this post was submitted on 31 Dec 2023
823 points (83.1% liked)

Memes

45646 readers
1090 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rdri@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago (3 children)

Deep down we know that doing terrorism will not solve any problems.

[–] peg@lemmy.world 40 points 10 months ago (2 children)

And yet the Israelis keep at it.

[–] Goferking0@ttrpg.network 18 points 10 months ago

Why stop when there's no consequences

[–] rdri@lemmy.world -5 points 10 months ago

You think they will still be at it if they are given every hamas member?

[–] DragonTypeWyvern 17 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Fun History Fact:

The Black Hands terrorist organization, the ones that killed Archduke Ferdinand, hoped that by doing so they would start a civil war that would result in a victory for Serbia, specifically creating a "Greater Serbia" from the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire where they had dominance over their regional neighbors.

Obviously, that didn't happen.

Instead WW1 happened.

Which ended in the dissolution of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the creation of Yugoslavia, a constitutional monarchy with a Serbian royal family, capital in Serbia.

(And then they made everyone hate them because they were assholes both as a monarchy and a communist state)

Second, Bonus Fun History Fact:

Terroristic tactics have left Afghanistan as the only nation to have defeated occupations by the British Empire, the Soviet Union, and America, the three most powerful states since the collapse of the Mongol Empire.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world -5 points 10 months ago

What you propose:

"Terrorists might've done something good actually. In some foreseeable future we might see changes in the world that would actually benefit them in the result, making their terrorism not useless"

What I propose:

"No human can see the future. But hamas could perfectly see what would happen if they launched such a violent attack - invasion with the purpose of removing hamas as an entity. If I can't blame them for not surrendering by now, I will blame them for not making anything to defend their citizens."

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Viet Cong's success in reuniting Vietnam says otherwise.

Attacking villages, taking hostages, and using guerilla tactics (like both Viet Cong did and Hamas are doing) are just the most effective ways of driving out an occupying force, and they wouldn’t be necessary if the oppressors weren’t there in the first place.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world -4 points 10 months ago (3 children)

So you're telling that hamas didn't do anything wrong and they will succeed?

It's interesting how some people blame Israel for being oppressors while others blame it for establishing hamas.

It's also interesting how some people say terrorism is not useless because there is "some" history, but others are upset by how Israel is doing it too, apparently.

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

None of these are mutually exclusive statements. You can understand that Israel propped up Hamas to label their aggressive tactics as "terrorism" and use that against all Palestinians, while understanding that those "terrorist" tactics can indeed be effective.

The US propped up the Taliban and other right-wing terrorist groups in Afganistan in the 80s to oppose their then secular Socialist gov and the supporting USSR, and we all know how that came back to bite them later. Just because a country props a group up doesn't mean it'll always keep doing things beneficial to them.

are upset by how Israel is doing it too

"Terrorist" tactics (or anything really) used for the sake of driving out a settler colonial ethnostate (a good thing) - like Hamas are doing and Viet Cong did - is good, while those tactics when used to oppress and commit genocide on a native population (a bad thing) - like Israel is doing - is bad. This isn't that hard to understand.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world -4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Israel propped up Hamas to label their aggressive tactics as "terrorism"

Can't seem to identify the bad actor here. Would you help out?

The US propped up the Taliban and other right-wing terrorist groups

You mean Taliban good, USA bad?

"Terrorist" tactics (or anything really) used for the sake of driving out a settler colonial ethnostate (a good thing) - like Hamas are doing and Viet Cong did - is good, while those tactics when used to oppress and commit genocide on a native population (a bad thing) - like Israel is doing - is bad. This isn't that hard to understand.

I understand that you think hamas will succeed in driving Israel out. Since all the current events are the result of hamas' actions and the expected process of driving Israel out, I don't see why wouldn't we just sit and watch it till the end. Since terrorism is excusable, all the casualties are the price of Palestine getting real independence.

[–] Alsephina@lemmy.ml 4 points 10 months ago (1 children)

What the fuck are you even saying

Are you actually braindead or is this a bit?

[–] rdri@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

What did you not understand in my comments?

[–] OtakuAltair@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Seeing libs both-siding a genocide and colonialism in the present day honestly makes it much easier to understand how slavery was so prevalent for so long.

Decolonization is violent; if you don't like it, don't colonize in the first place.

[–] rdri@lemmy.world -2 points 10 months ago

Decolonization is violent

This is like saying nuclear bomb kills a lot of people. I agree. But is it happening in current reality?

[–] kaffiene@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago