Note that I just mirrored your own argument. And you interpreted it was support for October 7, the killing of 1200 people. So can you take stock of what it is that you are doing when you make the same argument to try to explain the killing of 100,000 people?
Are you asking me to support Regime Change in Israel? I mean, we could, but I don't know that there's anyone worth leading it.
The conflict exists because Zionists decided that they were entitled to a state on someone else's land, and that they have a God-given right to kick other people out of their homes and crush their children's heads with bulldozers. So believing you, without "Leftist Islamic Nationalists", people would say: oh sure, come crush my child's head with a bulldozer, steal my land and ethnically cleanse my from my ancestral land.
The Palestine movement has been fraudulent from the beginning. It's attaching itself to people who lost a revolution and a civil war. Their sole purpose is the violent overthrow of Israel, and a genocide of the jews. They are used as a weapon to destabilize the state.
It's very different, because the British are on their own land. Even so, no one said anyone deserves to be raped, except for Israeli lawmakers.
A lot of the Pakistani rapists and their families claim the children deserve to be raped for being whores.
Are you asking me to support Regime Change in Israel? I mean, we could, but I don't know that there's anyone worth leading it.
Apparently, I can't post clearly if my life depended on it.
You asserted that Gazans being slaughtered en masse should have led them to believe "jeez, maybe we should never fight back against the people who did that, because fighting back led to this". So I asked you: should October 7 have led Israelis to conclude that they shouldn't have carried out atrocities against Palestinians for decades? An exact mirror of your question, but you thought that was an invitation to "justify genocide". If my question justifies genocide, yours would have all the more, not? But that wasn't even my point, only that these are double standards.
Regime change anywhere did not factor in.
The Palestine movement has been fraudulent from the beginning. It's attaching itself to people who lost a revolution and a civil war. Their sole purpose is the violent overthrow of Israel, and a genocide of the jews
Is this blood libel? The native population isn't just going to disappear, no matter how much you wish for it.
A lot of the Pakistani rapists and their families claim the children deserve to be raped for being whores.
You asserted that Gazans being slaughtered en masse should have led them to believe "jeez, maybe we should never fight back against the people who did that, because fighting back led to this"
I never asserted that. I said that they should reconsider a genocidal race war as a good policy, and avoid that from happening in the future.
Regardless of why, it is inadvisable to kill one Mongolian soldier from The Great Horde. The retribution will be merciless and extreme. Do not do that. Not unless you intend to defeat the whole Mongol empire. Sometimes you're on the loosing side of history. It would be a much better idea to stop engaging in armed conflict, and simply engage in an influence campaign like the Philippines did with the US. Our conquest of the Philippines was murderous. The Philippines realized that armed resistance wouldn't work, and peaceably got their independence only a few decades later. Effectively within 1-2 generations. The Palestinian movement, has never tolerated that as an idea.
And to be clear, I don't consider "fighting back" to be genocide or counter genocide. The 10/7 attacks were not "fighting back" they were atrocities. Actual useful military and strategic targets were not considered. It was intended to generate the response it got by maximizing the brutality of the attack. The hope was that it would start a regional war, and it did. That is one that Hamas and Iran have nearly been destroyed by.
Is this blood libel? The native population isn't just going to disappear, no matter how much you wish for it.
The Palestinian movement isn't real, so no. It's an ideology. The Arab population of the Mandate of Palestine still has a lot of people who live in Israel, and others that moved elsewhere. "Palestinians" aren't a real group. They're Arabs radicalized by Leftism and used as a weapon by other Arabs.
I never asserted that. I said that they should reconsider a genocidal race war as a good policy, and avoid that from happening in the future.
If that is your logic, why shouldn't Israel have stopped its genocidal race war after October 7?
Regardless of why, it is inadvisable to kill one Mongolian soldier from The Great Horde. The retribution will be merciless and extreme.
I agree. What I can't stand is when you wrap it in moralizing language, when there is absolutely nothing moral about it.
Our conquest of the Philippines was murderous. The Philippines realized that armed resistance wouldn't work, and peaceably got their independence only a few decades later. Effectively within 1-2 generations. The Palestinian movement, has never tolerated that as an idea.
The difference is that you wanted to control the Philippines, while Israel wants the Palestinians removed or dead, in order to have more living space for the superior race. The analogy is far closer to that of the red Indians, whose resistance of course was also futile.
The 10/7 attacks were not "fighting back" they were atrocities.
They were. I can say this about October 7. You cannot say this about the 2 year campaign of genocide carried out by Israel. Why is that?
Actual useful military and strategic targets were not considered.
Many IDF bases were apparently overrun, which is why 1/3 of the dead were IDF soldiers. Ironically, Hamas has a much superior military/civilian kill ratio than the IDF, which killed 83% civilians.
The Arab population of the Mandate of Palestine still has a lot of people who live in Israel, and others that moved elsewhere.
Oh wow, some people moved away? Definitely means that they're not real.
