For a bunch of far right fasicsts, it’s truly remarkable how the MAGA idiots and the Likud+ maniacs underestimate …nationalism.

I would be happy with something to the effect “not allowed to serve in the army of countries engaged in illegal occupation and/or found in contravention of this and that treaty”, and enumerate the treaty for the prevention of apartheid, the one for genocide, and the Geneva conventions.

The US and Israel started this and now have put Iran on “death ground”. So them doing anything they can for regime survival, and after Trump’s genocidal language, civilizational survival is …understandable. It’s grimdark, yes, but there is no “both sides” here.

Ok, the first thing you guys need to do is shut the fuck up about Kamala. Nobody outside the US cares that you’re mad at the people who didn’t vote for Kamala because of Gaza. It’s in the past. The snark makes you feel good but is 100% pointless.

Proud of you, keep pushing!

I see @jordanlund@lemmy.world in the list of mods in this community and I know from !world@lemmy.world that he feels strongly about substacks. But as far as I can see there is nothing on the sidebar here that follows similar rules as, say !world@lemmy.world’s Rule 1. He mods both communities and Rule 1 here says “only links to articles”, whereas Rule 1 there says “news articles only”, so I assume that qualification identifies a meaningful difference. On the contrary, I see that “original content” is encouraged. At any rate, if this violates the rules of this community, sorry, and please update your rules because it’s not otherwise clear.

This is a pretty straightforward declaration of genocidal intent. If the Americans bomb civilian infrastructure, there is a credible case for accusing them of Genocide in the Hague.

EDIT: Historian Timothy Snyder also identified it as such, pointing that this creates legal liabilities up and down the American state: https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-president-speaks-genocide

This is a pretty straightforward declaration of genocidal intent. If the Americans bomb civilian infrastructure, there is a credible case for accusing them of Genocide in the Hague.

EDIT: Historian Timothy Snyder also identified it as such, pointing that this creates legal liabilities up and down the American state: https://snyder.substack.com/p/the-president-speaks-genocide

Treating Trump as a source of any kind of truth is extremely shaky.

I’m of two minds too. Maybe the compromise would be something like moderation IRL? So like not involving policing by default but protecting the public sphere?

Sure whatever.

Really can’t blame them. They have zero incentive to trust anything the US is offering because the US has repeatedly negotiated in bad faith as a cover for preparing military escalation. When you behave like an honour-less scumbag, at some point people start assuming your word means nothing.

The drone revolution is truly something to behold.

You sidestep everything else (so, do you retract the assumption of a gotcha?) which is … moving the goalposts fallacy.

But let’s talk about the new goalposts. I did not set up the “test” in the first place. In the first place was a cheap moralistic finger wagging point about the tired cliché regarding supposed single issue voters refusing to back Harris. My “test” was precisely challenging the cheapness of that moralistic finger wagging.

So no, I didn’t do anything “in the first place”.

Any more bad faith one liner comebacks?

In other words, meaningless paperwork just to keep the population disciplined. Germans 🙄.

The moral argument I made is precisely this:

Have you been doing any Palestine solidarity work or is gaza just a gotcha for you?

That’s the fact, visible to anyone just a few posts up the thread. Nothing thrown away.

From this you assumed that I was setting up a different kind of gotcha, where I would instantly dismiss as not enough anything the other party would say. That’s your assumption, not what I said. The fallacy you accuse me of requires your assumption, does not stand on what I wrote alone. That in turn is exactly a strawman fallacy.

Congratulations you defeated the strawman you created.

I asked for a minimal (do you do anything or is it just a rhetorical device?) not any kind of maximal (pass my morality test).

You clearly didn’t. I’m not American so I’m not part of your “we”. Your turn: is Gaza just a gotcha for you?

Have you been doing any Palestine solidarity work or is gaza just a gotcha for you?

The link works for me. What can I tell you, I’m literally debating shitty Chinese policies with user “stumu415” on a different sub thread here. Search for the string “IAGS” in the comments under this post. I’m tired trying to convince you I’m not an elephant when you continuously make bad faith assumptions and miscaracterise what I’m saying.

Edit: if you’re denying the existence of mass incarceration system in the US (aka the carcéral state) you’re denying reality and absolutely giving the US a pass.