Anonymous shrimp_fried_rice 15w

There’s a particular Lebanese creator I follow and love, and she speaks openly about her support for Palestine and the hardships of her family in Lebanon, but every time she says “isnotreal” and I’m like babe no now I’m focused more on my cringe than your message

6

Anonymous OP 15w

If you think it shouldn’t exist might as well go full stupid and just use the made up names

9

Anonymous #7 15w

honestly its more complicated than i can concisely explain in a paragraph of text so i’d rather just not get into it

9

Anonymous #9 15w

yeah i know?

3

Anonymous OP 15w

So why care

1

Anonymous #9 15w

because jokes still have meaning

1

Anonymous OP 15w

This is such a fucking cop out.

6

I’ll try to be concise: Israel is built on 1) apartheid 2) illegal annexation and 3) genocide against Palestinians Meaning Israel’s govt aims to give lesser rights, steal land and/or mass kill half the area’s population while the other half enjoys an ethnic supremacist legal status Just as apartheid South Africa or Nazi Germany shouldn’t have existed and had to be dismantled, the Israeli state must be replaced by a true democracy w/ equal rights & freedom for everyone from the river to the sea

3

Anonymous #10 15w

if you really want an answer the person above this comment said it well. i would not have been able to explain my own argument that concisely. i dont think that’s a cop out, i just know my limits

3

Anonymous OP 15w

you’re valid imo. the morality on Palestine isn’t complicated, but concisely making the full anti-Israel argument can be hard (esp over Sidechat lol). i’ve had practice, plus listened to lots of antizionists, plus typing still took a sec 💀

-3

Anonymous #6 15w

fair enough yeah

1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

I reject the premise outright. Israel didn’t materialize in 1948 from colonial whim, it was a state nearly 3,000 years ago. Jewish continuity in that land predates every modern state in the region, including those now accusing it of illegitimacy.

-3

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

Second, calling it “genocide” isn’t just false—it’s lazy. Gaza’s population is growing. The West Bank, supposedly under “oppression,” has stable governance in Areas A and B, its own security forces, and expanding infrastructure. That’s not genocide. Words mean things. If this were 1913 South Africa, you’d know the Natives Land Act stripped 80% of land from 90% of the population. The West Bank isn’t remotely comparable.

-2

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

And where’s this smoke for Egypt? Gaza shares a border with Egypt. Egypt enforces the blockade. Egypt demolished hundreds of tunnels and built a steel wall. Egypt blocks Palestinians too. But somehow, your outrage radar only pings when it’s Israel. That tells me this isn’t about justice and more about fixation.

-2

Anonymous #10 15w

1. Jewish historical presence in the region does not give Israel the right to indiscriminately bomb civilians 2. Genocide does not require a a threshold of population depletion. It’s any acts that’s intendedgoal is to destroy (whether entirely or in part) a specific group 3. Egypt allowed refugees until Israel set up attacks on the safety routes, and Egypt offered humanitarian aid that Israel blocked. People smoke Egypt for not trying anymore, and people blame Israel for their impact with that

6

Anonymous og_beer 15w

1.) No one said historical presence justifies bombing civilians. That’s a straw man. But war isn’t neat, and it isn’t fair. It’s asymmetric by nature. When people say “war is hell,” this is why. It’s not just an edgy anti-war slogan. It means there are no clean solutions once the fighting starts, especially when one side embeds itself in civilian zones and refuses to surrender. So what’s the alternative? Unilateral restraint while rockets still fall?

-3

Anonymous #10 15w

War implies two armed forces. It’s not a war. It’s a mass scale attack on civilians :) the alternative is give Palestinians the rights and safety they deserve to reduce their own internal support of Hamas and intelligence based targeted operations, that they claim they’re capable of, just don’t do

5

Anonymous og_beer 15w

3.) Egypt’s behavior doesn’t support your narrative. Rafah was largely sealed years before October 7. Egypt destroyed tunnels, built a steel wall, and has blocked exits for years. Meanwhile, Israel has provided humanitarian aid even while under fire. You’re selectively moralizing is just your bias in costume. There is no semblance of justice any anything you said.

0

Anonymous #10 15w

You can’t ignore the actions that fall into the definition of genocide in favor of the ones that don’t to ignore the reality of the situation to promote killing brown kids

5

Anonymous og_beer 15w

“War implies two armed forces”? Are you being serious? Tell that to every asymmetric conflict in modern history. By that logic, the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan wasn’t a war either. Neither was Sri Lanka vs. the Tamil Tigers. Or the Philippines vs. Abu Sayyaf. War isn’t defined by symmetry but by sustained, organized violence between political entities. Hamas has rockets, fighters, tunnels, hostages, and command infrastructure. That’s an armed force, whether it wears a uniform or not.

