Serious The Politics Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
NotVeryCake said:
The absoloute fucking nerve of some of the people in this thread frankly shocks me. When someone's entire civilization is slowly, systematically being cleansed off the planet, when their chance of death is rising by the day, when they can't even find solice in their own home due to an invading force of colonisers commiting genocide in broad daylight, you try and lecture them on "racism" and tell them they shouldn't get too emotional, they might say something not fitting your idealistic vision of virtue. If you yourself have not had to deal with the atrocities she has has to deal with at all, let alone on an almost daily basis, you have no right to lecture her on opinions she holds against those who are directly benefitting and actively, or even passively participating in this bloodbath of the Palestinian people.
Click to expand...
I don't like to sling accusations, and because of my lack of social skills, I generally try to avoid doing so, but I feel very confident in my assessment that this post was not made in good faith. This post was repeating things already said to address issues already addressed because either you wanted validation, or you just wanted to make me look bad. The insensitivity of my post has already been addressed by several people, including myself, and as such you lecturing me adds nothing to the conversation. Furthermore, you asking "how could anyone be this insensitive to someone suffering this much" has already been answered. I had no idea she was Palestinian. You have every right to judge me, but I sincerely doubt you made this post to do anything other than make yourself feel superior. I could be wrong, and if I am, then I am sorry, but I doubt this post was made to do anything but beat a dead horse. This is not me defending myself, I have no right to do such in this situation. But you saying things that have already been very well established completely ignoring the context given cannot have been in good faith.

To everyone else: Did I completely misread this? Am I digging into someone for no good reason? If I am, please let me know, I don't really have good social skills, so I am prone to misreading things.
 
Myzozoa said:
A civilian is a person who is not a member of an armed force nor a person engaged in hostilities.[1] from wikipedia.
Click to expand...
Fair enough definition, this means that neither active IDF soldiers or Hamas members are considered civilians.

Myzozoa said:
So maybe there are no true Israeli civilians since being a settler is an endeavor characterised by constant hostility institutionalized in a security apparatus.
Click to expand...
Amnesty International disagrees with you here, as does a Human Rights Watch report done in 2002.

"However, settlers as such are civilians, unless they are serving in the Israeli armed forces." - Amnesty International article

"The illegal status of settlements under international humanitarian law does not negate the rights of the civilians living there. The fact that a person lives in a settlement, whether legal or not, does not make him or her a legitimate military target." - the report

Myzozoa said:
It seems like you are just searching for a reason to ignore whats unfolding or else to justify it via cherry picked and truncated definitions.
Click to expand...
I've already said where I stand on the issue throughout the thread, but sure, keep attacking my motives. I'm sure this will lead to a good debate.

Myzozoa said:
This is pretty low engagement and I feel there is little to be gained in spending more time on your posts.
Click to expand...
Eroil said:
As our views differ so greatly though, I unfortunately cannot see a fruitful discussion being made here that I would enjoy having.
Click to expand...
Two sides of the same coin.
 
Just quoting Amnesty International is, again, meaningless and ignores material reality of what settlers do; it's simply an appeal to authority. If "civilian" means "one who does not participate in hostilities" then no, settlers are not civilians as they are engaging in a violent act 24/7 simply by existing on the land they stole, to say nothing of the physical violence, psychological terror, and sexual violence they inflict. At the same time, efforts should be made to avoid killing them when possible, and things like sexual assault are condemnable in all circumstances. Obviously there is moral complexity to being born on stolen land, and I don't think children deserve to die for the sins of their parents. None of this makes Palestinians wrong for fighting back, and all deaths are a direct result of the actions of the colonizers, not the colonized.

Again, I don't see where anyone has offered a way for Palestinians to fight back where nobody except active IOF members are harmed. Would you like to provide them with drones and cutting-edge weaponry so they can pick their targets more carefully? Will you condemn the IOF for their use of human shields? Maybe you'll provide thorough training to these people, who are in large part literal teenagers, fighting back against an overwhelming military force hell-bent on killing them all to help them be more effective and disciplined, despite them already showing more discipline than the IOF? Or will you show up on their behalf and ask nicely till the colonizers all fuck off back to Europe? What is your ideal vision of how this works?
 