"Palestinians" aren't a real group. They're Arabs radicalized by Leftism and used as a weapon by other Arabs.
But a bunch of people from Poland named Miliekowsky and Schneidermann are definitely a real group and native to the Middle East.
If that is your logic, why shouldn't Israel have stopped its genocidal race war after October 7?
It should have, but no one listens to me, particularly not Israel.
The difference is that you wanted to control the Philippines, while Israel wants the Palestinians removed or dead, in order to have more living space for the superior race. The analogy is far closer to that of the red Indians, whose resistance of course was also futile.
The US was a million times better to Indians than the Israelis are to Gaza. Phillipense is the correct analogy because it was properly murderous. Israel doesn't want "more breathing room", they want to remove an ever-present threat.
Many IDF bases were apparently overrun, which is why 1/3 of the dead were IDF soldiers. Ironically, Hamas has a much superior military/civilian kill ratio than the IDF, which killed 83% civilians.
They were attacked, but that's not a valuable strategic target like bridges, power stations, dams, and the like. Not one airfield was eliminated. The IDF wasn't over-run at any bases that I've seen, they were overrun at checkpoints.
Oh wow, some people moved away? Definitely means that they're not real.
Yeah, they're Jordanian.
But a bunch of people from Poland named Miliekowsky and Schneidermann are definitely a real group and native to the Middle East.
Are you asking me to support Regime Change in Israel? I mean, we could, but I don't know that there's anyone worth leading it.
The Palestine movement has been fraudulent from the beginning. It's attaching itself to people who lost a revolution and a civil war. Their sole purpose is the violent overthrow of Israel, and a genocide of the jews. They are used as a weapon to destabilize the state.
A lot of the Pakistani rapists and their families claim the children deserve to be raped for being whores.
Apparently, I can't post clearly if my life depended on it.
You asserted that Gazans being slaughtered en masse should have led them to believe "jeez, maybe we should never fight back against the people who did that, because fighting back led to this". So I asked you: should October 7 have led Israelis to conclude that they shouldn't have carried out atrocities against Palestinians for decades? An exact mirror of your question, but you thought that was an invitation to "justify genocide". If my question justifies genocide, yours would have all the more, not? But that wasn't even my point, only that these are double standards.
Regime change anywhere did not factor in.
Is this blood libel? The native population isn't just going to disappear, no matter how much you wish for it.
They'd make great Israeli lawmakers then.
I never asserted that. I said that they should reconsider a genocidal race war as a good policy, and avoid that from happening in the future.
Regardless of why, it is inadvisable to kill one Mongolian soldier from The Great Horde. The retribution will be merciless and extreme. Do not do that. Not unless you intend to defeat the whole Mongol empire. Sometimes you're on the loosing side of history. It would be a much better idea to stop engaging in armed conflict, and simply engage in an influence campaign like the Philippines did with the US. Our conquest of the Philippines was murderous. The Philippines realized that armed resistance wouldn't work, and peaceably got their independence only a few decades later. Effectively within 1-2 generations. The Palestinian movement, has never tolerated that as an idea.
And to be clear, I don't consider "fighting back" to be genocide or counter genocide. The 10/7 attacks were not "fighting back" they were atrocities. Actual useful military and strategic targets were not considered. It was intended to generate the response it got by maximizing the brutality of the attack. The hope was that it would start a regional war, and it did. That is one that Hamas and Iran have nearly been destroyed by.
The Palestinian movement isn't real, so no. It's an ideology. The Arab population of the Mandate of Palestine still has a lot of people who live in Israel, and others that moved elsewhere. "Palestinians" aren't a real group. They're Arabs radicalized by Leftism and used as a weapon by other Arabs.
If that is your logic, why shouldn't Israel have stopped its genocidal race war after October 7?
I agree. What I can't stand is when you wrap it in moralizing language, when there is absolutely nothing moral about it.
The difference is that you wanted to control the Philippines, while Israel wants the Palestinians removed or dead, in order to have more living space for the superior race. The analogy is far closer to that of the red Indians, whose resistance of course was also futile.
They were. I can say this about October 7. You cannot say this about the 2 year campaign of genocide carried out by Israel. Why is that?
Many IDF bases were apparently overrun, which is why 1/3 of the dead were IDF soldiers. Ironically, Hamas has a much superior military/civilian kill ratio than the IDF, which killed 83% civilians.
Oh wow, some people moved away? Definitely means that they're not real.
But a bunch of people from Poland named Miliekowsky and Schneidermann are definitely a real group and native to the Middle East.
It should have, but no one listens to me, particularly not Israel.
The US was a million times better to Indians than the Israelis are to Gaza. Phillipense is the correct analogy because it was properly murderous. Israel doesn't want "more breathing room", they want to remove an ever-present threat.
They were attacked, but that's not a valuable strategic target like bridges, power stations, dams, and the like. Not one airfield was eliminated. The IDF wasn't over-run at any bases that I've seen, they were overrun at checkpoints.
Yeah, they're Jordanian.
Yeah, their Israeli.