Well no actually. US intelligence was basically telling the entire world that the invasion was 100 percent going to happen. How do you not remember that?

Correct. You have to be utterly delusional to think otherwise. This is just Putin posturing for domestic consumption.

They go through the motions, but yeah, it’s definitely all theater.

No.

No, it’s entirely normal and part of standard usage. You probably don’t read very much.

I would too and I’m American. This person is simply unlettered. Maybe they’re just a kid, in which case it’s forgivable.

Is there a world? Yes. Are there certain countries that have the ability to project power globally? Yes. What part about this do you not understand?

The selective outrage is very telling. We live in an era of unreality.

I think the point is simply that there are language barriers that create problems. This is totally believable and is a coordinating issue in any country where there are immigrants who need social services but don’t speak the primary language. Not everything has to be down to all Israelis being bad people and not actually giving a fuck.

Are you sure Masha Gessen is a man?

Barbarossa. It’s Operation Barbarossa. And again, you continue to ignore the political reality that at least two giant constituencies in the US had very good reasons for not wanting to get into the European war. In a democracy, their views could not be ignored, no matter what others may have thought was the right thing to do. As I constantly find myself repeating to people on lemmy, winning an election doesn’t mean that you get to do anything you want, it means that you can probably do some of the things you want and will have to compromise on others.

Bullshit. The pro-Nazi elements in the US were never anywhere close to being a majority and were never close to implementing pro-Nazi policies. At worst, the US government was guilty of remaining neutral and continuing to do business with Nazi Germany, but that’s a far cry from supporting the Nazis. This is pure revisionist tripe.

It’s also worth mentioning that at that time the two largest ethnicities in the US were Irish and German immigrants or their immediate descendants. With the famine still in living memory and Irish independence still relatively recent, Irish-Americans were very leery of joining the war on the side of the UK, while German-Americans obviously weren’t necessarily keen on fighting the country from which they’d immigrated. These two constituencies were far too important to be ignored politically, and that’s a huge part of why it took the attack at Pearl Harbor for the US to do the right thing.

Honest question; what incentive would the IDF have to knowingly kill escaped Israeli hostages? To me it only makes sense as a case of being far too willing to shoot first and ask questions later. That’s a problem, especially in such a dense urban environment, but it still is “accidental friendly fire” and not deliberate premeditated murder as your comment suggests.

The flipside is that we imagine that they knew the 3 Israeli hostages were trying to get back to friendly forces and decided to kill them anyway for… reasons, I guess? Nevermind that it’s hell on morale and obviously a PR disaster.

I don’t know, I just can’t make this pencil out as anything other than a tragic fuckup born of terrible discipline. If it tells us anything, it’s that the IDF are obviously trigger happy and not being at all careful, but again, that’s very different from the narrative being pushed by most people in this thread.

Removed by mod

Sometimes but not always. There’s more to it in international law. That said, I realize that in arguing caution before leveling accusations of genocide, I am in the minority in this instance. My take is based on what I’ve read of expert legal opinion on the subject and not on my own evaluation of the IDF’s moral position.

The long and short of it is that there are matters of intent that have to be shown in order to have a case for genocide. Thus far, regardless of how we think about the IDF vis war-crimes, I have yet to see a convincing argument for genocide on a legal basis.

You may say that this is a distinction without a difference, and while I’m sympathetic to that idea, I still think it’s worthwhile to maintain these sharp legal definitions.

I think a lot of people are in denial about who and what Hamas is.

You don’t understand basic game theory.

That’s begging the question in the traditional sense of the term in formal logic. First of all you have to establish that it is in fact a genocide. While what the IDF is doing probably counts as war crimes, I have yet to see a convincing case that it’s genocide in a legal sense. We’ll see. I’m more than willing to change my mind in light of new evidence or a stronger argument than I have seen thus far.

No.

Yeah the Amazon is a trip. I was down there for about a week, and except at night, there was no point at which I was not basically dripping with sweat. I’m told that your body eventually acclimates and it becomes less of an issue, but a week was definitely not long enough for me.