Rick’s answer to “Hi, I'm obsessed with your books! WILL YOU EVER WRITE A CLIMAX/ENDING TO YOUR UNIVERSE? Also, I kin…” > Likes and Comments
78 likes · Like
My dear Demigod X, "The brutal West"? Compared to what? Hamas livestreamed a slave raid just a few weeks ago, and ISIS and al Qaeda compete with pagan Gahanian slavers across much of the Sahel and territories nearby, unoticed by people who still denounce Britain for a slave trade her navies (with surprising help from America's including lots of slave-owning officers), suppressed at considerable cost in blood and treasure.
Honza--there is brutality everywhere. For instance, the obvious example: Israel is currently committing a genocide against the Palestinian people. However, the discussion in the original comment was about the West specifically and what symbol best represents it. There was absolutely no need for your comment.
M. Gem ... ":genocide" has a meaning. Israeli weapons are designed to REDUCED collateral damage in exclusively Palestinian areas (because all Jews are gone on pain of death from Gaza until the military reincursion once the Israelis deliberately left) - except for sniper rifles and kniives, NO Hamas weapons are designed to minimize casualties and limit area effects.
Hamas burned Israelis and visitors to Israel out of bomb shelters all thee locals were required by the government to build. Hamas shoots non-combattant Gazans who try to shelter in the extensive network of bomb shelter Hamas reserves for its leaders and for combatants exclusively.
Hamas leaders bragged for years in television interviews that they could one day (October 7th, "the Black Sabbath") attack Israeli civilians and that Israeli society would be "too weak" to respond because Hams would hide behind civilians. That makes genocide at worst a shared responsibility, at best (for a horrible value of best) an entirely Hamas responsibility.
For similar grim reasons, firebombing German cities wasn't genocide, even though eventually the Allies killed far more Germans and their subjects than the Nazis killed of the good guys ... and the fire-bombing was still preferable to the Politburo's more personal methods. It's no accident Hamas is also run by a Politburo ... though the Soviets didn't dig up sewer lines built for them by Germans to make inn accurate rockets designed to target towns (rather than military targets, which are smaller, and shielded) and which also roasted everyone in a hospital parking lot in the first days of the war when one spectacularly misfired.
Genocide does have a meaning: a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part. In what way does Israel's murder of over 21,000 Palestinians in the last few months not meet this definition? And this is only in the past months. Since the creation of Israel, it has expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and killed thousands more. Israel has been committing a slow ethnic cleansing ever since its formation. Bringing up Hamas is a smokescreen--it was formed as a response to Israeli oppression, and it was actively enabled and financed by Israel.
First off, it isn't murder, it's war. It's also a just war. I recommend actually reading The Geneva Conventions, just be aware of all the codicils Commkunists got most Europeans to sign in the 1970s to privilege rebels and insurgents from having to follow some of the basic laws of war and who those are not binding upon (because those folks didn't sign them - Hamas and the Islamic Revolutionary Republic obviously didn't since they hate the idea of human rights as that is officially "haram", but neither did the USA - France and the UK, for example signed them with reservations).
Even without reading de Groot/Grotius or religious just war theory and the laws of war, it should be obvious that the remedy to someone deliberately setting up firing positions and command nodes in a humanitarian or cultural site is that the site loses protection. Despite that, most Gaza hospitals are still standing. What was Hezb'Allah's excuse for targeting a church or Hamas' for burning people out of bomb shelters, or stealing humanitarian aid and repurposing it for combat (beyond digging up sewer pipes to make rockets, also stealing fuel from hungry civilians and hospitals with power shortages so that their military equipment functions), for that matter?
Israel pulled every single Jew out of Gaza for peace, and what it got was a live-streamed rape and slave raid by Hamas. A third of Israeli Arabs vote for Likud. More Israeli Arabs are doctors and bankers than Jewish Israelis. Israeli Arabs don't HAVE TO serve in the security forces, though thousands do. Hamas targeted Israeli Arabs for death too. That so many Palestinian Arabs fled was in part Palestinian policy of pulling its civilian non-combatants out of combat zones. It isn't Israel's fault that they fought better in a civil war whose aim on the Palestinian side has always involved ethnic cleansing as a stated war aim. When has Israel ever perpetrated a mass rape or anything like the payback Christan militamen perpetrated on Palestinians (who'se fighters had been pulling Christians off of public transport to publicly murder them for years) in Sabra and Shatilla? When has a Palestinian armed group investigated a war crime instead of naming streets or buildings after its perpetrators?
Quod erat demonstrandum.
This is no war. It is genocide, and it has been genocide since Israel's creation, as many Israeli officials have stated plainly throughout the years. I gave you the UN's definition of genocide, and yet you suggest I read the Geneva Convention. Well, if you believe this is a war, the Geneva Convention outlines every war crime Israel has committed. Targeting journalists. Use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas. Targeting hospitals. Collective punishment. 21,000 Palestinians have been killed. CHILDREN make up around 40% of Gaza. How many of them do you think were Hamas? What is Israel's excuse for targeting the West Bank, where this is no Hamas?
You continue to bring up Hamas. Israel is the sole reason for Hamas' existence. Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people, stealing their land, restricting their movements and their supplies, killing them; these are the reasons Hamas came to be, with Israel's financial help. You bring up Hamas to allude to the popular statement that they "use human shields". There has never been any evidence found that Hamas uses human shields, but even if there were, that is no excuse to kill those human shields! When a bank robber takes hostages, one doesn't kill all the hostages! Israel's targeting of civilians is entirely deliberate. You state "it isn't Israel's fault that they fought better". Israel has the eighteenth largest military in the world. It is utterly incomparable to Hamas. Hamas's attack was merely a useful excuse to continue carrying out the ethnic cleansing that Israel has been perpetrating since its inception. You have proven nothing but your lack of humanity when a genocide is staring you in the face.
Hamas officials gave INTERVIEWS on television bragging about the tactic of using human shields.
A Hamas officer who was known to the world as the administrator of a hospital for the UN (he had a military rank with the civilian combatant organization) gave an interview from Israeli captivity denouncing his superiors for being cowards in how ineffectively they used the human shield tactic.
Never trust any organization run by a Politburo ... except when they brag about doing something wicked. Hamas, like most Iranian front organizations and every Communist regime still around is run by a Politburo.
It seems this is the last point you have left to argue. There is absolutely no proof of Hamas using human shields. Amnesty International itself, which is an expert in such matters, found no evidence of such tactics. I would not trust an interview given from Israeli captivity, for obvious reasons--especially if this is the only 'evidence' given.
Yet you've still said nothing about the absolute inhumanity of murdering innocent civilians. The human shield argument is patently false, but even if it were true, it would absolutely not justify the killing of those civilians.
None of this has anything to do with the original question or Rick Riordan's response! Take it somewhere else!
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Honza
(new)
Dec 26, 2023 09:28AM
My dear Demigod X, "The brutal West"? Compared to what? Hamas livestreamed a slave raid just a few weeks ago, and ISIS and al Qaeda compete with pagan Gahanian slavers across much of the Sahel and territories nearby, unoticed by people who still denounce Britain for a slave trade her navies (with surprising help from America's including lots of slave-owning officers), suppressed at considerable cost in blood and treasure.
reply
|
flag
Honza--there is brutality everywhere. For instance, the obvious example: Israel is currently committing a genocide against the Palestinian people. However, the discussion in the original comment was about the West specifically and what symbol best represents it. There was absolutely no need for your comment.
M. Gem ... ":genocide" has a meaning. Israeli weapons are designed to REDUCED collateral damage in exclusively Palestinian areas (because all Jews are gone on pain of death from Gaza until the military reincursion once the Israelis deliberately left) - except for sniper rifles and kniives, NO Hamas weapons are designed to minimize casualties and limit area effects.Hamas burned Israelis and visitors to Israel out of bomb shelters all thee locals were required by the government to build. Hamas shoots non-combattant Gazans who try to shelter in the extensive network of bomb shelter Hamas reserves for its leaders and for combatants exclusively.
Hamas leaders bragged for years in television interviews that they could one day (October 7th, "the Black Sabbath") attack Israeli civilians and that Israeli society would be "too weak" to respond because Hams would hide behind civilians. That makes genocide at worst a shared responsibility, at best (for a horrible value of best) an entirely Hamas responsibility.
For similar grim reasons, firebombing German cities wasn't genocide, even though eventually the Allies killed far more Germans and their subjects than the Nazis killed of the good guys ... and the fire-bombing was still preferable to the Politburo's more personal methods. It's no accident Hamas is also run by a Politburo ... though the Soviets didn't dig up sewer lines built for them by Germans to make inn accurate rockets designed to target towns (rather than military targets, which are smaller, and shielded) and which also roasted everyone in a hospital parking lot in the first days of the war when one spectacularly misfired.
