Note:

I swapped the original article at the request of a mod to from a source deemed more reliable, but to avoid confusion when reading the comment section prior to this edit, here is the link to the original article. I chose the Relief Web source listed by some who commented. Cheers!

    • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
      395·
      2 years ago

      Was Native American raids on “Settlements” terrorism? Was Nat Turner’s rebellion terrorism?

      Hamas is evil and the acts they have done are evil. But they weren’t created in a vacuum. Peace and a one or two state solution needs to be agreed apone by all with a right to self determination for the cycle of evil to stop.

      • Patapon Enjoyer@lemmy.worldEnglish
        184·
        2 years ago

        Do you like this group of people? If yes, freedom fighters; if not, terrorists

        Do you like this state? If yes, government; if not, regime.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
          73·
          2 years ago

          I don’t like Hamas. They are nothing more than bigoted murderers. But they are created from a system of hate. This isn’t an argument of viewpoint. It’s just facts

          • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
            23·
            2 years ago

            What’s bigoted about them? They want to kill their oppressors they don’t care about race or religion.

              • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
                33·
                2 years ago

                There’s a church in Gaza full of CHRISTIANS that was shot by who again two days ago? Was it Hamas? Oh no it was the IDF!

                Because Hamas fights against oppressive Nazis not people of a different religion.

                • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
                  12·
                  2 years ago

                  Because the IDF commits war crimes Hamas is not a theocratic dictatorial regime? How did you manage to infer the one from the other?

                  I’ll readily grant Hamas that it doesn’t oppress Christians more than it oppresses Muslims. They’re still oppressors, though.

                  • Linkerbaan@lemmy.worldBannedEnglish
                    22·
                    2 years ago

                    When you call the guys committing literal genocide and the Americans backing them the “freedom fighters defending human rights” and the natives resisting genocide “the bigoted oppressors”.

      • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
        12·
        2 years ago

        Native American militias didn’t brutalise Native Americans, much unlike Hamas does to Palestinians.

        • MrSpArkle@lemmy.caEnglish
          5·
          2 years ago

          This is simply not true. Plenty of natives fought against other natives, whether independently, or with US troops, or for bounties.

          • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
            21·
            2 years ago

            Those were generally clashes between different tribes. Hamas is doing internal political oppression, brutalising political opponents etc.

        • NatakuNox@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          2 years ago

          Uhhhhhh one there was definitely infighting amongst the various tribes. Even during colonial expansion. Two Hamas is doing exactly what the IDF and Israelis government pays them to do.

          • barsoap@lemm.eeEnglish
            13·
            2 years ago

            Uhhhhhh one there was definitely infighting amongst the various tribes.

            Irrelevant because Gaza is not different tribes, thus I ignored it. But I bet you felt smart typing that.

            Two Hamas is doing exactly what the IDF and Israelis government pays them to do.

            Quite an edgelord take but yes they’re oppressing Palestinians, and killed a lot of Israeli leftists, hippie Kibbutz type people actually helping people in Gaza, in their attacks, Kahanites certainly don’t mind that. I don’t think Israel was planning on Hamas having a shot at the Israeli-Saudi rapprochement, though.

    • chitak166@lemmy.worldEnglish
      208·
      2 years ago

      Is it possible for you to argue without analogies? They’re never a 1:1 representation of the situation at hand. All they do is serve to distract from the conversation by making people debate the accuracy of the analogy.