Fired?

They committed employment suicide.

"All Israel has to do is return what they stole. Why is that a problem?"

What did Israel steal?

"Land and real property are equally subject to return if illegally taken in war."

Absolutely not. If that were the case your handlers in Russia would be giving back a significant part of the Russian state to Finland, as well as Kaliningrad back to Germany.

I don't think that any court in any of those countries is going to demand that.

You also seem to be forgetting that the land in question was part of the kingdom of Judea. Using your logic, Great Britain was just giving back to the Jews what had been taken from them thousands of years earlier.

"To prevent the emergence of a legitimate, Geneva compliant, Palestinian state."

Sure, buddy.

That's like saying it was the allies' fault that Germany did what it did in WWII.

"Because it's their homes being destroyed."

If the homes are being used to serve a military purpose, such as to store weapons or bed down combatants, then they are considered valid military targets under the Geneva Conventions.

Your issue is really with the combatants who, through their actions, turn those structures from protected entities into valid military targets.

"Half the homes in Gaza are destroyed, how is that not terrorism?"

Was it terrorism when the allies were bombing Europe and Japan in WWII? How about French and Dutch ports that had been occupied by the Germans?

More recently, how about cities like Raqqa and Mosul, where ISIS was taking over protected entities to use them for a military purpose?

"You go ahead and negotiate with terrorists after they come rape and slaughter 30,000 of your civilian men, women, and children."

A) Israelis not terrorists, at least not any more so than the US and the west was during WWII.

B) Germany and Japan seem to be better for being forced into unconditional surrender. And at least in Germany, they did turn it into a yearly holiday.

Who knows, maybe someday Gazans will show the same level of embarrassment to their historical association with Hamas and Germany does with its association to the National Socialism.

"Half the homes in Gaza have been destroyed by IDF."

Totally different.

When Hamas occupies and otherwise protected entity, it loses its protection under the Geneva Conventions.

What is Israel is doing is no different than what the US and our western allies did in places like Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq...all the way back to Germany.

Out of thousands, I think we targeted one ISIS military base that was purpose-built to serve a military function. The rest were all schools, houses, mosques, churches, and hospitals that ISIS had taken over.

"Israel is reacting so Disproportionately because they got shown how vulnerable they really are."

Actually, the outcome of the current conflict seems to be swaying Palestinian opinions in favor of a two-state solution, rather than an eliminate Israel solution.

"Again, how does killing Palestinian civilians achieve the goal?"

It doesn't. Civilians are, by definition, not targets.

They are just the collateral damage that occurs when Hamas surrounds it's valid military targets with civilians.

Hamas is the first and foremost war criminal (allegedly) when it comes to dead civilians. I don't often you or anyone else on Team TikTok bring that up.

"And even if it does, what hinges on the terrorists getting elected vs. the terrorists gaining power through terror?"

In this case, the vote is almost meaningless. Support for Hamas as a political entity is slowly eroding, while support for their efforts beginning 10/7 have held steady at 70%.

They're almost as popular as Hitler was.

Koan: "How many children must Israel kill to feel safe?"

Why would you need to kill children to feel safe?

Maybe onesie-twosies here and there...the ones whose associates strapped a suicide vest on them. Otherwise, children don't seem like they would often be seen as valid military target.

That said, the people and facilities who are valid military targets have been stuffed with kids. By Hamas. Which either serves as a deterrent to strike or gives the Palestinian militants to claim that children are being targeted. And it's a compelling argument, maybe, to those who don't understand how targeting works.

"Meaning they were preventing aid from getting in, meaning they ARE intentionally starving the Palestinians."

Do you think that might have something to do with Hamas confiscating UN food shipments that were be provided by different agencies. Packing it away in tunnels for their use of their leaders and personnel?

Even now, the west could deliver tons off food each day. Can demand it be given to them. The US has no real authority to deny them, nor do they have a mandate to use force to protect or distribute the food. And if they did, I'm sure we'd be hearing how bad that was as well. Like Somalia in 1992.

"Hamas is a terrorist organization."

Hamas is the government in charge of Gaza. A government that has been given billions in handouts over the last 18 years.

Most of your points seem to be align with the notion that Hamas needs to be wiped out.

I think Israel agrees.

"That's what Netanyahu did for most of the day. He was happy to let it cook."

I don't quite follow your argument.

Hamas was duly elected as the ruling government.

Are you saying that Israel should have started wiping them out in 2006?

That his fault was not starting this process 18 years ago?

"Now do Israel and using famine as a weapon of war!"

Are they?

How about Hamas?

Consider that in WWII, military necessity would have almost certainly meant the extirpation of Japanese society, as the country was preparing for everyone to fight to the death.

"It would seem that 30k to 1200 would be disproportionate enough, even to rabid rwingers."

Not necessarily.

Proportionality is related directly to military necessity. If a belligerent occupies a protected entity-something with no military function-it automatically loses its protected status and is considered a valid military target.

The Geneva Conventions require that belligerents act in such a manner as to minimize the effects of war on the civilian population. That's never 100% possible, but Hamas does not appear to even attempt to adhere to the GC. In fact they seem to be trying to leverage the civilian population as a tool they can use in their favor.

"It warms the cockles of my heart to see MAGAs and LIBS who hate the other's vision for America coming together and having a online love-in over ethno-supremacist Genociders who quote 3000-year-old genocide porn in order to kill babies!"

You don't seem to have much of an issue with ethno-supremacist Genociders who quote 60-year-old genocide porn in order to kill babies!"

This could all end today if the Palestinian fighters in Gaza chose to surrender.

The climate being what it is, they might even get favorable treatment.

"Unfortunately these few unintended tragedies is what we have to grimly accept when our leadership enables the maiming and deaths of tens of thousands of innocents and then expects chair-sniffers you to stand by and stroke your wee-wee over IDF war porn and do nothing."

Doing nothing? Israel seems committed to defeating those who would finish what Hitler started.

These weren't protests. These were marches in favor of the elimination of the Jewish state.

These were mini-Nuremburg rallies.

They have every right to speak, but they have no right to force others to listen.

The Brits also created a Palestinian homeland, FWIW.

They were just going to have to live alongside the icky jews.

"Can't be so bad or they wouldn't have chosen to nation-build Israel there."

Technically, it was the British and French who chose it. It was their land, after all.

Just like they chose a chunk of India to create a Muslim homeland.

#61

This was a non-political event. No different than having a color guard at an NFL game or other public, non-political event.

If it had been a campiagn or fundraising event, then yes. That would be a violation of the UCMJ. It would appear that, since they are a color guard, the Marines assigned them to the even...whether they wanted to go or not.

So...these 150 people were supporters of the German National Socialist Workers Party?

I think no one would like Biden to serve a second term as president more than Biden himself.

But who do you replace him with. If it's not a progressive with the correct identity politics qualities, then progressives wouldn't support the candidate.

The Dems were to choose someone like that, no one but the progressives would support them.

So, with all his issues, Biden still seems like the best of the available when it comes to presidential candidates.