Samsuma

Looks like that one might've gotten you scratched, bloodthirsty lib. Projection of what? And what mental gymnastics? I answered the question straight and to the point, with no fluff to skirt around the question, or any of the questions for that matter.

Seems you just recently found out about these terms, then decided to incorrectly use them to avoid actually engaging with the topic + to avoid any of the questions, because once you do eventually find out the answers to them, you'll come to realize that you're defending Zionism and by extension, US Imperialism.

No. "Israeli civilians" is an oxymoron: as Israelis are reservists at best and full-time genociders at least. They're Europeans/Americans, and they all had a choice in the matter when settling in land that don't belong to them. History did not begin on the 7th of October, 2023. Refer back to this lovely reply by @m532@lemmygrad.ml who manages to succinctly clear your doubts: https://lemmy.ml/post/29464508/18363453

I realise my other repeated question so far has been pretty tough and you’ve had to try to continuously dodge and deflect from it instead of just simply say the thing you actually think

Question:

Literally supports my point. So again, what about it, exactly, do you disagree with?

Answer:

Your “erm, akshually”-esque point makes complete sense when you don’t consider Palestinians as humans and have no right to resistance. there’s nothing to “agree” or “disagree” with.

• Britain (the Empire that helped give birth to the settler-colonial entity) Considered Israel Bigger Threat Than USSR in 1945

• Please Watch This Before Saying Anything About Israel/Palestine

• The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine and the Creation of Israel (How We Got Here)

Whether my questions are answered or not, reality won't be forgiving, unfortunately for you soon enough you'll have to come to terms with it, lib.

Your "erm, akshually"-esque point makes complete sense when you don't consider Palestinians as humans and have no right to resistance. It's not an opinion, there's nothing to "agree" or "disagree" with.

Now quit squirming and answer each and every single question posed. Or what, you wanna pass on the opportunity to show the 10 other people reading this thread how much you understand the subject, since you libs love to tout "nuance" so much when all you do is play semantics?

Ok, let's talk nuance since you libs love to terminate your thinking process before it even started. I raise the same questions to you as I did another user:

https://lemmy.ml/post/29464508/18363866

Who are Hamas, how did they come to be and what are they doing? What did they do on the 7th of October, 2023? Why does a settler-colonialist entity have the right to defend itself in this given context? Does it have the right on other contexts? Does it not, and if not, what does that change? Do you recognize what you are defending by virtue of your hyper-examining of a statement that doesn't change its meaning even after the hyper-examination?

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/11/28/bernie_sanders_israel_has_a_right_to_defend_itself_but_not_to_kill_12000_innocent_people_in_response.html

Israel has a right to defend itself, but what Israel does not have a right to do, in my view, is to kill 12,000 people in six, seven weeks, two-thirds of whom are women and children.

https://oregoncapitalchronicle.com/2024/01/16/u-s-senate-turns-aside-bernie-sanders-measure-to-order-human-rights-inquiry-of-israel/

“Israel has the right to defend itself and go to war with Hamas, who started this whole situation,” Sanders said on the Senate floor. “Israel does not have the right to go to war with the entire Palestinian people … And sadly that is what is happening right now.”

From the same source:

“The resolution brought forward by Sen. Sanders is little more than performative left-wing politics,” the Kentucky Republican said. “It is not, as our colleague would suggest, about authorizing a report on aid to Israel. It’s not even about human rights. It’s about tying the hands of a close ally locked in a necessary battle against savage terrorists.”

Team Red, the brother to Team Blue in its shared interest in imperialism, can smell his bullshit from a mile away and have no problem pointing out using non-euphemistic terms that are a reflection of how they really think about Palestine and Palestinians, the last question is, why are you struggling with this?

For as long as these questions remain unanswered truthfully, reality will be very hard to grasp for you.

The quote thing has been aptly noted by another user here already, actually. Have a look, it'll knock your lib socks right off:

https://lemmy.ml/post/29464508/18359532

Here's another instance of Bernie saying the quote:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2023/11/28/bernie_sanders_israel_has_a_right_to_defend_itself_but_not_to_kill_12000_innocent_people_in_response.html

Israel has a right to defend itself, [...]

Anything before or after that quote is to be understood as pure pearl-clutching/handwringing from a both-sideser.

Which part of the image is wrong (which by the looks of it, you're conflating "wrong"/"incorrect" with the word "propaganda" ) or "intellectually lazy", again?

The zombies from PvZ were a metaphor. Yes, including the Elvis Presley zombie.

Yes yes, we've already went over this, my opinions are quite heavy to read. Anyways, there's no rule that says you should be verbose to be able to explain the sort of “good faith” statements you had in mind on the topic of Team Blue and Team Red (unless that's a cult-like behavior from Reddit carried on here? Who knows).

In fact, if you're able to explain in simple terms, then there should be no problem explaining, so knock yourself out. What sort of “good faith” statements did you have in mind on the topic of Team Blue and Team Red?

Yes my posts pack quite the punch for bloodthirsty libs like you hiding behind a "goodwill" veneer who certainly care about building communities (but not for anyone outside of their KKKlub), thank you for noticing.

Anyways, that's enough sidetracking, let's try this once again: tell us, what sort of “good faith” statements did you have in mind on the topic of Team Blue and Team Red?

So brave. Tell us, what sort of "good faith" statements did you have in mind on the topic of Team Blue and Team Red's consensus on genocide, bombing campaigns, scapegoating foreigners, violating students for holding thoughts that go against the interests of the empire (whether via abduction through the ICE, by direct police brutality or through deportation), violating land rights to the Native Americans, continuing slavery, whether via salary theft, student debts, healthcare debts, or via prison slaves (as it is literally enshrined in the constitution)?

We arent going to stop Israel either way

I'm going to have to stop reading from here, I skimmed through 5 times anyways and couldn't get any semblance of a coherent point. Clearly you don't actually care about the marginalized groups you speak of, otherwise you would've understood why nobody takes your Western "democracy" seriously, you just continue to come off as the "I can't be a genocide-loving Islamophobe, I have an Arab friend" type (or similar).

No amount of pearl clutching will wash away your depravity.

Was the first sentence of the person I'm replying to not enlightening enough, or does someone have to hand you the explanation on a silver platter?