In other news
In the current news climate we see that some figures and events tend to dominate the front-pages heavily. Still, there are important, interesting or just plain weird things happening out there and a group of people can find these better than one.
I thought I would test with a thread for linking general news articles about "other news" and discussion. Perhaps it goes into the abyss that is page 2 and beyond, but it is worth a try.
Some guidelines:
- Try to find the "clean link", so that links to the news site directly and not a social media site. Avoid "amp-links" (google).
- Write some cliff notes on what it is about, especially if it is a video.
- It's not an excuse to make outlandish claims via proxy or link extremist content.
- If it's an editorial or opinion piece, it is polite to mark it as such.
- Note the language if it is not in English.
- There is no demand that such things be posted here, if you think a piece merits its own thread, then make one.
He is a chiropractor poster, for sure.
victor should not have asked for forgiveness of his student loans. he should have asked for a refund.
Firing anti ship missiles and drones at military and civilian ships is an odd way to show you aren't trying to hurt anyone. You can't just sit back and hope they keep failing.
victor should not have asked for forgiveness of his student loans. he should have asked for a refund.
only one post has addressed the facts of what is happening.
ntany is correct that they did indeed send drones and missiles at ships. but that was only after multiple warnings. and those shots were obv just warning shots.
when Israel is committing genocide as many countries are no alleging, and the USA is abetting it, there is no reason to allow their ships to pass.
this is what they said
seems pretty reasonable!
its not like Yemen has blocked the strait for all shipping either. they are letting plenty of ships thru.
this whole situation is especially grotesque when you consider that 100s of thousands of Yemenis died in the 2010s due to a USA supported blockade.
We seem to all be focusing on your broken record.... that this is ONLY about killing babies.
US President Joe Biden and UK PM Rishi Sunak confirmed the strikes, saying they were a response to repeated Houthi attacks on commercial shipping in the Red Sea.
US warship-launched Tomahawk cruise missiles and US jets attacked more than 12 sites, including in the capital, Sanaa, and Hudaydah, the Houthi Red Sea port stronghold, US officials say
Four RAF Typhoon jets bombed two Houthi targets, flying from Akrotiri base in Cyprus
President Biden warned of possible further measures to ensure the free flow of commerce
Support was provided by Australia, Bahrain, Canada and the Netherlands, the leaders said
A Houthi official warned the US and UK would "pay a heavy price" for this "blatant aggression"
there is no personal attack in my post. I could have pointed out the obv about ntany but I refrained bc believe or not I am trying to avoid rancor.
And to be clear, I wasn't suggesting that there was.
when you look at all of those facts, there is really nothing rhetorical about my post. there is nothing even contentious or inflammatory other than I guess the fact is that real life is particularly nasty at the moment (or always).
LOL, of course there was.
This is going to be the part that I feel silliest making the case for, because it couldn't be more obviously rhetorical. I'm not sure we know about any deaths yet, let alone babies. But that's not the point. The point is that you take a US attack on Houthi rebels and cast it as "USA is murdering Yemeni babies". that is, as I said "putting the worst possible spin on it for whomever you're hating on". That's not even slightly debatable.
Without going into a debate about whether what's happening in Israel is a genocide, this is once again "putting the worst possible spin on it for whomever you're hating on".
But the biggest issue is where you tend to take these things, and you've not disappointed here:
Because, you know, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that some people here might not be against the killing of babies. Not rhetorical at all. 🙄
This is going to be the part that I feel silliest making the case for, because it couldn't be more obviously rhetorical. I'm not sure we know about any deaths yet, let alone babies. But that's not the point. The point is that you take a US attack on Houthi rebels and cast it as "USA is murdering Yemeni babies". that is, as I said "putting the worst possible spin on it for whomever you're hating on". That's not even slightly debatable.
would you like to make a bet on if any Yemeni babies will die from USA/UK bombs by the end of this? if they havent already ofc.
Without going into a debate about whether what's happening in Israel is a genocide, this is once again "putting the worst possible spin on it for whomever you're hating on".
why do you think the USA is bombing Yemen? do you deny that they are bombing Yemen bc the Houthis are blocking ships to Israel?
like, its not spin. theres no both sides here. the USA has been explicit in why they are doing it. its not a mystery and the liberal mainstream pundits are not even debating the why.