Finchinator said:
Listening to Kamala speak coherently is such a step up from whatever the hell the first debate was and Trump’s recurring bullshit. It’s sad the bar is this low, but here we are.
Click to expand...
My only critique so far is in the economics talk it felt like she wasn't really confident, but she's overall doing p good

Trump's only real argument so far is "That isn't my policy + this expert believes in it + China"
 
Dead by Daylight said:
Two sides of the same coin.
Click to expand...
Actually it's you who have taken up all the zionist talking points for the purpose of making murky the clear ethical picture of Zionist perpetrators and Palestinian victims, repeatedly trying to equate and conjure up "Hamas members" to go alongside Zionist settlers and militants that are engaged in indiscriminate killing of Palestinians. It is only you has emerged as having common frames with the Zionists. This is just all around a very poor performance, leaning on ad hominem, from someone who claims to be keenly interested in 'debating' a genocide unfolding in real time. I have no more words, except that it is perfectly clear how valuable such an exercise is.
 
I dunno... Trump's not cracking... Of course Trump is lying and obfuscating...

...but she's also got places where she's avoiding answering. People don't know policy but they can smell those avoidances.

She didn't give a way for regular Americans to understand that a universal tarrif is a massive sales tax. She's not landing anything of significance imo. In order to understand why her answers are better, you have to be much MUCH more informed than the median voter... I don't think anything's going to stick...

And what the hell is she doing naming Goldman Sachs or Cheyney as reputable?
HUGE mistep imo-- avoid this support like the plague, don't own it. Underscoring Former Trump staffer's hate for him is good though I think.

And Trump's effective hits-- saying that she's empty and that SHE has come to HIS positions... I think this sticks. They DIDN'T get rid of the Trump Tarriffs. She HAS embraced right wing positions on policing and foreign policy. She has no populist economic policy she's underscoring besides Tax Cuts. Those of us who understand the intricacies of Tax types know there's a dramatic difference between their tax plans, but the median voter won't. End to end, the idea that Kamala and the race are shaped by him-- hits true imo.

Of course she's done great on abortion, but I don't think there's a knock out punch there-- Trump's position is weak and awful but he threaded the line as best as he possibly could; she didn't land a body blow.

She's so far not doing anything to change the headwinds of her campaign-- losing the mantle of "change candidate," losing any ability to distinguish herself/improve over Biden, losing the chance to restore the good faith of the base to give her a chance to be better than Biden, to grab the slumping enthusiasm waffling after her unimpressive performance at the DNC.

It's troubling folks... it's troubling...
 
OMG, this foreign policy section is going to be a disaster...

And Biden's weakness on the national stage, and getting crushed in that debate... the Democrats have NOTHING to counter Trump's claim that foreign policy would be better under him just because he's "stronger". Of course, lies. Straight up lies.

But if the Dems give zero assurances that they have spines, in the midst of allowing the war in Ukraine and the atrocities in Gaza to continue... it's such a bad look.
 
cheru said:
“Now she wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison.”

LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO wtf is he even yapping about
Click to expand...
Screenshot_20240910-220337.png
 
We are really in the hands of the voters... why we didn't lock this guy up I have no idea...

...but there is no way for the voters to understand the better side in this debate based on rhetoric, based on the social cues alone. Kamala's not going to corner or crack him. She's not giving us anything to CHOOSE HER for her.

The only way for the viewers to understand who's better here is for them to actually educate themselves, to actually understand what's at stake, to see through the lies and also protect our Republic's values and freedoms. We're really in the hands of the median voter and event as a radical small d democrat I'd be lying if I didn't acknowledge it's terrifying...
 
