Sen. John Fetterman (D-Penn.) called some of his colleagues’ quickness to blame Israel for the hospital blast in Gaza “disturbing” in a statement Wednesday.

“It’s truly disturbing that Members of Congress rushed to blame Israel for the hospital tragedy in Gaza,” Fetterman said in a post on X, formerly Twitter.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    21 year ago

    Then you almost join my club, however, there are two other certainties. 1. Terrorism is always wrong and the brutality of Hamas on Israel was way way over the line. 2. Since that is true, there is absolutely no way a war would not result and there is no way that ideological rhetoric is going to stop it.

    • Semi-Hemi-Demigod
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      Is property destruction allowed? Lots of people consider that terrorism but I’m not mad if someone, say, sinks an oligarch’s yacht as long as nobody gets hurt.

    • @Riccosuave
      link
      1
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Remember Kids:

      • When the dominant force in a conflict commits violence against civilians it is due to the “fog of war” or seen as “unavoidable collateral damage”.

      • When the minority force in a conflict commits violence against civilians it is “terrorism” or “savagery”.

      I’m not condoning the use of violence against civillians in any capacity. However, this is the way that the power brokers manipulate the emotions of the ignorant unwashed masses in their own societies to justify their own atrocities.

      Some form of this language manipulation tactic has been utilized as a catalyzing force to support the genocide of indigenous populations throughout all of human history.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Actually the term Fog of War describes a basic misunderstanding of events in war.

        War has rules and killing civilians is against the rules. Doing so to freighten living populations is terrorism.

        Hope this helps.

        • @Riccosuave
          link
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I know what it means. What I’m saying is that concept is then used as a justification for violence against civilian populations by the dominant force in a conflict.

          The messaging around that violence is what matters in the context of your initial statement, and the dominant force in a conflict NEVER admits that what they are doing is also very much “terrorism”, and usually on a much larger scale.