Was: Israel is at War; Now: Scoopers diagnose your anti-Semitism

[jesmu84]

Question for the BOTUS, aina?

🤡

[Shaka Shart]

Is a declaration of war necessary to shoot back at a group of people who are not a sovereign nation? This seems more Barbary Pirates than Pearl Harbor.

The official government of Yemen are Saudi puppets and 80% of Yemen is controlled by the Houthi's. So yeah probably should go through more official channels. Its not just a scrappy little group of pirates causing trouble.

[Pakuni]

The official government of Yemen are Saudi puppets and 80% of Yemen is controlled by the Houthi's. So yeah probably should go through more official channels. Its not just a scrappy little group of pirates causing trouble.

80%?
I didn't call them a scrappy group of pirates. The Barbary pirates weren't a scrappy group of pirates either.
I'm just not sure what the mechanism is (because it doesn't exist, it seems) for declaring war on a tribe.

[Shaka Shart]

80%?
I didn't call them a scrappy group of pirates. The Barbary pirates weren't a scrappy group of pirates either.
I'm just not sure what the mechanism is (because it doesn't exist, it seems) for declaring war on a tribe.

Inhabited by 80% of the population. Yeah.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/africa/dont-bomb-houthis

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

The official government of Yemen are Saudi puppets and 80% of Yemen is controlled by the Houthi's. So yeah probably should go through more official channels. Its not just a scrappy little group of pirates causing trouble.

The Houthis are completely funded by Iran

[Pakuni]

Inhabited by 80% of the population. Yeah.

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/africa/dont-bomb-houthis

Well, that's not what you wrote, but doesn't really change anything.
As far as I can tell, there's no method or requirement for Congress to declare war on a non-nation state.
It's reasonable to debate how best to respond to the Houthi attacks, but arguing that any response requires or demands a formal declaration from Congress is neither historically or legally accurate, nor is it realistic.

But beyond the semantical argument, what is it you suggest be done in response to the ongoing Houthi attacks and threats?

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Huh.

Someone stated here repeatedly that Israel was united in its goal to completely eliminate Hamas. Yet we have a member of his own war cabinet stating that they need to pursue an "extended cease fire."


https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/19/us/divisions-israel-gaza-netanyahu-hostages.html\\

"A member of Israel's war cabinet, a general who lost a son in the conflict, urged in a television interview broadcast late Thursday that the country pursue an extended cease-fire with Hamas to free the remaining hostages, a rebuke of the "total victory" being pursued by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu."

...

"The Israeli official who criticized the prosecution of the war, Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, a retired military chief of staff, has laid bare some of the persistent tensions within the wartime government. General Eisenkot said Israel's leaders must define a vision for how to wind down the war in Gaza, and for its desired outcome. Only a deal with Hamas would secure the release of the hostages, he said, adding that Israel had so far failed in its stated aim of destroying Hamas. More than 240 people were taken hostage on Oct. 7, and about 130 people remain captives in Gaza."

[MU82]

From the NYT: After visiting Auschwitz, Elon Musk said he had been "naïve" about the dangers posed by anti-Jewish sentiment, but he added that he had so many Jewish friends that he was "Jewish by association."

He's not. Those who are "Jewish by association" don't make and endorse antisemitic comments.

[Shaka Shart]

Well, that's not what you wrote, but doesn't really change anything.
As far as I can tell, there's no method or requirement for Congress to declare war on a non-nation state.
It's reasonable to debate how best to respond to the Houthi attacks, but arguing that any response requires or demands a formal declaration from Congress is neither historically or legally accurate, nor is it realistic.

But beyond the semantical argument, what is it you suggest be done in response to the ongoing Houthi attacks and threats?

Land doesn't vote I thought, but you're right we are arguing semantics and you and I don't need to poke each other any more about it.

I mean the answer probably is a ceasefire in Gaza but we know that's not happening at least in the near term.

I don't have an answer to what to do otherwise, because I know you will likely regard my passivism as naive. but my discussion on the matter is you should be seeking congressional approval on it for a military operation of this size and scope on the de facto controllers of the country. 1, because will require you to even surface level have to justify your actions to the American people vs a retroactive analysis we constantly have to rely on, and 2, because the past several administrations and their incredibly itchy trigger finger have caused incalculable collateral damage with little to no oversight and I (maybe delusional) believe having to go through the formality will at least divert the more reckless actions being debated.

Just because presidential reach has exceeded most oversight doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

[Jockey]

From the NYT: After visiting Auschwitz, Elon Musk said he had been "naïve" about the dangers posed by anti-Jewish sentiment, but he added that he had so many Jewish friends that he was "Jewish by association."

He's not. Those who are "Jewish by association" don't make and endorse antisemitic comments.

I wonder if he has a lot of black friend, too.

[JWags85]

Land doesn't vote I thought, but you're right we are arguing semantics and you and I don't need to poke each other any more about it.

I mean the answer probably is a ceasefire in Gaza but we know that's not happening at least in the near term.

