“Violating international law” is pretty sterile/soft verbiage for fucking war crimes.
He denounced specific parts of the attack. The section of international law that explicitly allows violent resistance to a military occupation or blockade doesn’t exempt the resistors from the rest of international law. The IDF/Israel and Hamas have the same obligations under international law(s).
serious question - if Jews in a ghetto during WW2 got together some weapons, revolted, left the ghetto and killed a bunch of German civilians partying right outside the ghetto, would you call it “genocidal” and “terrorism” and say “yes, while Nazi Germany is bad, so are these Jews who committed terrorism”?
Yeah I have no idea how these people don’t get it. Are the Palestinians expected to just accept having their calories counted and reduced, their water limited, and their electricity shut off? Like what sort of peace do you think is possible?
This you bitch? Bc this is how “it stops”
both sides
Comrade Amogus flags those paired words as extra sus whenever they are found!
Liberals are always dealing in the abstract. “Israel must stop oppressing Palestinians”
Ok who is going to make them? Then when the Palestinians stand up for themselves “this violence is abhorrent and must end immediately”
Ok how does it end? It’s like they have no concept of WHY people do things.
that’s nice what is he going to do about it
he says WHAT? didn’t he say the opposite like 1 day ago?
I mean, good, but
“Both sides should just stop being mean to each other” is in this case the blandest, most useless take you could possibly have. It does nothing for nobody, it’s just saying something for the sake of saying it.
What are his positions on how to resolve this thing? What should the Palestinians get in his opinion?
