Sorry, i dont want to be rude, but do you actually have any arguments other than gesturing at the article & giving both-sides-isms?
Hamas has committed war crimes, yes, however it shouldn’t be ignored that Israel is currently engaged in terrorism, genocide, land grabs, torture of prisoners and more. Simply saying “both sides bad” lays the blame more evenly than it should be laid.
The article also mentions that Israel has started using it in their own propaganda videos. showing the triangle over targets as they’re hit, and when you flip it like that there’s a very clear implication of destroying the symbol of freedom… Which is to say, I still fail to see your ultimate point. You’re just pointing at the news article and saying “SEE! THEY SAY ITS BAD!”
Could you provide some actual argumentation to go with that?
And just so it doesnt seem like I’m running, “Targeting reticle” would imply a weapon optic or similar, hence my confusion. “using it to mark targets” would have been clearer.
Asking you what you mean by calling the triangle a “targeting reticle” absolutely does not mean I don’t know the topic at hand, its me asking you to clarify your argumentation.
What is this even in reference to? Do you care to elaborate on the propaganda you’re trying to spew, or are you just expecting me to know the same talking points as you?
Now I might just be too stupid to understand what I’m displaying, but last I checked, the red triangle has been a symbol of pro-Palestinian support since the Palestinian Revolt in uhhhh… 1938. It’s possible Hamas might have co-opted it, but then you might as well ban the Palestinian flag as well since that’s the source of the triangle, and it has also existed since 1917, I’m failing to follow how this is a symbol of Hamas
Except thats not even fully correct either. Hezbollah is also a political party with members who are 100% non-militant civilian members who are only politicians.
This is specifically talking about stores like crumbl cookies I think (appears to be what the cookie in the picture is). Very fancy, quite overpriced, pretty tasty, but kinda doughy in the center IMO.
People that complain about forced diversity are complaining about diversity. No one is forcing excessive diversity on you.
To be clear, that wasnt me you just responded to, but I was the one who asked you the questions. You seem to be making a lot of bad faith assumptions about my intent with those questions.
You’re asking a rhetorical question in the hopes of getting a gotcha.
Well, it is rhetorically framed, but I was trying to see if you and I are both working with frameworks built on reality.
Your primary goal here is not to deepen any kind of understanding.
Again, ouch. The tone of the questions may have come across that way, but my intent is never to “gotcha”… You’ll just have to take my word for it obviously.
If you did, you would be a lot more honest in your questions. You’d open up with a clear argument, based on specifics, with dates, people, events etc.
This is a forum on internet, not debate club. Like I said above, I’m sorry if my questions came across as being bad faith, but I’m not obligated to serve you a rhetorically perfect and fallacy-free set of questions, just as you are not obligated to engage with my questions if you feel they’re trying to uh… “Gotcha”
If you did, you would be a lot more honest in your questions. You’d open up with a clear argument, based on specifics, with dates, people, events etc.
I’m not totally sure how I’m responding with catch phrases. Honestly, if nothing else I’d love for you to clarify this
You want a nuanced discussion that delves into the specifics of the geopolitics of the region? Start a thread that’s not just diluted meaningless sentences, such as this nugget:
Why should the US president be in regular contact with the perpetrator of an ongoing genocide?
I’m sorry, I’m not being intentionally obtuse, but I can’t tell if you’re using the above as an example of a “diluted meaningless sentence” or whether it’s meant to be a good question.
Ultimately, I don’t feel I was acting in bad faith considering I was trying to evaluate your framework. If you feel it was done poorly, that’s okay, you dont need to respond.
Also:
Who are “you guys”?
Mind telling me how Israel is a table democracy? Or how they create stability? Maybe you can tell me why the middle east is a destabilized region to begin with?
Actually, it’s not irrelevant and they’re both!
It’s a rhetorical device :) I’m more than happy to agree that no-one really needs anything much larger than a kei truck.
Well… Back when a truck wasnt $60+k… Yes thats exactly what people did. They had a truck that guzzled gas and provided the bed space or towing capacity they needed for work, and a daily driver for other things.
From the last time I saw this ‘debate’… ~30% of truck owners use the bed once a year or less, ~75% of owners tow once a year or less, and ~70% go offroad once a year or less.
Now, obviously there are applications where a truck is needed. That can’t be denied… But there are so many applications here that use massive fucking trucks where another country would use a sprinter van or similar vehicle for the exact same application.
I totally understand where you’re coming from. It’s absolutely not uncommon to casually refer to high-rank NCOs as Officers (in Canada at least)
[Source: Family in CAF and RCMP]
Don’t believe or don’t care. Workers are less likely to collectivize if they spend 80% of their time under the supervision of someone who’s paid to stop any discussion of that kind.
I absolute agree with you that that is how employers are viewing it and I agree with your disagreement with people in the industry that suggest the solution is ten hour days for blue collar workers.
(One of) The problem(s) behind this is that the capital class seemingly does not care what the evidence shows, and are only interested in what feels more productive. To them, it feels more productive to have fewer workers, for longer hours, with less safety measures, and because they feel it’s more efficient, that means it must be (because it costs more “less”). Until we change that, or sufficiently collectivize to force them to change, it’s gonna be hard to move the needle.
I mean, a four day work week still benefits blue collar jobs, though it’s understandably more difficult to implement this in a some blue collar workspaces, and I dont claim to have the answer for how to do it by any means.
Factories would benefit from seven day work weeks, more time producing not less.
Factories benefit from higher efficiency, and less downtime, which can be achieved with more employees, working less, being less tired, more satisfied with their pay and benefits, and having fewer accidents which interrupt production.
It can be done, but other systems also need changing to help it along.
To everyone pearl clutching in response to this correct meme with one of the following phrases:
“That’s how you create an echo chamber”
“paradox of intolerance doesn’t say how to fight fascism”
“This is about silencing opposing thought”
I would like to take this moment to remind you that the paradox of intolerance isn’t about exiling those who disagree on economic policy; it’s about recognizing and directly opposing those who are trying to harm or disadvantage others and doing so in a meaningful way that will actually change the outcome. You can’t debate Hitler out of doing a genocide, but you could have jailed him before he gained power.
Being too spineless to call out and fight intolerance enables fascism. The longer you live wrapped up in your civility politics, the overtones window shifts further right, and it strengthens the fascist support. It happened in pre-WW2 Germany, and it’s being repeated in dozens of countries worldwide. If you feel the urge to block me, go ahead…
…but know that this is your fault