Chou, while I will agree democrats are spineless, surely the median voter has to hear an exchange like:
"The Haitian migrant pet claims have shown to have zero substance" - not even Kamala, a moderator
"Wrong. They're looking for themselves and I can assure you that they ARE actually stealing our hard working Americans pets and eating them like the barbaric criminals they are." Donald J. Trump

And realize how genuinely insane trump sounds when it comes to completely overt xenophobia
 
One is a selfish fascist who wants to destroy our democracy and take away peoples' rights. One does not. Even if you don't like Kamala, it's a pretty obvious decision. Not voting because "both sides are bad" is incredibly selfish to all of the people that will be directly affected by Project 2025.
 
Or could be wrong... maybe I'm just used to hearing him talk... maybe there will be more normies than I thought disgusted at his disgusting answers. Need to have faith.
 
Man. Convicted felon Trump got cooked. This was the most lopsided debate I’ve ever watched. Impeccable job by VP Harris.

Unfortunately, debates don’t change peoples votes. It is still going to be a 51%(D) 47%(R) race. Hopefully the population distribution isn’t too crazy in November to allow the treasonous felon to steal enough swing states.
 
Think Kamala did aight but I can't help but feel Biden had more charisma in some of the earlier debates (specifically the 2020 debates). Might just be me though.

Initial vibes are that Trump being the loudest in the room will give him some points with the average joes tuning in to watch the debate who don't know about much of the issues, but maybe this will change over time. I listened to the debate as background noise so that's the general vibes I got. Think her points on abortion and on Trump's criminal record were strong, but she did have to sidestep a few of Trump's claims herself. I'd say on most accounts Trump got cooked in his positions, but IDK if it'll come across that way to the public. Trump's nonsense did shine much more clearly later in the debate than the initial segments if that means anything. I might rewatch this debate again later and re-evaluate it again over time. Rewatching Biden's 2020 debates kinda made me realize how much he cooked Donald Trump on nearly every issue, which wasn't as clear initially.

Really a fundamental issue on these debates is that Trump can inject as much BS as he wants and you can't disprove it because its all based on "vibes". This is espicially applicable to stuff like the economy, which is so abstract that it can be molded to whatever you want. Did Trump actually get "arrested" or is it really a "political prosecution"? You decide! Nothing means anything anymore. Lying is just OP in debates.
 
Sabelette said:
Just quoting Amnesty International is, again, meaningless and ignores material reality of what settlers do; it's simply an appeal to authority. If "civilian" means "one who does not participate in hostilities" then no, settlers are not civilians as they are engaging in a violent act 24/7 simply by existing on the land they stole, to say nothing of the physical violence, psychological terror, and sexual violence they inflict.
Click to expand...
Merriam-Webster: one not on active duty in the armed services or not on a police or firefighting force
Oxford English Dictionary (the source cited in the Wikipedia article): "a person who is not professionally employed in the armed forces; a non-military person"
Cambridge Dictionary: a person who is not a member of the police or the armed forces

Sabelette said:
Again, I don't see where anyone has offered a way for Palestinians to fight back where nobody except active IOF members are harmed. Would you like to provide them with drones and cutting-edge weaponry so they can pick their targets more carefully?
Click to expand...
No, I would rather see demilitarization in the area rather than escalation. Here's my solution: cut all military aid to Israel and sanction them heavily, provide humanitarian aid to Gaza, urge the removal of Netanyahu and his cabinet from power, and potentially station troops in Gaza to repel any further Israeli attacks.

Sabelette said:
Will you condemn the IOF for their use of human shields?
Click to expand...
Yes, as I condemn them for their genocidal actions in Gaza.

Myzozoa said:
Actually it's you who have taken up all the zionist talking points for the purpose of making murky the clear ethical picture of Zionist perpetrators and Palestinian victims, repeatedly trying to equate and conjure up "Hamas members" to go alongside Zionist settlers and militants that are engaged in indiscriminate killing of Palestinians.
Click to expand...
I would like to clarify that in no way, shape, or form am I attempting to justify the Israeli genocide in Gaza. I've acknowledged that settlers have no right to protection under the law if they are attacking Palestinians and have acknowledged that this is an occurrence that should most certainly not be ignored. In turn, I have given you articles that say that settlers are civilians under international law. The above sources are the dictionary definition (what I am going off of) for what a "civilian" is. Thanks for insulting me, I guess.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top