I don't have an answer to what to do otherwise, because I know you will likely regard my passivism as naive. but my discussion on the matter is you should be seeking congressional approval on it for a military operation of this size and scope on the de facto controllers of the country. 1, because will require you to even surface level have to justify your actions to the American people vs a retroactive analysis we constantly have to rely on, and 2, because the past several administrations and their incredibly itchy trigger finger have caused incalculable collateral damage with little to no oversight and I (maybe delusional) believe having to go through the formality will at least divert the more reckless actions being debated.

Just because presidential reach has exceeded most oversight doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

I know its not your intention, but I think its given undue legitimacy to a borderline terrorist organization.  You call the actual government of Yemen "Saudi puppets" but urge proper protocol and respect for an Iranian funded insurgent group with a "Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse Upon the Jews" slogan.

I'm not a hawk, but I see little political reason to approach the Houthis in the same way the US would respond to attacks from a sovereign nation or legitimate military declarations.  The way the Houthis have somehow become "Yemen" in discourse is odd.

[Pakuni]

Land doesn't vote I thought

Neither do Yemenis. 

I mean the answer probably is a ceasefire in Gaza but we know that's not happening at least in the near term.

I agree a ceasefire/end to hostilities needs to come eventually, but I don't think the idea here should be to push for a ceasefire because it may get the Houthis to knock it off. Nor can I buy the argument  - not by you, but I've seen it elsewhere - that the Houthis' actions are somehow justified by what's happening in Gaza.

because the past several administrations and their incredibly itchy trigger finger have caused incalculable collateral damage with little to no oversight and I (maybe delusional) believe having to go through the formality will at least divert the more reckless actions being debated.

Just because presidential reach has exceeded most oversight doesn't mean I have to agree with it.

I mean, Congress authorized Afghanistan and Iraq, so I'm not sure that's much of a bulwark.

[4everwarriors]

"Israel proposes 2-month pause in Gaza for release of
all hostages."


This will never happen because the Palestinians will never pause until they are completely annihilated, hey?


#fromtherivertothesea

#neveragain

[JWags85]

I agree a ceasefire/end to hostilities needs to come eventually, but I don't think the idea here should be to push for a ceasefire because it may get the Houthis to knock it off. Nor can I buy the argument  - not by you, but I've seen it elsewhere - that the Houthis' actions are somehow justified by what's happening in Gaza.

Yea, its wrapped up in this "US/West is bad/colonizers/hate brown people/must support the underdog" mindset that so many people seem to be adopting.  Hence my statement above that people are mentally jumping to Houthis=Yemen and the US is unnecessarily attacking more poor Middle Eastern people, people who are only trying to support their poor Palestinian brethren.  Not realizing (or flat out ignoring) that its all just a bigger Iraninan power play and the Houthis don't give a damn about Gaza or the Palestinians either way

[Shaka Shart]

I know its not your intention, but I think its given undue legitimacy to a borderline terrorist organization.  You call the actual government of Yemen "Saudi puppets" but urge proper protocol and respect for an Iranian funded insurgent group with a "Death to America, Death to Israel, Curse Upon the Jews" slogan.

I'm not a hawk, but I see little political reason to approach the Houthis in the same way the US would respond to attacks from a sovereign nation or legitimate military declarations.  The way the Houthis have somehow become "Yemen" in discourse is odd.

They've become Yemen in discussion because they effectively control the country. I have said nothing about giving legitimacy to them, nor should they be lauded. Acknowledging their influence and Power over a sovereign nation even with their terroristic characteristics is to be realistic of their influence on a suffering and starving people's daily lives.  Are the Taliban not the ruling party of Afghanistan, to which we have ceded this reality?

To this point, that is why I endorse some sort of restraint and collective discussion about our actions there. Because when you start bombing the Houthis, you are going to also be bombing yet another population of people who have very little to lose.

This discussion here has come up numerous times before and my rebuttal remains, just because it is said one side (My quoted Saudi puppetry) is bad, doesn't mean the other side is good or legitimate. (Prior reference to Hamas atrocities/Israel atrocities)

In the end once again it's about our tendency to disregard our future consequences worldwide for our unrestrained actions.

[Shaka Shart]

Yea, its wrapped up in this "US/West is bad/colonizers/hate brown people/must support the underdog" mindset that so many people seem to be adopting.  Hence my statement above that people are mentally jumping to Houthis=Yemen and the US is unnecessarily attacking more poor Middle Eastern people, people who are only trying to support their poor Palestinian brethren.  Not realizing (or flat out ignoring) that its all just a bigger Iraninan power play and the Houthis don't give a damn about Gaza or the Palestinians either way

The US hating brown people is gross oversimplification on a very complex matter for sure. (Though that's a depressingly common reason in our country nonetheless.)

In the end it has always been about not making the situation worse for ourselves. I just think it's cynical to approach it as "they don't care about Gaza anyway so we should continue to bomb them". How has that gone for us recently?

