wtf is a person supposed to actually do about israel murdering hundreds of innocent civilians.

i don't really do this link-n-run bullshit but this is quite important:

I think this is a good, quick read. A lot of you subscribe to the "bigger gun" school of thought regarding your hatred of Israel.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/honest-voice-israel

  On 8/4/2014 at 1:17 AM, Alcofribas said:

in my experience contemporary philosophy has basically no insight into situations like this.

haha, what? hm, a little self incriminating. this begs the question, then what experience do you have?

Let me make something clear. The shelling of that UN school is an atrocity. Many have been committed. The Israeli response is zealous at best, more fairly excessive.

But you cannot dismiss the fact that Hamas, the whole of it, not just the cleric in the video I posted, wants to wipe out the jewish population. I don't understand how that doesn't temper your condemnation of Israel.

And to those who still don't think this is a religious war, you are playing right into their hands. It's all part of the plan.

^ I don't see how one side's madness makes the other side's madness more acceptable. why should anyone temper their condemnation of Israel bombing schools and hospitals and safehouses because Hamas wants to wipe out Jews, exactly? that doesnt make sense to me. I don't think you need to compromise on either front, both of them are being insane.

and I still dont believe it's a religious war, but rather a war in which religion is playing a part. Hamas is in a corner and desperate and frenzied, that's where their zealotry and hate speech is coming from. it's posturing, like a defense mechanism. if the Palestinians weren't in such dire straits Hamas would be less mad with this desire for vengeance.

  On 8/4/2014 at 1:17 AM, Alcofribas said:

 

  On 8/3/2014 at 11:05 PM, poblequadrat said:

sadlol just about sums it up really

sort of. but you're willing to chime in about architecture and driverless cars and shit so I'm curious what you have to say about this situation beyond "sadlol." I'm especially curious bc you're post are robust with philosophical knowledge and insight; but in my experience contemporary philosophy has basically no insight into situations like this.

 

i'm a disappointing person so i'm going to disappoint here too.

wars are a very concrete thing and they have to be discussed in non-philosophical terms as well as in philosophical terms. however all i know about israel and palestine are some touristy tales from my parents, so in fact i don't know what either side are fighting for at this point - my impression is that it's become a matter of survival, but then i can't say much about that. i think that what israel is doing is quite appalling and probably in the short-term the measures proposed by that party eugene votes for would be a good idea. but i'm not sure that's a viable situation in the long term. neither side seems to be for these measures anyway. so maybe the half-philosophical question is: is there a way to intervene in such situations that doesn't rely in the obscene and hypocritical notion of ethics that underlies the United Nations and the kind of discourse that puts an inconsistent and conservative concept of "human rights" above political struggle? what would be the political and the ethical/philosophical implications of this? i reckon what is needed here is a bold move which would be to some degree external to the logic of the conflict itself. i don't know what that move might be, but what Europe can do is do away with its ethics, and one of the pillars of that strand of ethics is the conception of "totalitarianism" as the ultimate limit of humanity that forbids any sort of utopian thinking. of course, "totalitarianism" includes nazism, and with that a certain discourse on israel, but mostly i think what's important is giving wars, or generally conflict, a more political treatment rather than a purely tactical one masked by a combination of humanitarian talk about victims and murderers together with a discourse of the defense of "liberal freedoms".

as you see i'm talking shit and basically sadlol is all i can say, which i'll admit is pretty embarrassing.

i can share with you the pathetic story that i was given the name "israel" because my parents had high hopes for me. that's another sadlol.

god i'm bullshitting so hard i sound as if i was doing a zizek impression

They have raised the ire of Anonymous...

http://www.digitaljournal.com/internet/anonymous-targets-brings-down-israeli-secret-service-website/article/394457

they must be quaking in their boots.

  On 8/4/2014 at 7:25 PM, Rubin Farr said:

They have raised the ire of Anonymous...

lol, is that still a thing?

THE IRE OF ANONYMOUS = discomfort a few websites

anonymous failed to even particularly irritate scientology, and the scientologists arent even an organisation that have start openly bombing schools and hospitals

Anonymous save us all.

  On 8/4/2014 at 7:25 PM, Rubin Farr said:

They have raised the ire of Anonymous...

 

http://www.digitaljournal.com/internet/anonymous-targets-brings-down-israeli-secret-service-website/article/394457

Oh shit! That will teach em all!

This conflict is ovah!

*sarcasm*

I think they were offended someone in a Guy Fawkes mask was killed.

http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/does-this-war-make-me-look-fat/

  On 8/4/2014 at 4:50 PM, usagi said:

^ I don't see how one side's madness makes the other side's madness more acceptable. why should anyone temper their condemnation of Israel bombing schools and hospitals and safehouses because Hamas wants to wipe out Jews, exactly? that doesnt make sense to me. I don't think you need to compromise on either front, both of them are being insane.

