• @Krono
    link
    English
    149 months ago

    “Fight it out until one side surrenders unconditionally” my dude you are out here calling for millions of deaths, you can’t be serious. Genocide is not the only path to peace.

    Maybe listen to Dan Carlin’s “Logical Insanity” episode to get an idea of how your proposed solution would spiral out of control.

    • @sailingbythelee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      69 months ago

      I’m not calling for genocide. You made that up and should apologize. Did the Allies genocide Germany and Japan? No, they did not.

      Obviously, war is horrific. Israel and Palestine have been in a low-level war for many decades now. No peace plan, foreign mediation, or negotiation has settled it. What’s your genius solution that no one else in the world has thought of?

      • @Krono
        link
        English
        89 months ago

        My preferred solution is not novel or genius, it is the international consensus: A two state settlement on the international border (green line) with mutually agreed upon land swaps. This is the solution with consistant and overwhelming international support, just look at the UN votes on the subject over the past 5 decades.

        Unfortunately due to their overwhelming military superiority, Israel will not agree to this in the short term. This military superiority is a gift from the world superpower: having a client state in the middle east is very valuable to US economic interests. This is why you often see votes in the UN with a result of something like 161-2 (Israel + US vs. the rest of the world).

        So I believe the larger question is how to stop the United States military industrial complex. And I’m sorry but I don’t have a solution for that. Just like we are willing to fight Russia to the last Ukranian life, we are willing to turn a blind eye to Palestinian death as long as Israel keeps spending billions a year on helicopters, tankers, naval guns, and so much more.

        • @stifle867@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          49 months ago

          I think the point they were trying to make is that this solution is great in theory, but due to the reasons you have pointed out does not actually work in practice. What happens in practice is everything that has led us to this point. They were not intentionally calling for genocide IMO, but misguidedly floating the idea of a less protracted end to the conflict.

          • @killeronthecorner@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            2
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            I think there was a failure to demonstrate that lack of protraction and I think glossing over the allies dropping two atomic bombs on Japan and killing half a million people speaks to the weakness in justifying it with that comparison.

            That’s not to say there’s no substance to it at all, but this isn’t the right case for it.

      • AngrilyEatingMuffins
        link
        fedilink
        1
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        The Allies definitely genocided the Germans. It’s not popular to talk about but between the Russian advancement and the massive displacement projects following the war it would be disingenuous to not call it ethnic cleansing.

        Edit: apparently downvoters don’t think displacing millions, leading to the deaths of millions, based on their ethnicity, isn’t ethnic cleansing. Okay