this post was submitted on 27 Mar 2025
1545 points (95.3% liked)
Microblog Memes
7250 readers
4061 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, you kinda fucking do, actually, unless you're fine with the genocide continuing.
I asked for an answer, not Hasbara propaganda and genocide apologia.
Every claim Israel makes about Palestine is lies and projection. It's the IDF that uses human shields, not Hamas. It's the IDF that levels cities and shells hospitals, including those run by the UN. The IDF is a terrorist organization.
Yes, the "war" would stop if Hamas surrendered, because then it would become even more of a one-sided slaughter, although the killing wouldn't even end when every Palestinian was dead because Israel also goes Lebensraum on neighbors like Syria and Lebanon. Israel is a blatantly expansionist apartheid state and the only way lasting peace will be achieved is when the system of apartheid is ended and Palestinians are given full and equal rights and the colonizer ethnostate goes the way of similar states like apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany.
From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free.
In the mean time, the terrorist rogue state of Israel cannot be reasoned with but can potentially be kept in check through force, the only language it understands.
It's a bit rude to just respond to someone with an empty accusation, isn't it? I'm sure you can come up with a better response and is useful to read and shows your point.
That is a very strange line of reasoning.
What's strange about it? "The poor should be fed, but I oppose every practical solution to feeding them" is effectively the same as saying "The poor should not be fed." The only difference is rhetorical. Likewise, "I don't support the genocide, but I oppose every practical solution to ending it," is effectively the same as saying, "I support the genocide."
I guess it's strange if you think words and rhetoric matter more than physical reality.
And you consider killing sailors who may not even know their ship is Israeli owned is a "practical solution"?
Yes, I do indeed consider distruption of trade routes a practical solution, because it is. How do you propose to force Israel and the US to the negotiating table? Asking nicely?
That's an ML take if ever I saw one.
Yes, people from my instance do tend to have more correct takes, thanks for noticing.
You still can't offer any alternative whatsoever, besides just allowing the genocide to continue unopposed.
yes. even in your stupid fucking bullshit strawman can you come up with a more heinous event than killing 53 civilians like the US just did.