When did I say that? All I want is for all belligerents to be held to the same standard. Show me the evidence that these missiles are falling on targets with strategic importance; show me that they’re making efforts to not waste human lives. It’s clear that Israel’s attacks are not and they’re rightly called out for it. Why is Iran above the same scrutiny?

US was the invader during the Vietnam War so that’s a bad example all around

Why is it a bad example? Does being the defender in a war make you immune to war crimes? It’s indiscriminate killing of non combatants either way.

You’re just wildly incorrect on all fronts here.

since you were the one talking about nations’ flags

A nation is not a nation state, and a population doesn’t have to be a sovereign state to have a flag.

No, they did it in order to hit their targets, which were often cities.

Exactly, to limit collateral damage. Germany (and the RAF’s night bombing, to be fair) also targeted cities with strategic war industries, they just cared more about their pilots’ safety than civilian lives.

You’re putting words in my mouth.

I’m not at all, I’m pointing out the lack of criticism for clips like the one above. There’s not even reserved judgment until we know what got hit and who died, just full throated support based only on the name of the city being bombed. I’m the only one here wanting evidence that these attacks are targeting anything of value and limiting non combatant deaths.

Remember when Israel was criticized for half-hearted pamphlet dropping to warn of barrages? All the scorn at Israel’s reports of the use of human shields? The outrage over bombing population centers and refugee camps allegedly hiding rockets? Zionists saying Palestinians deserved bombing because they elected Hamas and had parties celebrating Oct 7 and X% of Palestines supported Y?

I’m seeing the exact same comments in reverse. Just read the comments on this post. But this time nobody bats an eye because the “right” people are dying.

I don’t see how that makes a difference? Israel bombing civilians with precision doesn’t make imprecise bombing of civilians more acceptable. Everyone ends up just as dead. It just makes it more palatable for people who value retribution above civilian lives.

To put it another way: if you want to hit a military target but can’t do so without outsized collateral damage, you don’t have ethical grounds to make the attack. You don’t see people defending the USA’s use of Agent Orange in Vietnam just because it was the only feasible way to clear foliage.

Holy fuck you don’t even know what a nation is lmfao

If there’s anything to be learned from WWII, it’s that no one is more antifascist than communists.

If you knew anything about WW2, you’d know that strategic bombing of population centers was a futile effort that wasted lives. Allies and Axis both admitted it, and the Allies even stuck to day bombing to limit collateral damage.

I’ve been asking up and down this thread for any context on what these bombs hit, any evidence at all, and all I get is equivocation like yours.

Your “critical support” isn’t very critical at all, it’s pretty one dimensional. Isreal bombs a population center: bad. Iran bombs an Isreal population center: good. I’ve seen no depth beyond that.

These aren’t people being tried for their crimes, not even people being picked out and put in front of a firing squad. This is an explosion in a city. You have no clue who might have been in that area any more than I do.

How many residents have fired a weapon against a Palestinian? 30% if you’re being generous? That’s about the same as the population of children.

You’re OK with those odds? Or does your form of communism always cheer at indiscriminate death so long as some of the right people get caught in it? If X% of the population drinks the apartheid propoganda kool-aid it’s open season? What’s your number?

Nobody expects the state to relinquish power without violence, but that doesn’t mean it’s OK to cheer clips of massive explosions within lethal range of civilian houses.

I have yet to see anyone share hard evidence that these are targeted at military areas, let alone actually hitting them. Just a bunch of equivocation about military reserves and public opinion polls. Isreal rightfully caught shit for their pager attack being too indiscriminate but an explosion clearing half a city block isn’t?

Total population of Israel: 9.2 million Total IDF personnel (including reservists): 500k Total settler population: 700k Total Isreal police force: <30k

But sure, let’s glass them all. Especially the 86% that have no active involvement with what’s going on. You sound like a goddamn fool.

Edit: let me cut off the horseshit collective punishment argument before you make it: you’re still cheering for your own class to be slaughtered

Here’s a fun fact, did you know that 65 other countries also have mandatory military service, including Iran? Being a class traitor by the law of the state doesn’t make you not proletariat.

Abandoning massive chunks of workers based only on their place of birth or the bubble of propoganda they live in is the opposite of every reputable leftist ideology. If your empathy for the people crushed under the rubble of an apartment complex depends on the flag out front then just admit you’re a frothing nationalist and stop pretending.

For an instance nominally based on worker solidarity and elevating the proletariat, everyone sure is pretty quick to throw that out the window for tribalism and nationalism

Where is that evidence? I’m not denying it, I’m asking for it and nobody provides it.

Edit: from what I can tell that F35 rumor started in 2024 as a meme mocking Israel’s claims of apartments hiding Hezbollah weapons. Why would you stack up $100m planes in a place extremely hard to scramble them and perform maintenance?

