Comment by trimethylpurine
2 years ago
You made the comparison: "It's reasonable to view Palestine as a nation and it's reasonable to look at what's going on and see forced starvation of a nation coupled to, as we are discussing here, cruelly relaxed standards for enemy combatants that make a mockery of international law and are de facto indiscriminate by any standard."
Gaza's policy is objectively indiscriminate. Israel's is objectively not indiscriminate.
I don't care what political party you identify with, and I don't care which country I'm damaging. I'm with the "Everyone Must Learn Science and Remain Objective" party. You were objectively wrong.
Does that make sense?
This is a complete non-sequitor? Be well my friend, I'm sorry about the account being marked as throttled, I think it'll help in the long run.
Marked? I don't think that's how it works, but thanks for the sentiment.
Non-sequitor? The last comment is a literal quote from you, and an explanation about how it doesn't fit the charter that you agreed in the preceding comment.
You're offended when I explain the argument, and then when I don't, you say you don't get it.
/shrug
Look it's simple; Gaza is worse than Israel. Objectively. That doesn't mean Israel is a model of human morality. And I don't think anyone is claiming that. But let's not pretend it's the same as Gaza. Israeli troops aren't rolling in beheading children while dancing and posting videos, right? It's nowhere near, even if we take everything in this garbage hearsay article and multiply it by 1000, it's still better than Gaza.
There's nothing you can say other than, "Yeah, I shouldn't have made that comparison." Any other statement at this point just looks like you condone beheading children. How do you not see that that's what you implied unintentionally?
Hopefully that's not what you're condoning.
[dead]