this post was submitted on 18 Sep 2024
402 points (84.9% liked)
NonCredibleDefense
6664 readers
740 users here now
A community for your defence shitposting needs
Rules
1. Be nice
Do not make personal attacks against each other, call for violence against anyone, or intentionally antagonize people in the comment sections.
2. Explain incorrect defense articles and takes
If you want to post a non-credible take, it must be from a "credible" source (news article, politician, or military leader) and must have a comment laying out exactly why it's non-credible. Low-hanging fruit such as random Twitter and YouTube comments belong in the Matrix chat.
3. Content must be relevant
Posts must be about military hardware or international security/defense. This is not the page to fawn over Youtube personalities, simp over political leaders, or discuss other areas of international policy.
4. No racism / hatespeech
No slurs. No advocating for the killing of people or insulting them based on physical, religious, or ideological traits.
5. No politics
We don't care if you're Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Baathist, or some other hot mess. Leave it at the door. This applies to comments as well.
6. No seriousposting
We don't want your uncut war footage, fundraisers, credible news articles, or other such things. The world is already serious enough as it is.
7. No classified material
Classified ‘western’ information is off limits regardless of how "open source" and "easy to find" it is.
8. Source artwork
If you use somebody's art in your post or as your post, the OP must provide a direct link to the art's source in the comment section, or a good reason why this was not possible (such as the artist deleting their account). The source should be a place that the artist themselves uploaded the art. A booru is not a source. A watermark is not a source.
9. No low-effort posts
No egregiously low effort posts. E.g. screenshots, recent reposts, simple reaction & template memes, and images with the punchline in the title. Put these in weekly Matrix chat instead.
10. Don't get us banned
No brigading or harassing other communities. Do not post memes with a "haha people that I hate died… haha" punchline or violating the sh.itjust.works rules (below). This includes content illegal in Canada.
11. No misinformation
NCD exists to make fun of misinformation, not to spread it. Make outlandish claims, but if your take doesn’t show signs of satire or exaggeration it will be removed. Misleading content may result in a ban. Regardless of source, don’t post obvious propaganda or fake news. Double-check facts and don't be an idiot.
Join our Matrix chatroom
Other communities you may be interested in
- !militaryporn@lemmy.world
- !forgottenweapons@lemmy.world
- !combatvideos@sh.itjust.works
- !militarymoe@ani.social
Banner made by u/Fertility18
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If they have nothing to hide, why don't they let themselves be killed?
That's a very weak arguement - you're communicating with the embassy and ambassador of a recognized country.
Is it simply impossible for you to imagine that other peoples have different opinions and viewpoints on things?
Just because it's been ingrained into you that arabs are bad and they are all "shithole countries" or hezbollah is evil, doesn't mean that others share that view. Ask yourself: Does Lebanon and Iran and Palestinians have a right to defend themselves?
And no that doesn't mean I agree with either of those groups. I just realize that framing everything as a fight of good vs evil like it's some fantasy movie where you can just slay the mindless orcs. These are human beings sick of imperialist aggression. Do you expect them to just lie down? Solutions are complicated and don't involve just killing everyone who opposes you.
So of course Iran would have communication channels with Hezbollah or even support them.
The problem isn't that my argument is weak, it's that I have to make it in the first place. It's fucking obvious except to the severely brainwashed, and then there is little point of making it instead of mocking them.
"Defend" themselves against Israel daring to exist?
Right, Israel just needs a bit more lebensraum in the east / the west bank.
Why are you changing the topic? Yes, Israel using the situation to expand into palestinian territory is also despicable. But that doesn't magically make military, militia or terrorist attacks against Israel an act of defense.
If you want to condemn Israel's actions then the bare minimal requirement is not being even worse. At which countries openly supporting terrorists and calling for the destruction of a neighbouring country fail by definition.
Worse? We have numbers for the respective body counts. They probably killed more Palestinian children in the last 8 months alone than Israeli victims in the entire history of terrorism against Israel.
Israel had decades of superior military power to ~~culturally genocide~~ re-educate Palestinians and create peace. Instead they chose fascism, oppression, and violence against their neighbors.
And again you changed the topic and now it's about body count and not who actually attacked the other and who is defending themselves.
If you need to redefine a problem every single time you try to make a point either your answer is simplified bullshit or you start with your conclusion and then adapt everything else to support it.
I will give you a hint, the Israelis siezed lands by force as part of the formation of Israel, expelling or killing hundreds of thousands of Palestinians.
Everything following that action has been defence by the regional populace.
So you are indeed denying Israel the right to defend themselves or even exist... yet you are trying to argue as if your were actually reasonable and weren't advocating for just another genocide.
Are you saying seizing other people's lands, and expelling them, gives you the right to exist there? The zionists entered a place that was decolonizing from the British, and began buying land, that was already occupied, from the British, then began expanding, refusing to hire, or do business with, anyone who wasn't jewish, and expelling the people originally there. You claim that imperialist expansionism is bad, but the moment someone points out that this behavior is the root of this conflict, you jump to the side of the colonizers. You can't have it both ways. Either you are fine with colonial expansionism, or you agree that people being colonized can route the colonizers.