That situation had significant differences. The power balance was not skewed as far as it is with Israel. And there was no religious hate driving the conflict. External powers were also not fueling the conflict to the same level.
Where it was similar was how the conflict was used by weak men to maintain their priveledged positions. Once the two parties negotiated how the weak men on both sides, were going to keep sharing the spoils, the conflict got resolved. Remember when Israel and the palastinian authority where starting to gain some traction in negoriations, Hamas took power. That would not have been possible without the religious indoctrination and external interference from Israel and the US.
I have been living in South Africa my whole life, was discrimination against by the apartheid regime and now by the new government using many of the same race based tools to maintain a political elite at the cost of the average South African.
Why is it so difficult for people to understand that you can condemn the Israeli genocide of Palestinians, the Holocaust of Jews and slavery(both old and current). All while still being critical of Hamas targeting a festival on oct 7, the allies firebombing German and Japanese cities and religious and cultural obliteration conducted by Islam and Christianity in the middle ages.
If you cannot hold that position, you may want to check yourself for indoctrination by the “us vs them” narrative.
So when people start criticizing Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian, do you also make sure to start going on about all the imperfections of Ukraine? Or do you reserve that “both sidesism” for non-whites like you have so far?
Ukraine has been more honorable in their defensive war with Russia than most other conflicts. Is the country perfect, no. Is it being a lot more humane and professional in their conduct than say, Russia, Hamas, Israel and Iran, absolutely.
I am going to assume you are not a native english speaker. So please read carefully.
You are assuming that anyone striving to be objective is being “both-sidesims”. In order to meet that definition, you need to be using the actions of the one party, to defend the actions of the other. I have not done that. That’s called being an apologist.
Regarding the racist allegations. Please count the number of times I criticized a “white” (your definition not mine) power in this thread with you.
That situation had significant differences. The power balance was not skewed as far as it is with Israel. And there was no religious hate driving the conflict. External powers were also not fueling the conflict to the same level.
Where it was similar was how the conflict was used by weak men to maintain their priveledged positions. Once the two parties negotiated how the weak men on both sides, were going to keep sharing the spoils, the conflict got resolved. Remember when Israel and the palastinian authority where starting to gain some traction in negoriations, Hamas took power. That would not have been possible without the religious indoctrination and external interference from Israel and the US.
I have been living in South Africa my whole life, was discrimination against by the apartheid regime and now by the new government using many of the same race based tools to maintain a political elite at the cost of the average South African.
Ah, so you don’t just “both sides” the Palestinian genocide, you also do it to Apartheid South Africa.
You going to do the US Civil War too?
Conflicts are rarely one sided, if ever.
Just because one side is bad, does not make the other side good.
Believing otherwise is just naive, or based on ignorance.
Do you think the firebombing of dresden in WW2 was justified because the Nazi’s were worse?
Oh god, you actually do “both sides” the US Civil War.
Do you even do it to the holocaust?
Why would you assume that?
Why is it so difficult for people to understand that you can condemn the Israeli genocide of Palestinians, the Holocaust of Jews and slavery(both old and current). All while still being critical of Hamas targeting a festival on oct 7, the allies firebombing German and Japanese cities and religious and cultural obliteration conducted by Islam and Christianity in the middle ages.
If you cannot hold that position, you may want to check yourself for indoctrination by the “us vs them” narrative.
So when people start criticizing Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian, do you also make sure to start going on about all the imperfections of Ukraine? Or do you reserve that “both sidesism” for non-whites like you have so far?
Ukraine has been more honorable in their defensive war with Russia than most other conflicts. Is the country perfect, no. Is it being a lot more humane and professional in their conduct than say, Russia, Hamas, Israel and Iran, absolutely.
I am going to assume you are not a native english speaker. So please read carefully.
You are assuming that anyone striving to be objective is being “both-sidesims”. In order to meet that definition, you need to be using the actions of the one party, to defend the actions of the other. I have not done that. That’s called being an apologist.
Regarding the racist allegations. Please count the number of times I criticized a “white” (your definition not mine) power in this thread with you.
Lol. Turns out you do indeed reserve the “both sides bad” nonsense for non-whites.
Now you are trolling.
Nazi Germany is not white enough for you? Britain is non white enough for you? Usa is non white enough for you?
Pray tell, who is white enough for you?