416 karma · joined March 17, 2019
Surely there's no moral case to be made for Israel having a right to exist in its current religious ethnostate form? People who presumably should have citizenship due to their ties to the land area are excluded because they believe in the wrong ancient delusions.
Sure, and their mistake here was 100% the fact that they chose to host this chat on Discord, home to the cringiest crowd on the internet.
I don't think so. I think we all know how we'd react if we heard someone casually using "microslop" in real life. They'd seem like they're larping as a Silicon Valley character or something.
The split works very well, the megathreads mostly stick to tracking rapidly developing situations in which separate threads would just be spammy and unnecessarily fragment the conversation
I think there's a big difference between having high standards and the slop that is LinkedIn.
Go look and tell me that's not one of the best curated communities on the internet, despite specifically covering incredibly controversial topics. HN is good but doesn't even come close.
Because the decision was made by some normal adult without mental health issues who hasn't internalized just how disturbed some people on the internet are?
It really shouldn't be unreasonable for moderators to try to maintain a professional tone. Although in this case they certainly picked the wrong platform if "professional" was what they were going for.
So... 4chan? Why would you possibly want that in this context?
Although, you're posting on HN so it's probably fair to assume that "open and frank discussion" isn't a very high priority for you.
"M$" may not be insulting in itself, but it's certainly typically associated with insultingly poor writing.
Wouldn't any community that wants to encourage good quality conversations immediately ban everyone posting stupid slashdot-esque jokes like this?
I suspect not.
But if you don't want childish behaviour, Discord is an ... interesting choice.
What are you implying? It's totally fine to defend yourself against aggressors.
The problem is that in the Israel-Palestine conflict, Israel has always been the aggressor.
This is a top tier troll, good job.
I think "Cantor: The Man Who Stole Infinity?" would strike a good balance.
Yes, the old addresses will be compromised. That's fine. The point is that nobody can tell that you aren't actually using the same keys to generate new addresses anymore.
You're saying that the numbers don't say what I want them to say, but then you choose a rather weird set of numbers to demonstrate this with. It's weird!
It is an indisputable historical fact that jewish zionists expelled vast amounts of Palestinians from their homes and forced them out of the territory of what is now modern Israel.
>This will be my last comment to you, I don't want to engage with someone so comfortable at defending genocide.
I'm not defending genocide, that's a ridiculous interpretation of my words. I'm just pointing out the fact that if you keep poking someone long or hard enough, you shouldn't be surprised when they eventually want to get rid of you.
I certainly don't think the extermination of Israeli jews would in any way be a positive outcome.
How are we supposed to get an understanding of the scale of these events while totally disregarding Israeli actions?
>You've just made my point. The reason Skåne isn't contested is that there are no living people suffering under Danish occupation of it. You've described the mechanism yourself: time plus resolution. That's exactly what a two-state settlement would produce. You've argued for the process without noticing.
Israel has explicitly rejected that over and over again, and continues to do so every day through ongoing annexations.
There will never be moral high ground for the state of Israel as long as it allows the settlements to exist and doesn't at the very least honor it's internationally recognized borders.
>On citizenship: Israel granting full citizenship to all Palestinians would mean the end of a Jewish majority state within a generation, by demographics alone. You know that. Proposing it as a "simple solution Israel refused" is not a good faith argument; it's describing the dissolution of Israel but painting it as moderation.
A jewish ethnostate is as morally unacceptable as an aryan ethnostate.
>On extermination: you've moved from "perfectly natural" to "perfectly predictable." Those aren't the same thing. Predictable means understandable given the circumstances. Natural means it requires no further justification. You've retreated and you haven't noticed.
No, it's both. It's predictable because it's a natural reaction.
> It’s not morally credible to focus on the Jews’ actions alone, given the broader context of the conflict, Islamic conquest and domination. I don’t want to be patronizing and give history lessons, but antisemitism, Jihadism, and other Islamicist extremist doctrines predate the state of Israel by centuries.
That's just whataboutism and has approximately nothing to do with the conflict started by the creation of the modern state of Israel.
The only people who you could reasonably blame besides the zionist jews are the other Europeans.
Neither participant in the Israel-Hamas conflict subscribes to that.
And I'm not really sure how you could expect the small resistance group to follow international humanitarian law when the big state they're fighting doesn't either? That seems absurd.