0

Anonymous og_beer 15w

Ohhh there it is. There's that anti-Western bias dressed up as moral clarity. You’re not applying standards, you’ve just applied outrage selectively. If the same actions came from a non-Western state, you’d call it complicated geopolitics. But when Israel acts, it’s “genocide” and “brown kids.” You’re not defending human rights. All you're doing is playing ideological favorites.

-1

Anonymous #10 15w

Wow og_beer being described as having an anti western bias. Never thought I’d see the day

6

Anonymous og_beer 15w

This is pathetic. You sardonically acknowledge your bias like it’s a personality quirk, but you can’t name a single system that’s better. You deconstruct, deflect, moralize and then offer nothing. No alternative. No solution. Not even a coherent critique. Worse, you still haven’t addressed a single point I’ve made. Not one. You’re entirely performative and this smug non-response highlights just how hollow your entire posture that you've curated you're whole persona around really is.

-3

Anonymous #10 15w

I gave a very nice critique and alternative solutions to the conflict. It’s not irrelevant just because you don’t like it and would rather kill all Palestinians. But now you’re using your big boy words to try to be scary instead of acknowledge your own biases bc that would risk hurting your ittle wittle feelings :( so yeah imma be disingenuous bc you’re full of shit and I don’t see the point in arguing with toilets

5

Anonymous OP 15w

Yeah it also just rolls off the tongue better

1

Anonymous #10 15w

If “anti-western bias” is saying “killing brown kids is bad” then maybe anti-western bias is good 🤷🏼‍♂️

3

Anonymous og_beer 15w

Oh shut up dipshit. Your meltdown proves my point better than I ever could. You didn’t give a critique; you merely offered a tantrum wrapped in moral sloganeering. You think saying “give Palestinians rights” is a solution. It’s not. It’s a platitude. You haven’t addressed anything about Hamas, asymmetric warfare, Egyptian complicity, or the legal standard for genocide.

-2

Anonymous og_beer 15w

And now you’ve pivoted to childish insults and cartoonish accusations like “you want to kill all Palestinians” because you’re out of arguments. And If you think “anti-Western bias” means infantilizing conflict and assigning moral blame by skin tone, then congratulations, you’ve reduced a centuries-old geopolitical crisis to a sidechat post.

-8

Anonymous #6 15w

You’ve forfeited the right to be taken seriously. You haven't engaged with anything I said.

-2

Anonymous #10 15w

Lmfao there’s nothing to engage with, you’re just spewing Zionist talking points whether or not they’re actually true in the slightest

3

Anonymous #10 15w

How you felt typing all that

7

Anonymous #6 15w

Ok, you’ve officially admitted you have no argument. You’re not engaging because you can’t. You’ve outsourced your thinking to labels, and now anything that challenges your script is dismissed by reflex. aNtI zIoNiSM iNtIfAdA gOoD

0

Anonymous #10 15w

You have yet to deny wanting them all dead tho

1

Anonymous #10 15w

I can use big words I don’t know the meaning of too, watch: antidisestablishmentarianism

4

Anonymous og_beer 15w

I haven’t explicitly said it because any honest reader already understands it from everything I’ve written. I want peace. I want coexistence. What I don’t want is to pretend that asymmetric war erases moral complexity or that one side is exempt from consequence.

0

Anonymous #10 15w

“Anti Zionism intifada good” yes unironically yes. Opposing genocide through any means necessary is objectively a good thing. If you can’t see that. That says a lot about you as a person

4

Anonymous shrimp_fried_rice 15w

Shrimpy, I haven't used any big words, but this speaks to your reading comprehension skills if you can't understand what I'm saying big guy.

-2

Anonymous #10 15w

I’m a shrimp it’s a miracle I can read at all buddy You’re just jealous that I can see more colors than you

4

Anonymous #6 15w

So now it’s “any means necessary” based on a genocide you haven’t proven and a cause you can’t define. That’s a blank check for political violence. You’re not opposing genocide. You’re mimicking its logic. Congratulations. You played yourself.

-1

Anonymous #10 15w

If it’s so obvious just say it then. Say you disagree with Israel’s excessive use of force against civilians because you don’t want all the Palestinians to die

3

Anonymous #10 15w

og_beer is exactly right on all accounts. but just to add: - the nation-state system is only a few hundred years old. Israel literally was created on a 19th/20th century colonial whim, inventing a new supremacist dichotomy between “Jews” (Ashkenazi settlers, Arab Jews from the MENA region, and indigenous Arab Jews from Palestine) and “Arabs” (indigenous Arab Muslims and Christians from Palestine).