How? Nobody dies and the neighborhood ends up destroyed? It’s the exact same thing.

By all means, I’ll take evidence that they’ve been hitting military targets. My issue is with people cheering videos like this lacking any of that evidence at all.

And no, having a bunker doesn’t make a civilian population fair game. It’s the same thing as crowding people into internment camps while you level their neighborhood.

Comment sections have been absolutely fucked since this started. I’ve seen some reports that these are hitting military targets but apparently I should be cheering about rockets landing a few dozen meters from this apartment?

I remember a video of an Israeli rocket hitting just outside a shop window in Yemen/Iran at a similar distance and people were balking that it could be hitting anything of strategic importance. Suddenly pictures of collapsed apartments and hospitals are fine because it’s the guys you don’t like?

Apparently it’s a bad take for me to think civilians shouldn’t be bombed regardless of how much Zionist brainwashing they have. People talking about “they deserve it” and pointing to Isreal opinion polls showing 60% support X awful thing. Last time I checked, a rocket doesn’t take a survey before it explodes. So 4/10 people in that explosion deserve to die by association?

You all make me sick, down vote away.

Hate to be the bearer of bad news but if you can’t relate to mental images existing in a visual sense you probably have some degree of aphantasia.

Some research indicates that it may be a spectrum from complete lack of imagery to full five-sense detail, which might be why it’s hard to relate to either extreme. At any rate most people fall in the category of seeing an image, to the point that hyperphantasia is even more common than aphantasia.

I have it*, but not as severe as others. Imagining an apple starts as a very abstract concept, I can’t visualize it without concentrated effort. Other people might be able go on to describe the stem, the leaves, the shade of red, the glossy wax exterior, etc… I can’t automatically build to any of that, even if I subconsciously default to a red apple the “image” may just as well be green.

*edit: checked the vviq test and discovered the label is hypophantasic

One of us is misunderstanding for sure.

Fitness is a quantitative representation of individual reproductive success.

You’re conflating metaphysical goals with the literal biological goals of propogation. It has nothing to do with survival, plenty of animals sacrifice themselves after reproducing, either as a food source or lack of evolutionary pressure to stay alive. The human exceptionalism that our awareness puts us above these natural processes is part of the problem.

In this case the logic is sound. Evolution doesn’t often occur, it always occurs. And we’re not talking about secondary or tertiary reproductive fitness (ie: humans are efficient at running so they must run, men are physically strong so they must defend), we’re talking about actual reproductive encounters.

Its the entire goal of the of all life on earth. There’s a carrot for anything getting you closer to reproducing and sticks for anything that moves you the wrong direction. Despair and discomfort can be caused by plenty of things, but you don’t have to disentangle the entire human experience to draw the line from a lack of healthy sexual experience to an ideology based on extreme sexual frustration.

Edit: again, down votes with no counter argument. For some reason people agree that abstinence in sex ed is a bad policy but turn around and say sex isn’t part of normal human function. Which is it?

None of my argument is about regressive bioessentialism. There’s no inherent violent masculinity or genetic fitness or any stance about what relationships are “supposed” to look like. Men are just having less sex than women.

24% of men aged 22-34 did not had sex in 2022-2023 vs 13% of women. That’s a much larger cohort to propagate that frustration. You can argue that there are other social factors that make it manifest in this specific toxic ideology (as opposed depression, anxiety and body image issues) but the root cause is the same.

More sex means less frustration about lack of sex, less sex means more. Why jump through hoops to make it about personal failing or some other indirect cause?

The best of both worlds is the tree style tabs plug in. Though I do wish it was a core feature so I could get tab grouping and hide the top tab bar.

Self-worth can be a result of societal expectations.

Sure true, but you can’t ignore that humans have millions of years of evolution that have honed our physiological and social behavior to act a certain way. Just because it’s not rational doesn’t mean you can flip a switch and shrug it off.

For example, peer pressure in teens is more than a normal learned behavior. The need to conform to an in-group that (historically) will be your lifelong community is immense. The pain of exclusion and embarrassment is amplified, closer to actual physical pain, compared to what an adult/child might feel in the same situation.

The only reason a person would feel bad is because society is pushing the narrative

…is because reproduction is a core part of animal evolution. An asexual person saying that core discomfort is invalid is like a person who can’t feel physical pain rolling their eyes at touching a hot stove.

The comment was about self worth not societal worth. Being asexual shouldn’t matter with that argument because you wouldn’t feel the same sexual drive; your self worth isn’t impacted.

Isn’t it the inverse of that? And Hemingway always struck me as more of a “write drunk, edit buzzed” guy