Genocide does have a meaning: a crime committed with the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part. In what way does Israel's murder of over 21,000 Palestinians in the last few months not meet this definition? And this is only in the past months. Since the creation of Israel, it has expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians and killed thousands more. Israel has been committing a slow ethnic cleansing ever since its formation. Bringing up Hamas is a smokescreen--it was formed as a response to Israeli oppression, and it was actively enabled and financed by Israel.
First off, it isn't murder, it's war. It's also a just war. I recommend actually reading The Geneva Conventions, just be aware of all the codicils Commkunists got most Europeans to sign in the 1970s to privilege rebels and insurgents from having to follow some of the basic laws of war and who those are not binding upon (because those folks didn't sign them - Hamas and the Islamic Revolutionary Republic obviously didn't since they hate the idea of human rights as that is officially "haram", but neither did the USA - France and the UK, for example signed them with reservations).Even without reading de Groot/Grotius or religious just war theory and the laws of war, it should be obvious that the remedy to someone deliberately setting up firing positions and command nodes in a humanitarian or cultural site is that the site loses protection. Despite that, most Gaza hospitals are still standing. What was Hezb'Allah's excuse for targeting a church or Hamas' for burning people out of bomb shelters, or stealing humanitarian aid and repurposing it for combat (beyond digging up sewer pipes to make rockets, also stealing fuel from hungry civilians and hospitals with power shortages so that their military equipment functions), for that matter?
Israel pulled every single Jew out of Gaza for peace, and what it got was a live-streamed rape and slave raid by Hamas. A third of Israeli Arabs vote for Likud. More Israeli Arabs are doctors and bankers than Jewish Israelis. Israeli Arabs don't HAVE TO serve in the security forces, though thousands do. Hamas targeted Israeli Arabs for death too. That so many Palestinian Arabs fled was in part Palestinian policy of pulling its civilian non-combatants out of combat zones. It isn't Israel's fault that they fought better in a civil war whose aim on the Palestinian side has always involved ethnic cleansing as a stated war aim. When has Israel ever perpetrated a mass rape or anything like the payback Christan militamen perpetrated on Palestinians (who'se fighters had been pulling Christians off of public transport to publicly murder them for years) in Sabra and Shatilla? When has a Palestinian armed group investigated a war crime instead of naming streets or buildings after its perpetrators?
Quod erat demonstrandum.
This is no war. It is genocide, and it has been genocide since Israel's creation, as many Israeli officials have stated plainly throughout the years. I gave you the UN's definition of genocide, and yet you suggest I read the Geneva Convention. Well, if you believe this is a war, the Geneva Convention outlines every war crime Israel has committed. Targeting journalists. Use of white phosphorus in densely populated areas. Targeting hospitals. Collective punishment. 21,000 Palestinians have been killed. CHILDREN make up around 40% of Gaza. How many of them do you think were Hamas? What is Israel's excuse for targeting the West Bank, where this is no Hamas? You continue to bring up Hamas. Israel is the sole reason for Hamas' existence. Israel's oppression of the Palestinian people, stealing their land, restricting their movements and their supplies, killing them; these are the reasons Hamas came to be, with Israel's financial help. You bring up Hamas to allude to the popular statement that they "use human shields". There has never been any evidence found that Hamas uses human shields, but even if there were, that is no excuse to kill those human shields! When a bank robber takes hostages, one doesn't kill all the hostages! Israel's targeting of civilians is entirely deliberate. You state "it isn't Israel's fault that they fought better". Israel has the eighteenth largest military in the world. It is utterly incomparable to Hamas. Hamas's attack was merely a useful excuse to continue carrying out the ethnic cleansing that Israel has been perpetrating since its inception. You have proven nothing but your lack of humanity when a genocide is staring you in the face.
Hamas officials gave INTERVIEWS on television bragging about the tactic of using human shields.A Hamas officer who was known to the world as the administrator of a hospital for the UN (he had a military rank with the civilian combatant organization) gave an interview from Israeli captivity denouncing his superiors for being cowards in how ineffectively they used the human shield tactic.
Never trust any organization run by a Politburo ... except when they brag about doing something wicked. Hamas, like most Iranian front organizations and every Communist regime still around is run by a Politburo.
It seems this is the last point you have left to argue. There is absolutely no proof of Hamas using human shields. Amnesty International itself, which is an expert in such matters, found no evidence of such tactics. I would not trust an interview given from Israeli captivity, for obvious reasons--especially if this is the only 'evidence' given. Yet you've still said nothing about the absolute inhumanity of murdering innocent civilians. The human shield argument is patently false, but even if it were true, it would absolutely not justify the killing of those civilians.
None of this has anything to do with the original question or Rick Riordan's response! Take it somewhere else!