But the biggest issue is where you tend to take these things, and you've not disappointed here:
bc Spew has trolled me about this multiple times across multiple threads for months, I got a little mouthy there. I did show a lot more restraint than I normally would. I am trying.
Because, you know, it's perfectly reasonable to suggest that some people here might not be against the killing of babies. Not rhetorical at all.
most people lie to themselves. really everyone does. but if someone supports Israel, as most people do, then that person supports killing babies. it really is that simple right now, at this point in time. you do realize that over 10k children have been murdered in the last 3 months by Israel?
people say, well Israel needs to do bombs but I dont support killing babies. thats like saying, well I support you pulling the trigger on that gun pointed right at someones face but I dont support them dying.
I feel like I am taking crazy pills with you guys. its beyond insane.
how can someone support dropping bombs and not support what the bombs do? make it make sense.
Victor, I was under the impression that you had a job as a programmer. Is that still the case? I find it hard to believe that anybody can create literally a thousand posts a month on 2p2 and still be gainfully employed. Don't you find this constant anger and contrarianism to be a little exhausting?
I dont have a job. I live off welfare.
Victor, there are actually a number of things that I agree with you on WRT Israel, but you almost always take it too far for me. This is one of the reasons I don't participate in the thread, because there are a number of people that hold extreme opinions, on both sides, that really seem pointless to argue with. And no, of course I wouldn't bet against Yemeni babies dying - as I said, that wasn't the point.
ok I think we may be getting somewhere.
so if a person supports the bombing in Yemen, and they know, or at least understand that it is highly likely, that babies will die, then I dont understand how they cannot literally support the death of those babies.
now, they can say that it is worth it for the babies to die for reasons and I would not really quibble with them other than their moral character depending on the reasons.
in this case the reasons are to make it easier for ships to reach the USA and Israel. considering that Israel has killed over 30k innocent people in 3 months and is on trial for genocide, and the explicit reason for the Yemeni blockade attempt is to stop such atrocities, then I would argue that allowing such shipping is not a good enough reason to kill babies.
and I would go further and argue that allowing such shipping would actually kill more babies bc the supplies will go to Israel who will use those supplies to...King Spew guessed it... kill babies.
maybe his job got genocided?
ok I think we may be getting somewhere.
so if a person supports the bombing in Yemen, and they know, or at least understand that it is highly likely, that babies will die, then I dont understand how they cannot literally support the death of those babies.
now, they can say that it is worth it for the babies to die for reasons and I would not really quibble with them other than their moral character depending on the reasons.
in this case the reasons are to make it easier for ships to reach the USA
support is not distributive.
we support a ceasefire. Some people will be killed if they one. We dont support killing them.
I support child vaccines in some cases. Some children will die from vaccines. I dont support killing them
You're being hyperbolic. Which has some value but it isn't true.
Wtf are you talking about? You made the following post six months ago.
ripping on liberals is not the same as accusing you of being a pedophile or saying you are bad at your job. I dont even know what your job is. but d2 knows my job and mentions it in damn near every post directed at me. and chillrob has admitted to doing the latter for no reason.
but ya, I have no reason to be upset about vile lies and attacks on my professional character by low lifes felons. remember, I have had my personal life attempted to be ****ed up by people on this board.
Am I just too stupid to recognize expert trolling on your part?
I wasnt blind with rage about anything. but certainly not about being bad at my job. I was mad that *******s have tried to get me fired. they have since succeeded so congrats on that part.
What if someone was holding a gun to the head of your child, and that guy was using his own baby as a shield? And the only way you could prevent your child from dying was to shoot the guy, killing the child.
Would you shoot? If so, does that mean you want a baby to die?
victor will live in a cabin writing his manifesto within a year
I wasnt blind with rage about anything. but certainly not about being bad at my job. I was mad that *******s have tried to get me fired. they have since succeeded so congrats on that part.
I am very sorry to hear that. Are you saying that posters on this forum are responsible for you being unemployed?
you arent sorry.
I dont owe you any answers. esp considering what you and your friends have done.
I do like that I have gotten you libs so pissed off that it has come to this. on a forum of like 12 people, almost all of them are very knowledgeable about my personal life and are now peppering me with questions.
why? oh bc I said that bombing babies is bad.
Well that is certainly terrible. No matter how I felt about someone online I would never do anything to try to punish them IRL.
