Comment on The lamest countries
rdri@lemmy.world 11 months agoI’d say it’s not loaded framing on my side, but convoluted assumptions (and possibly clairvoyance) on the other.
I may not have the explanation of why “Israel funded hamas”, but I know that half the world funded Palestine for years, and that most of that help naturally must’ve went through hamas.
Simply put, it doesn’t seem like Israel could avoid funding Palestine. Hamas could’ve put that money in improving lives of citizens.
WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Israel put a terrorist org that’s hostile to them in neighbouring territories they’re trying to ethnically cleanse via genocide and you can’t figure it why? I suppose critical thought was never fascists’ strong suit.
International funding went to Palestinians via aid orgs - not Hamas. That said, anything that did go to Hamas was because Israel put them in power - you don’t get to put terrorists in power, commit war crimes, then whine when the international community sends aid to the people you’re genociding. Israel is also a recipient of $3.8 billion dollars every year in US military support alone - that’s comparable to the total amount of internal aid sent to Palestine between 2014 and 2020.
The problem isn’t Israel funding Palestine - it’s with them funding a terrorist group to put them in power, removing the secular moderates that were in place already… You know - so they could justify the genocide they’ve been loudly telegraphing they want to commit.
You don’t get to play the victim on this one, Jitler.
rdri@lemmy.world 11 months ago
What?
And I thought it was Palestinians who chose hamas during elections. The other candidate was also a terrorist group if I’m not mistaken though, so really don’t see how complicated the plan of Israel should’ve been for everything to play out exactly as it had.
So basically the plan was “Kill us, so we could kill you” all along, huh? This is some flat earth level conspiracy.
WaxedWookie@lemmy.world 11 months ago
Hamas is a terrorist org that Israel backed to replace the secular moderates - this isn’t half as complex as the narrative knots you idiots tie yourselves in to defend the genocide - in not sure why you’re finding this difficult.
They’ve been signalling genocidal intent for years, but can’t just do it without losing the US backing they need to not get obliterated by their neighbours. Why else did they help the hostile jihadists over the secular moderates? Again, really straightforward stuff.
Meanwhile, you use Nazi-tier logic to defend Nazi-tier actions.
rdri@lemmy.world 11 months ago
First, the whole matter of some country being able to affect political groups in another country being normal, as you’re saying about it, is more than lousy to say the least. Israel did not create hamas. Israel could not know how it will act over the years. Israel could not know who will win the elections.
Second, proposing the idea that a modern non-jihad government would put their own population at risk of terrorist attacks in order to have a chance to do genocide of other population is ridiculous.
Third, if the “second” thing above is incorrect, they would instead fiddle with the iron dome. More specifically, there would be no iron dome in the first place - they would take all the rocket hits they could in order to show the world how aggressive terrorists are and invade Gaza asap.
I don’t know what to say here. What nazi-tier even means is beyond me. But you here basically operate with extremes like every actor does exactly what they are programmed to do. It seems to me that even if some investigation will conclude that Israel, in fact, did not intent to fund any specific group, you’ll still find new twists in order to make Israel guilty of what hamas did.