Summary

Trump plans to lift the Biden administration’s freeze on supplying 2,000-pound bombs to Israel and reverse sanctions against Israeli settlers.

  • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 hours ago

    only a very small fringe believes Biden is to blame for this

    You have this so backwards it actually makes my head hurt.

    It is a shame you are a moderator in this community given your strange sense of when appealing to an authority for truth is acceptable and when it isn’t.

    Like… sure the ICJ is necessary and great but who is to say they don’t believe the US and Biden are directly complicit they just know saying the whole truth gives them zero chance of winning? That is a very simple but reasonable hypothetical and I made it to point out the massive blindspot in your understanding of the world.

    Biden absolutely is as directly morally culpable as if he had dropped the bombs himself, you don’t get to play games with escaping culpability when you get the job as president…

    and just to be clear, fuck Trump

    • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Again, morality and philosophy are subjective. Legally, which is objective, Biden is not responsible.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        So we are only allowed to discuss responsibility in the context of a narrow legal definition… on a world news sub?

        You are searching for a line between the black and white and you don’t realize you are in a sea of different shades of grey.

        The question over whether Biden is responsible is inherently subjective and even if it wasn’t an authorities’ conclusion that Biden is or isn’t responsible for the Palestinian genocide is inherently subjective…and subject to interests that may influence and distort a picture of the truth.

        Also, what would happen if the legal definition of responsibility was unethical and unjust and you knew it? Would you still moderate according to those rules even if they violated your core values?

        The law is a record of political and human struggle, there is nothing about it that makes it somehow impervious to bias or corruption like (arguably) the study of pure math or logic is.

        • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 hours ago

          No, you can discuss anything you want, but you won’t be allowed to assert blatant falsehoods as true.

          Same goes when I remove the arguments about Ukranians being Nazis or how they were the real aggressors after Russia invaded them or how the Uyghur genocide is all made up by Western powers to make China look bad.

          Bullshit gets removed, repeated, unrepentent bullshit gets a temp ban. Repeated temp bans get longer and longer until the bullshit is excised.

            • jordanlund@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              4 hours ago

              From your article:

              “Prosecutors in The Hague said on Monday that they would not, for the moment, investigate allegations that China had committed genocide and crimes against humanity regarding the Uighurs, a predominantly Muslim ethnic group, because the alleged crimes took place in China, which is not a party to the court.

              They have no legal jurusdiction in China.