If the problem is churches taking too much money from people, how is taxing them going to change that? Won’t that just encourage them to take more?

I mean, you can’t even tell me what would justify October 7th, so I’m not sure even you understand your own ideology. It comes across to me like Christians who reframe the entire world through their interpretation of the Bible, then get angry at others for questioning it. In this case, it comes from a furious inability to accept that Hamas committed unjustifiable atrocities because that would collapse your entire worldview. You’re probably backing off now because you’re afraid of having this precious opinion challenged any more than it already has been.

But hey, I can’t force you to reply anymore. I enjoyed this conversation, and I hope you have a good rest of the week.

I should have added them before. Now, would you like to answer the question, or was October 7th not justified?

So what specific circumstances would justify raping a bunch of women, killing dozens of children, and shooting up a concert full of people who were not an immediate threat to you? And how do they not also justify 9/11?

So just give it to me straight, do you think it’s okay to shoot up a concert where nobody could reasonably be considered a threat to you? Consider that in isolation. It’s a simple question yes or no question. I’ll read your thing about “resistance ideology” if you can answer that.

I found this article, which specifically states:

Under international law the right to resist excludes recourse to violence against civilians.

That sounds to me like Hamas isn’t allowed to kill civilians. Do I understand that correctly?

I don’t really know what “resistance ideology” is. Are otherwise-heinous actions acceptable if they come from a weaker party? Is this that power-plus-prejudice thing again?

Ukraine’s capabilities wouldn’t change whether Russia’s invasion was unjust. If they were a corrupt nation run by neo-Nazis (they aren’t) and Russia wanted to draw attention to it, then they’d be justified in attacking Ukraine.

Yes, Operation Cyclone is a fact, but Al-Qaeda literally said that they didn’t receive US funding. They have zero reason to lie about that. Why are you so angry about it?

Morality is the entire point of the discussion. If morals don’t matter, then it shouldn’t matter how many innocent people die at the hands of Hamas - or the IDF. Both sides can do whatever they want and nobody gets to complain about what they do. That includes you, me, and everyone else on Lemmy. If morals do matter, then we need to think about the motivations and actions of every party involved.

Hamas and Hezbollah are both oppressive, extremist regimes internationally recognized as terrorist groups who are intent on destroying Israel. This is literally genocide. Since Iran is funding and arming them, Iran is complicit in their attacks on Israel. Iran is also internationally known as a state sponsor of terror. These are indisputable facts.

Iran only gets attacked by Israel when they start fights with Israel. Their motivation is simply the destruction of a nation that doesn’t provoke them. The recent strikes were a response to Iran’s sponsor of murderous terrorist groups attacking Israel - namely, Iran messed around and found out.

If morals don’t matter, why are you so upset about Israel killing civilians? If morals do matter, how do you feel about Hamas expelling the previous government of Gaza in a civil war, using the entire Gaza strip as a human shield, raping and killing over a thousand innocent people, kidnapping over two hundred of them, and firing thousands of indiscriminate rockets into Israel?

If raping and murdering people is an acceptable way to bring attention to issues, then the Russian invasion of Ukraine under the pretense of eliminating anti-Russian bias and removing Nazi influence in their government. You and I both know that’s a ridiculous statement, but it follows logically from yours.

Al-Qaeda themselves deny that they received funding from the US. Now, why is Iran funding genocidal terrorist groups acceptable? Can you answer that without saying “well the US is doing it too,” or is this whole conflict tit-for-tat?

And raping/killing over 1,000 people and taking over 200 hostages is clearly the best way to achieve peace.

the same reason why the US funded Alquaeda.

I can’t find a credible source confirming that. And even if they did, that wouldn’t make Iran’s funding of Hamas and Hezbollah any less genocidal. Fair point on the origins of Hamas, though.

And allowing Hamas to continue killing people with impunity isn’t realistic either.

Alright. I learned a lot and enjoyed talking with you, and I hope you have a good rest of the week.

The old one is no longer relevant. … They didn’t kill them because they were Jews. It was because they were Israelis.

Tell me, what percentage of Israel is Jews? And do you really think the antisemitic attitude has completely dissolved among Hamas?

Hezbolllah is more than capable of hitting Israeli targets. They’ve been pounding Haifa and even almost assassinated Netanyahu as well.