 

and I still dont believe it's a religious war, but rather a war in which religion is playing a part. Hamas is in a corner and desperate and frenzied, that's where their zealotry and hate speech is coming from. it's posturing, like a defense mechanism. if the Palestinians weren't in such dire straits Hamas would be less mad with this desire for vengeance.

wholeheartedly agree

segregation is a bitch, but people still practice that shit.

  On 8/4/2014 at 4:17 PM, sheatheman said:

I think this is a good, quick read. A lot of you subscribe to the "bigger gun" school of thought regarding your hatred of Israel.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/honest-voice-israel

 

  On 8/4/2014 at 1:17 AM, Alcofribas said:

in my experience contemporary philosophy has basically no insight into situations like this.

haha, what? hm, a little self incriminating. this begs the question, then what experience do you have?

to be sure my reading of contemporary philosophy is very limited. but thanks for not helping me with that lol

  On 8/4/2014 at 7:51 PM, goDel said:

 

  On 8/4/2014 at 4:50 PM, usagi said:

^ I don't see how one side's madness makes the other side's madness more acceptable. why should anyone temper their condemnation of Israel bombing schools and hospitals and safehouses because Hamas wants to wipe out Jews, exactly? that doesnt make sense to me. I don't think you need to compromise on either front, both of them are being insane.

 

and I still dont believe it's a religious war, but rather a war in which religion is playing a part. Hamas is in a corner and desperate and frenzied, that's where their zealotry and hate speech is coming from. it's posturing, like a defense mechanism. if the Palestinians weren't in such dire straits Hamas would be less mad with this desire for vengeance.

 

wholeheartedly agree

 

Rather, Hamas is using a cornered, desperate, frenzied people as their platform.

  On 8/4/2014 at 10:03 PM, Alcofribas said:

 

  On 8/4/2014 at 4:17 PM, sheatheman said:

I think this is a good, quick read. A lot of you subscribe to the "bigger gun" school of thought regarding your hatred of Israel.

 

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/honest-voice-israel

 

  On 8/4/2014 at 1:17 AM, Alcofribas said:

in my experience contemporary philosophy has basically no insight into situations like this.

haha, what? hm, a little self incriminating. this begs the question, then what experience do you have?

to be sure my reading of contemporary philosophy is very limited. but thanks for not helping me with that lol

  On 8/4/2014 at 7:51 PM, goDel said:

 

  On 8/4/2014 at 4:50 PM, usagi said:

^ I don't see how one side's madness makes the other side's madness more acceptable. why should anyone temper their condemnation of Israel bombing schools and hospitals and safehouses because Hamas wants to wipe out Jews, exactly? that doesnt make sense to me. I don't think you need to compromise on either front, both of them are being insane.

 

and I still dont believe it's a religious war, but rather a war in which religion is playing a part. Hamas is in a corner and desperate and frenzied, that's where their zealotry and hate speech is coming from. it's posturing, like a defense mechanism. if the Palestinians weren't in such dire straits Hamas would be less mad with this desire for vengeance.

 

wholeheartedly agree

 

 

by the way, in Badiou's "Cinema" there are a couple of pages on Udi Aloni's "Forgiveness". it's very general and basically a bag of good wishes but at least it's a contemporary philosopher sort of talking about the issue.

anyone denying hamas' use of human shields is in absolute denial or they're simply not informed...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu54aSM6QOE&feature=youtu.be

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dv6edjCDXJA

and some interesting insight from the son of a hamas leader:

Oh yeah! I forgot about Yousef. A vital, VITAL piece of the puzzle.

Please explain how we can dismiss his testimony?

  On 8/4/2014 at 11:47 PM, Lane Visitor said:

anyone denying hamas' use of human shields is in absolute denial or they're simply not informed...

 

 

I don't think anyone is denying that Hamas (as well as the IDF) have used human shields, what intelligent people are disputing however is the claim that anytime a power plant, school, UN facility, ambulance or hospital is bombed by the IDF that it was because of a 'human shield'. You would have to be fairly moronic to believe that every time a target like this is destroyed. Especially when you take into consideration that the Bush administration even wrote a pre-emptive document from January of 2003 explaining how Saddam will use 'human shields' as a means to condition the public for the upcoming massive civilian casualties that would occur in Iraq. How else would the US population be ok with hundreds of thousands of civilians being murdered? Easy, just say that the enemy purposefully launches attacks from densely populated areas or that they intentionally try to 'blend in with civilians', or hey lets just say that the 'enemy' loves death, that works right?

While there is truth to propaganda, the 'human shield' claim has been used for over 60 years as a means to dehumanize an enemy force

It's an age old tactic of dehumanizing the 'enemy'. the underlying message, only 'they' do that. aka Americans and Israeli forces would never do such a horrible inhumane thing

but nevermind, this infographic convinced me

Israel continues to lose the fuck out of the PR war

2nd Times of Israel article removed out of embarrassment & public outrage in the last 72 hours (first article removed was 'When Genocide Is permissible')

the article titled 'Does this war make me look fat' (that autopilot posted above) has now been removed
http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/does-this-war-make-me-look-fat/