1

Anonymous #10 15w

- Second, my comment was pretty fucking clear in delineating 1) apartheid, 2) illegal annexation, and 3) genocide. West Bank Palestinians are (at least rn) experiencing illegal annexation through settlements and land theft. Gazan Palestinians are def experiencing genocide, through Israel’s massive bombings and manufactured starvation All Palestinians, even those that are Israeli citizens, experience apartheid through varying forms of discrimination, at varying risks of expulsion

3

Anonymous #10 15w

- Third, I do have smoke for Egypt. Like Israel, they’re a US client state that’s complicit in Palestinian genocide for all the reasons you’ve mentioned. But unlike Israel, their planes didn’t drop 100k tons of bombs, their snipers aren’t shooting small children in the head, their bulldozers don’t flatten the remaining rubble for future settlements across Gaza.

3

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

1.) If the nation-state system delegitimizes Israel, it delegitimizes every post-Ottoman Arab state. You can't say you oppose colonial borders as you single out the sole Jewish one. 2.) Calling it apartheid or genocide doesn’t make it true. Gaza’s population is growing. Israel issues warnings, opens corridors, and delivers aid, none of which align with genocidal intent under international law. You’re branding war as extermination because you can’t prove the claim.

-1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

3.) You can't say the “Jew vs. Arab” dichotomy was a byproduct of Zionism as it was enforced by Arab regimes who expelled 850,000 Jews from MENA. Your revisionist framing erases this to fit your narrative 4.) You say you have smoke for Egypt, but this entirely performative. Egypt sealed Gaza, destroyed tunnels, and built a wall. Since they didn’t drop bombs, they get a moral pass. No, that's bullshit and you know it. They sealed the border yieleding responsibility but aggregating culpability.

0

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

This isn't analysis, it’s revisionist history draped in postmodern drag.

-2

Anonymous #10 15w

You really aren’t seeing how Israel bombing schools, hospitals, religious buildings, turning entire cities into parking lots, blockading humanitarian aid, bombing aid, blocking all roads entering and existing Gaza, killing Palestinians at “escape routes”, and blocking all food shipments is “just war” but Egypt building a wall is big meanie

3

Anonymous og_beer 15w

Are you fucking kidding me? Were you lobotomized with a heated dildo, or do you just regurgitate whatever rage bait floats by? You list hospitals, schools, religious sites as if these labels make them untouchable. Under international law, protected status is forfeited when those sites are used for military purposes.

0

Anonymous og_beer 15w

So, if Hamas fires from a mosque, stores weapons in a school, or runs ops out of a hospital, that site becomes a lawful military target. This isn't just my opinion, it’s the Geneva Conventions. You strip away this nuance as it wrecks your script. What you call genocide is warfare under constraint and what you call moral clarity is just curated blindness.

-1

Anonymous #10 15w

You believe Hamas is genuinely inside every mosque, school, and hospital? And also no it doesn’t. Hospitals (that would be unlawfully taken over by Hamas, if we’re going off your interpretation of international war law) are never allowed to be targets. And if Israel cared, would they be doing target operations to say, liberate these places from Hamas to help the people of Palestine? Instead of BLOWING THEM UP

4

Anonymous #10 15w

these talking points are just outdated. Israeli policy towards Gaza is so clearly collective punishment. Leaders say “we’re going after Hamas”, but then admit they see everyone as Hamas, so that’s it. Past genocidal remarks from leadership, 82% of the Israeli Jewish population want to expel all of Gaza. 47% want to directly kill everyone there. Tell me, is that fact “moral clarity” or “curated blindness”

3

Anonymous og_beer 15w

You clearly haven’t read the Geneva Conventions. Civilian sites lose protected status when used for military purposes—Article 52(2), Additional Protocol I. If Hamas operates out of a hospital or school, it’s a lawful target. That’s not an opinion, it’s international law. Screaming “blowing them up” doesn’t change that. If you actually cared about civilians, you’d start with the ones using them as shields.

-2

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

You’re citing Middle East Eye quoting polls without methodology, then calling that “genocidal proof.” That’s not evidence. That’s opinion laundering. Public sentiment isn’t policy. Hamas is policy. It governs Gaza, fires rockets from civilian areas, and embeds in infrastructure. You ignore that entirely to frame Israeli defense as collective punishment.

-1

Anonymous stethosc0pe 15w

Also, if you’re going to cite quotes to claim genocide, apply that same standard to Hamas’s founding charter, or the endless broadcasts calling for Jewish extermination. But you won’t, because your outrage is selective, not principled.

-1

Anonymous #10 15w

The amount of mental gymnastics you are willing to do to justify genocide is frankly terrifying

3

Anonymous #6 15w

Calling it “mental gymnastics” doesn’t change the fact that I’ve cited law, precedent, and doctrine, while you’ve offered slogans and poll headlines. I haven’t justified genocide. I’ve explained warfare. You just keep calling anything you can’t emotionally process “genocide” and hoping repetition makes it true.

-2