@WassimBerbar said in #50:
>
(Please note that when I use caps, I am not yelling. I have simply not figured out how to use italics on Lichess forums. If someone could educate me, I would greatly appreciate it!)
For one, start by realizing that just because a country stays neutral, that does not mean they condone Hamas. Or just because they don't recognize Hamas as a terrorist organization doesn't mean that they think Hamas is right. It could be for many reasons - Pressure from neighboring states is one, for example. Pressure to do something doesn't mean that thing is right. Assuming that just because Hamas is not universally recognized as a terrorist organisation means that they aren't is a good textbook example of the false cause fallacy.
Then realize another thing - not thinking Hamas is a terrorist doesn't mean that they condone the attack. That's a huge, huge leap - and you know that too. You can think that Hamas is not a terrorist but still think that they went overboard. Again, you are overgeneralizing and assuming a lot of things to be true when they don't have to be. These sorts of baseless claims aren't going to get you anywhere.
Now let's get to the main part about your argument: that I'm overusing October 7.
Let me ask you - is October 7 relevant to this topic? I think that after we've expanded on it, yes. October 7 was one of the things that Brucknell, a famous (or infamous? hmmm....) self-immolation case, was thought to have condoned. In this way, discussing it is not wrong. I am not overusing a debate. In fact, I merely mentioned it as a passing comment, originally - you chose to engage and it devolves into this. I am not really overusing anything if it's relevant. After all, trying to praise or condemn people without context is always a bad idea.
I, for one, do not see why you struggle to avoid talking about it. In my opinion, if Hamas assumed responsibility for that attack - we should let them assume responsibility for it. Why are you trying to say that Hamas didn't have that big of a role, when they themselves would insist that their role be known worldwide?
As for tanks, I've never said a single thing about tanks, whether to say they exist or that they don't exist. All this talk about tanks is odd.
It is well known that Hamas acknowledges they killed citizens. Of course, they insist in their report that such things were only accidental - however much the evidence shows contrary. Let me ask you - if you truly believe that Israel would have enough energy to kill that many citizens on its own - Do you think they would have enough time to successfully tie people together and then burn them? Do you believe that these people could successfully fight alongside Hamas? Do you not think that Hamas would still have to attack to carry away hostages?
Trying to justify massacres is pointless.
Remember, Wassim. Online you are a supporter of Palestine. What you say about Palestine and Israel are what people take to be a view that a good amount of other people take on the issue. If you start justifying the killing of innocents, including children that have nothing to do with the IDF's policies, purely because you think that there's a small chance friendly fire killed them or that these news are false - you are setting a picture for others that all Palestinian supporters are blind repeaters of Hamas who don't care about innocents purely because those innocents look like the soldiers.
But be honest, you don't think that, and I know you don't. And as for supporting Palestine - I bet almost nobody on the Palestinian side supports that.
So why are we trying to justify massacres? Why can't we just acknowledge them for what they were? We can acknowledge and not justify. We can sit and realize that this was a terrible event, one of the worst for Israel since the Holocaust. We can sit down, acknowledge, and reflect on how to move on from there.
Or....we can use insane mental gymnastics to try to deflect blame in an effort to save a side that doesn't need saving. A side that would fare much better if you simply acknowledged instead of blamed. What good are we doing blaming? Why do we need to blame?
The morality of the situation has been known since the beginning. We all know that Hamas isn't the best government. And to prove that, think about the science of power.
Those in power, especially military governments, want obedient subjects so that they can accomplish their oligarchical agendas. As we know, Hamas, although funded by billionaires, has a strict hierarchy where commanders hide in hospitals and also get better living conditions in underground tunnels.
Already Hamas is sacrificing people for "the cause". Imagine how much worse it'll be when Hamas takes over Palestine.
And that's the problem. You cannot let military governments rule. Supporting Hamas, IMO, is being an enemy of Palestine.
That said, you have contradicted yourself quite a lot in the time I've spent arguing with you over forums.
For example, these statements:
1) Hamas is the oppressed, the meek lamb fighting against Israel. They need help. vs
2) Hamas is strong and will surely defeat Israel.
1) Israel is very incompetent and will self-destruct. vs
2) Israel is extremely strong! And needs to be stopped by any means possible.
And this, the most recent one:
1) All citizens have a right to life. Killing any citizen is wrong.
2) October 7 is justified and should be condoned.
Remember the phrase, killing any citizen. Any. By whomever. And then, no matter how crazy your belief is....condoning will always be wrong. Because even if Israel killed all of their own men women and children in an instant...would not that still be killing citizens?
See the problem here? Doublethink doesn't help.
You are capable of much more than this. You just aren't showing it right now.
