“Why’d you make me hit you?” is not the same language as “Why did that guy make me shoot him?”.
The very specific form I used is.
Yes - hitting people who did nothing to them, and then blaming them for it. That’s exactly what the stereotype is about.
Then if the IDF had used this specific form of words it might be relevant.
Fine, so let’s move on to something more relevant than spurious claims about “abuser language”.
It wasn’t the IDF that I said was using that rhetoric. Nor did I claim it was a direct quote.
If you can find any logical sentence construction that has been used by anyone with relevance to this conflict that could not (with appropriate substitution of different causal act and different responsive act) be used in explaining a justified act, I will concede that the notion of “abuser language” is meaningful.
What is relevant in identifying an abuser is whether the claimed causal act does actually justify the response, not the cause-and-effect language.
I don’t give a flying fuck what you’re willing to concede or not.
I’m sure you don’t, but that response implies that you’ve got nothing.
Honestly, that’s not really necessary. As these debates have continued I got very sloppy. I started responding only to the harshest criticisms, those that used or implied terms like “ethnic cleansing” and “genocide”, and perhaps even started interpreting criticisms that were nothing like that in the same light. At the same time I started ignoring jingoistic anti-Palestinian comments of the sort that earlier on I harshly criticized as “let’s you and him fight”.
I didn’t do this because my voew of these comments changed, but because my emotional reaction to some of the arguments made in the thread made it difficult to properly prioritize both fronts of the debate. That’s a failure on my part, and it’s why I think I need some time away from posting on this topic.
Infer what you like. My intention was to indicate your attempted use of logic when I was talking rhetoric was a big, flat fail. Learn which leg of the trivium you’re sucking at before you prematurely declare victory, dumbass.
I don’t think that’s fundamentally defensible as a “first step” or precondition of any kind. Palestinians having a right to exist with full citizenship rights in a sovereign state in their homeland, whether that state is a binational Israel-Palestine or a separate Palestinian state, is not conditional on whether or not some Palestinians are terrorists.
No, but Israel recognizing specified borders and removing any Israeli assets beyond those borders is conditional on Israel feeling that the Palestinians can be trusted to not attack them, which in turn is dependent on whether some Palestinians are terrorists and specifically whether those terrorists are condoned or even abetted by the Palestinian leadership or arrested by it.
If that’s true, then it’s only true at this moment, and it’d only be true at this moment because Hamas doesn’t currently possess the necessary weapons to destroy Israel. Hamas are working very hard to change that. That alone is enough to justify labelling the Hamas regime as an existential threat.
…here is the Israeli Minister for the Ministry of Strategic Affairs and Public Diplomacy Ron Dermer telling us that he doesn’t know how many civilians they’ve killed in Gaza.
I don’t know how anyone with a straight face could argue that this administration is taking care not to target civilians when they don’t even have any estimates on how many have been killed.
Advisor to Israeli government minister Ben-Gvir:
https://twitter.com/YishaiFleisher/status/1722164068276949350
He writes:
It’s this sort of “it’s ours because God said so / here is a thing that happened centuries ago” nonsense that kills people.
I mean, it’s not unique to the Middle East by any means. Look at the Yugoslavia catastrophe from the early 90s.
How’s the regular response to these things go? “That’s unhelpful.”
It is easy enough to blame looneys, but guilt also lies with those who allow looneys to gain any measure of temporal power.
That led to ethnic cleansing and the Bosnian genocide.
The real danger to Israel is not Hamas, which can’t do anything more than cause bloodshed, but what Israel does to itself in their response to Hamas.
UN secretary-general says there is something “clearly wrong” with Israel’s Gaza operation with regard to civilian deaths:
Israel have, over the last couple of weeks, repeatedly called on the UN secretary-general to resign for his comments on the conflict.