Fetterman calls rush to blame Israel for hospital blast ‘disturbing’
Fetterman calls rush to blame Israel for hospital blast ‘disturbing’
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 Member…
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.
You're viewing part of a thread.
What if I think both sides are fucking assholes?
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.
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.
How do you feel about someone running a plane into a building is more salient
Are there people in the building or on the plane? Is the building something like a factory that makes pepper spray and tear gas?
Quit obfuscation. You know exactly what I'm talking about.
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.
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.
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.
-