u/jsomae

seven *Israeli* soldiers, in case you didn't click.

were their husbands safe at least

if you turn your mouse upside down, you can find the unclick button on the bottom.

Fellow canadian here, what's your take?

the conventional wisdom checks out to me. Sometimes bullies happen to be right.

Probability of nuclear war rises with number of states having nukes. It's best to keep that number as low as possible, so I would not think it wise for Greenland to have nukes. It would not be a sin for Iran to have them, though, given Iran's allies aren't exactly offering a nuclear umbrella.

Yeah, good point. I'm with you.

Headline writers believe there are two genders: pilots and female pilots.

can you explain the problem?

it's beyond me how people can feel bad for one but not the other. Feeling bad for neither or both, that I can understand.

Bad headline. They are advocating for killing her. They are not threatening to kill her because most of the people mentioned do not have the power to do so. I could threaten to arrest Netenyahu but it would not be a credible threat because that's not within my power at all. But I can post online in favour of the idea.

Friendly reminder that even being Jewish doesn't preclude being racist against Jews.

Right, but "most" is not "monolith." There's around 16 million jews worldwide, so even if 90% of jews are pro-zionist that's still over a million non-zionist jews. List of Jewish anti-Zionist organizations. Generalizations about groups of people are harmful even if they're true, because it's unfair to the those who don't fit the generalization.

To be clear, you're saying that you *would* say that 100% of Jews should be "taken out," except that this would get you banned?

Fair enough about America and Canada. Still, I think the Israeli are perfectly aware that they *could* become part of Palestine. They just don't seem to want that. Honestly, trying to convince the Israeli people to go for this option seems rather Liberal-minded to me -- liberal democracy! Just vote!

"river to the sea"

RttS is a prediction, or a call to action. It is a slogan used by both sides, to mean freedom in one case or manifest destiny in the other.

What Israel has a right to do is not relevant. America has the right to become part of Canada. Israel remaining as it is is the problem -- and more to the point, the problem is that people don't see that as the problem.

Good point. Still, "not having the right to exist" *sounds* to me -- and more importantly, to those undecided on the issue -- like it's encouraging the destruction of the things that are in Israel, not the entity of Israel itself. Which is obviously not a take that's likely to attract support.

Generally I'm not interested in what Israel as the right to become. I would rather "Israel doesn't have the right to not be Palestine" (phrased better, perhaps?)

I wonder if we can find a new way of describing the notion of "Israel existing." It seems opponents believe we mean killing the occupants of Israel or (somehow removing the area entirely) rather than reforging the state itself. It's not like we don't want the geographical region to continue existing.

assuming holocaust=genocide, then this is not the second. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_genocides