It just is. It’s an unspoken restriction of her job. Nobody gets elevated to that position unless they unequivocally back their boss.
To repeat a question, is that acceptable even when it includes standing by genocide?
So you’re in favor of genocide, but just mad at which side is losing.
I’m in favor of dismantling all theocratic colonialist states. I’m opposed all genocide of any people, especially when that is based on religion or bigotry. To be clear, the state is not the people it supposes to represent.
To repeat a question, is that acceptable even when it includes standing by genocide?
Except she was working for peace to end the genocide. You keep skipping over that reality as if it were meaningless.
I’m in favor of dismantling all theocratic colonialist states. I’m opposed all genocide of any people, especially when that is based on religion or bigotry. To be clear, the state is not the people it supposes to represent.
How do you realistically propose to dismantle Israel in a way which wouldn’t qualify as genocide?
Except she was working for peace to end the genocide. You keep skipping over that reality as if it were meaningless.
I’m not skipping over the deals she was making. I’m just not relying on it as the singularly decisive factor in determining her contribution to the conflict. As well as highlighting the context in which it was done.
How do you realistically propose to dismantle Israel in a way which wouldn’t qualify as genocide?
the state is not the people it supposes to represent.
How did we dismantle the nazi state in a way that didn’t qualify as genocide?
I’m just not relying on it as the singularly decisive factor in determining her contribution to the conflict
Working for peace is the exact opposite of contributing to the conflict.
How did we dismantle the nazi state in a way that didn’t qualify as genocide?
Killing 4.4 to 5.3 million Nazis was part of that achievement. It was not achieved peacefully. Thankfully “Nazi” isn’t an ethnicity, but Israeli Jews are and ethnic group.
Working for peace is the exact opposite of contributing to the conflict.
I was actually trying to use a neutral phrase. Meaning that it would be possible to have a positive contribution to resolving the conflict. As I think I’ve made clear, I don’t believe it was positive overall because of a few factors I’ve tried to lay out. Can you say that you aren’t skipping over factors I’ve presented to come to your conclusion?
Killing 4.4 to 5.3 million Nazis was part of that achievement. It was not achieved peacefully. Thankfully “Nazi” isn’t an ethnicity, but Israeli Jews are and ethnic group.
That was the war that got us to the place where we were able to make demands of the state and hold them accountable for their actions. At the moment, it doesn’t seem like war is required to give the US that kind of sway over the state of Israel.
They are inconvenient to your argument. This is you dismissing evidence in order to preserve a worldview. Practically the definition of being close minded.
You don’t try to stop something you support.
She didn’t try to stop it, that would require holding the aggressors accountable for their actions. If there’s no accountability, why wouldn’t they just pick up where they left off?
Do you expect that Netanyahu would step down from power if we asked?
Yes. If the USA, the world’s largest superpower and Israel’s biggest benefactor and arms dealer, were to demand he step down, I don’t think he would feel he had much choice. Maybe he’d try to start a war because of it, but it wouldn’t last very long. Assuming we actually had intention behind the demand.
I thought maybe you were misinformed before, but now I know you are just lying. We just agreed she was working for peace. That is trying to stop it.
Yes
Then you are completely ignorant to the political situation in Israel. Holding power is the one thing stopping Netanyahu from going to prison. He won’t step down under any circumstances.
No we did not. You agreed with yourself. I said there’s no peace without justice and no stopping without accountability.
On both parts and others you’re flat out ignoring major pieces of my argument. I have no desire to respond to someone who engages disingenuously like that.
To repeat a question, is that acceptable even when it includes standing by genocide?
I’m in favor of dismantling all theocratic colonialist states. I’m opposed all genocide of any people, especially when that is based on religion or bigotry. To be clear, the state is not the people it supposes to represent.
Except she was working for peace to end the genocide. You keep skipping over that reality as if it were meaningless.
How do you realistically propose to dismantle Israel in a way which wouldn’t qualify as genocide?
I’m not skipping over the deals she was making. I’m just not relying on it as the singularly decisive factor in determining her contribution to the conflict. As well as highlighting the context in which it was done.
How did we dismantle the nazi state in a way that didn’t qualify as genocide?
Working for peace is the exact opposite of contributing to the conflict.
Killing 4.4 to 5.3 million Nazis was part of that achievement. It was not achieved peacefully. Thankfully “Nazi” isn’t an ethnicity, but Israeli Jews are and ethnic group.
I was actually trying to use a neutral phrase. Meaning that it would be possible to have a positive contribution to resolving the conflict. As I think I’ve made clear, I don’t believe it was positive overall because of a few factors I’ve tried to lay out. Can you say that you aren’t skipping over factors I’ve presented to come to your conclusion?
That was the war that got us to the place where we were able to make demands of the state and hold them accountable for their actions. At the moment, it doesn’t seem like war is required to give the US that kind of sway over the state of Israel.
They are irrelevant. You don’t try to stop something you support.
Do you expect that Netanyahu would step down from power if we asked?
They are inconvenient to your argument. This is you dismissing evidence in order to preserve a worldview. Practically the definition of being close minded.
She didn’t try to stop it, that would require holding the aggressors accountable for their actions. If there’s no accountability, why wouldn’t they just pick up where they left off?
Yes. If the USA, the world’s largest superpower and Israel’s biggest benefactor and arms dealer, were to demand he step down, I don’t think he would feel he had much choice. Maybe he’d try to start a war because of it, but it wouldn’t last very long. Assuming we actually had intention behind the demand.
I thought maybe you were misinformed before, but now I know you are just lying. We just agreed she was working for peace. That is trying to stop it.
Then you are completely ignorant to the political situation in Israel. Holding power is the one thing stopping Netanyahu from going to prison. He won’t step down under any circumstances.
No we did not. You agreed with yourself. I said there’s no peace without justice and no stopping without accountability.
On both parts and others you’re flat out ignoring major pieces of my argument. I have no desire to respond to someone who engages disingenuously like that.