The surrounding nations have failed numerous times to extinguish Israel, going four-to-one against them and still losing. Not to mention their continued assaults on the country since. If they could wipe out Israel, they would have.

My opinion can be of both. A lot of the world thinks this way.

People don’t say “you don’t get a right to complain about X” unless they think the victim deserved it. Rape apologists are well known for this.

Nowhere in the article does it mention holding civilians by force.

We now have two sources corroborating the same phenomenon: the authorities not wanting Gazans to evacuate. The “American government propaganda” article has actual evidence backing it.

And yes, Hamas is going to be among civilians. They are Palestinians, and they are in one of the most densely populated areas by the force of Israel in what people have called the “largest open air prison.”

Does that justify using civilian garb, vehicles, and infrastructure to avoid getting attacked? Or alternately, using the whole Gaza Strip as a human shield while killing Israelis?

Because you’re using it to justify genocide. The article didn’t say evacuated. It said vacant.

The building was vacant because it was evacuated. You’ve been truthful in other areas, why not here? The article states this, and no, them not being rockets doesn’t mean they also weren’t withdrawn:

As soon as the rockets were discovered, UNRWA staff were withdrawn from the premises

Anyway…

I explained what was debunked and what wasn’t. Stop bringing this shit up.

The only other people I’ve seen who go “this atrocity wasn’t actually as bad as people say it is” are people who support it in some way. It’s a slope towards justifying the whole thing. See Holocaust and Holodomor deniers. You’ll forgive me for seeing a similar pattern here.

My point is simple: Israel has a right to defend itself. When they’re provoked, they can retaliate. Killing more women and children intentionally is horrible, obviously. But if nothing is done, then the attacks will continue, increasing in severity. If you didn’t want to argue over “minute points,” you shouldn’t have sent me 31 links and told me to read all of them. If you don’t want to talk anymore, that’s fine. Just as I’ve come away learning more about Israel’s crimes, I hope you come away from this better understanding Hamas’s actions. “They don’t get to complain about it” isn’t the stance someone takes on 1,200 people getting raped and killed without thinking it was justified.

the six day war? Literally yes.

Egypt knew that they’d be attacked if they blockaded Israel by sea and did it anyway. They then massed troops on the border, only to get whooped.

Yom Kippur was then started to take back the territory lost in the six day war.

Which was a war provoked by Egypt.

even if we accept that the PLO’s attack was anything but provoked by Israeli apartheid and ethnic cleansing,

Killing amassadors to foreign nations is obviously the correct solution to this sort of thing.

you do realize they didn’t just fight the PLO right?

Syria has a long history of waging war with Israel, so yes.

They then occupied a country that did nothing to them

Other than kill over 30 civilians in a kidnapping attempt and try to kill their ambassador.

causing among other things the creation of Hezbollah.

Which wouldn’t be as strong today if Iran wasn’t supplying them. Iran has also been an enemy of Israel for a long time.

You’re made-up idea that it’s about Jews and not Zionism also goes against the actions and remarks of the founder of Hamas

They’re the ones that included a quote encouraging the killing of Jews - not Zionists - in the original charter. They’re also the ones who went on to commit, among numerous other attacks, October 7th. Do you not see the connection here? If there were any reforms, they’ve obviously failed.

De-development via the Gaza Occupation

Even today, Hamas is misusing humanitarian aid, and they’ve been known to do this for years.

Peace Process and Solution

At least two analyses have concluded that Hamas only wants ceasefires as a means to destroying Israel in the long term. An organization that genuinely wants a two-state solution doesn’t provoke its neighbors by killing over a thousand people and taking over 200 hostages.

I don’t think you get to call the killings an accident when they went there to kidnap a bunch of people. If I break into someone’s house to kidnap a woman and I end up shooting her husband, that doesn’t make it any less a murder.

It’s been a long and bloody conflict since Israel’s inception. But does any of this justify Hamas and Hezbollah killing/kidnapping Israeli civilians? Hamas wasn’t forced to do October 7th, or to fire off over 10,000 rockets since then. Hezbollah wasn’t forced to fire off rockets in solidarity with them. Neither of those things is stopping the cycle of violence. To suggest the onus is entirely on Israel is absolving these two literal terrorist groups of their responsibilities.