![](https://media.kbin.social/media/4e/9d/4e9d27b1901c43e3bc7ca6b0f1aef26b12f212a0ebd0ebe66e909c0d2fa0f273.png)
![](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/gWmVEUZ94Z.png)
International relations are politics. The marches are intended to place pressure on politicians of the country they are occurring in, to adopt certain international relations positions.
International relations are politics. The marches are intended to place pressure on politicians of the country they are occurring in, to adopt certain international relations positions.
The conclusion pushed by this article makes genocide easier to swallow.
I really don’t see how? Everything about the article condemns these actions?
The whole idea of twisting the media’s line of “this is Israel’s 9/11” makes it more impactful, rather than making it easier to swallow.
Israel is not “about to take” any actions it has not already pursued against the Palestinians for fifty years
Yes, agreed. And the article is supportive of that conclusion too. It takes a mocking tone at the idea that the attacks “came out of nowhere” and specifically states that the US, and Israel, played a key role in creating the conditions that give rise to the attacks that they then use as a justification for further escalation.
parallel to 9/11 is a mistake, or(more likely) a jingoistic attempt to trick Americans into supporting a rapidly concluding genocide.
I took the exact opposite conclusion from the article. It seems to be a condemnation of the US’s actions in the wake of 9/11, and thus also a condemnation of the actions the author believes Israel are about to take in the wake of the Hamas attack.
Remember, we know how to address many of the world’s problems, including poverty, homelessness, and climate change.
But those with capital in society choose not to.
The only reason I opened the article, “whatchu mean fear of peace talks?!”
Like I get it, Ukraine shouldn’t capitulate. But ending the bloodshed is a good thing, surely.
How obnoxious. Doubly so because there is no way you don’t actually know what the above commenter is referring to: that the average Millennial or younger person has had a significantly more difficult time accumulating wealth than Boomers did at similar points in their lives. So you are aggressively misinterpreting them, then acting smug about your own misunderstanding.
Bloody hell, with what crime? Convincing your comrades to not work?