Have we really tried anything different to justify going back to bomb first and foremost? Not really. Acting with the justification of "well they'll just do this anyway" changes deterrent policy into instigation very quickly. Though maybe that was the goal anyway.

[Hards Alumni]

"Anyone who disagrees with me should be ostracized".

Sounds like a true believer in democracy.

You know that isn't what I said.  Your interpretation entirely.

drink some water

[Hards Alumni]

Hards Alumni

Aren't you the fascist who called for complete isolation and discrimination against those who chose not to take the Covid vaccine, even though it disproportionately impacted minorities (which I know matters to you and your white savior complex)? 

Didn't you literally call for them to be shamed and prohibited from basic life necessities?

You still feel that way?

People, please go back and look at his posts on the topic. What this man suggested the second he felt he had the moral upper hand with the vaccine is exactly the same mentality of a complete lunatic in power. 

He called for them to be publicly shamed.

It showed his true fascist and racist tendencies, so I find it hilarious that he tries to play the race card here.

Waiting for your apology to the nonvaxed, lower income, immigrant community, but instead, I am sure you will deflect because it is really damaging. Actually no, you are so stupid that you may actually double down on your tyrannical position.

People, never let this clown think he has the upper hand. He is a virtue signaling, insecure, pompous moron.

lol man, what crawled up your ass.  Please misrepresent what I said more though. 

[moomoo]

lol man, what crawled up your ass.  Please misrepresent what I said more though.

This is your exact quote, you liar. Not gonna be able to weasel your way out of it. You thought people would forget. We won't forget the fascists.

Zero misrepresentation. 

YOUR EXACT QUOTE:

"Instead of treating the stupid people of the US with kid gloves we need to ostracize them from society, and mock their foolish opinions.  There is nothing fascist about that, but then you probably don't understand the meaning of the word.  You can be of the opinion that grass is blue, and the sky is green, but no one should take you seriously.  Similarly, anyone who is antivax should not be taken seriously."

[moomoo]

You know that isn't what I said.  Your interpretation entirely.

drink some water

To anyone who wanted to work without getting the vaccine and also live a peaceful life without exclusion from society, that is EXACTLY what you said....as you stated, disagree with me then you should be ostracized.

We won't forget, fascist.

[Shaka Shart]

To anyone who wanted to work without getting the vaccine and also live a peaceful life without exclusion from society, that is EXACTLY what you said....as you stated, disagree with me then you should be ostracized.

We won't forget, fascist.

Strange to have to use this on someone besides Heisey

https://youtu.be/Y7QZgH1eP2o?si=x_YB6RSUUcrxgHaW

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

This is your exact quote, you liar. Not gonna be able to weasel your way out of it. You thought people would forget. We won't forget the fascists.

Zero misrepresentation. 

YOUR EXACT QUOTE:

"Instead of treating the stupid people of the US with kid gloves we need to ostracize them from society, and mock their foolish opinions.  There is nothing fascist about that, but then you probably don't understand the meaning of the word.  You can be of the opinion that grass is blue, and the sky is green, but no one should take you seriously.  Similarly, anyone who is antivax should not be taken seriously."

lol. Hards I hope you can get over a user named "moomoo," who thinks you're a fascist because he doesn't understand English, won't forget something you posted once.

[moomoo]

lol. Hards I hope you can get over a user named "moomoo," who thinks you're a fascist because he doesn't understand English, won't forget something you posted once.

Sultan

Ridiculing someone's muscoop name was genius.  You really should be proud of that. It really struck a chord. It takes a special  person and talent to reach to that level. I tip my hat to you for reaching that depth of quality.

The subordination of individual interests and freedoms for the perceived (and often false) good of the nation is the core of fascism.   If you want, I can try to explain it using crayons since that might be more effective for someone like you.

I hope you and Hards enjoy the next fascist rally somewhere.

We won't forget.

[Lennys Tap]

lol. Hards I hope you can get over a user named "moomoo," who thinks you're a fascist because he doesn't understand English, won't forget something you posted once.

If he gotten over "Fluffy Blue Monster" he can get over anything.

[Hards Alumni]

This is your exact quote, you liar. Not gonna be able to weasel your way out of it. You thought people would forget. We won't forget the fascists.

Zero misrepresentation. 

YOUR EXACT QUOTE:

"Instead of treating the stupid people of the US with kid gloves we need to ostracize them from society, and mock their foolish opinions.  There is nothing fascist about that, but then you probably don't understand the meaning of the word.  You can be of the opinion that grass is blue, and the sky is green, but no one should take you seriously.  Similarly, anyone who is antivax should not be taken seriously."

Ah, so you don't understand what fascism is.  That tracks.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, of course.  But there are fundamental realities in this world.  Debating them is pointless.  Those people are stupid.  That is all I was saying.

But I guess, say whatever you want.  I have no idea who you are and why you all of a sudden have some sort of axe to grind with me years later.  Kinda weird that you'd pop up and another poster (who called me a jew hater) disappeared.  Scoop is a helluva place.