Average tankie calling for the genocide of the working class for being the wrong ethnicity
Average tankie calling for the genocide of the working class for being the wrong ethnicity
Average tankie calling for the genocide of the working class for being the wrong ethnicity
This is their name for the attack by Hamas on a music festival, is that right?
stolen your homes and land
...
private property should be abolished
Pick only one
That's not what they mean by "private property." Leftists are just so goddamn stubborn that they refuse to acknowledge the immediate confusion and use any other label.
Daily reminder that tankies aren't leftists.
I'm ready for the new tankie book called "my struggle."
I don't understand. Regardless of who does the killing and for whatever reason Ukrainians kill Russian civilians or vis versa, if Uyghurs kill Han Chinese or vis versa or even if Palestinians kill Israeli civilians or vis versa and even if it is fully understandable it is never legal nor justified to kill civilians.
Holy strawman, Batman!
Please explain to me how defining the murder of civilians as a legitimate and legal attack for the crime of existing in a country while a particular ethnicity is anything but a call for ethnic cleansing.
What was wrong with their comparison to a previous occupying force? Occupy does not mean at war or invade. Nazis could be civilians of course.
"Al-Awsa flood was a fully legitimate and legal attack against an occupying force"
Citing the attacks on October 7th, which targeted civilians, as legitimate and legal against an 'occupying force'.
"Innocent civilians are not an occupying force"
Giving the opportunity, here, to dispute that they were innocent civilians - by specifying innocent civilians not being an occupying force, they are necessarily narrowing the scope of the discussion to civilians in the context of the October 7th attacks and whether they were legitimate.
"When they're the people who've stolen your homes and land, they are"
That innocent civilians were targeted is not disputed. Instead, it is asserted that as the civilians were "the people who've stolen your homes and land", they are in some way legitimate targets. What other reasonable interpretation is left in context?
Well they didnt avoid military personnel, they grabbed whoever they could. Its a bit different too when you consider all Israelis serve in their military by default.
How about this, you tell me what they should have done instead? Continued on as they were? Are you aware the IDF was killing a palestinian child per week all through 2023, PRIOR to October 7th?
https://www.savethechildren.net/news/2023-marks-deadliest-year-record-children-occupied-west-bank
I'm not saying its right to hurt people, I'm saying there is only so much a community can take before things like this happen, and now its being used as an excuse to further kill and steal land, which is wrong.
Or how about foreign countries lobbying our government? Bad right? If russia had a PAC and was donating money to get laws passed that are favorable to Russia, we would rightly protest across the nation.
We allow the exact same thing for Israel and protesting that fact is now illegal in America. How's that for moral consistency?
The civilian settlers who are taking Palestinian homes by force are an occupying force.
The attack by Hamas was not legitimate because it was against random civilians.
I agree entirely. But to them, Israelis are all 'settlers'.
I'm not saying Israelis are guilty or deserved the attack on civilians, but Israel is a settler-colonial state. So is the US, but I'm not going to call for every US citizen with colonial roots to be forced off the continent (especially since that would include myself, my ancestors - including recent ones - were awful people who did awful things).
You can acknowledge that the state of Israel is an illegal settlement without calling for genocide, just as you can acknowledge that the US is founded on stolen land without calling for death to all Americans.