/pt/ – Petrarchan

how do you define antisemitism in contemporary terms? as in anti-israel, anti-jews, anti-zionism? like which one is it? is it hitler stye antisemitism or some libtard coded pro-brown people idea?

Last year I told a jewish NY girl that maybe people dislike Israel for a reason and she called me an antisemite and had a nervous breakdown. I don't think anyone can avoid being called an antisemite at this point.

>he told a jewess he dislikes the jewish ethnostate >surprised when he got 0 jewussy why are u retards like this?

>>6844

>he told a jewess he dislikes the jewish ethnostate >surprised when he got 0 jewussy why are u retards like this?

I didn't even tell her I dislike the jewish ethnostate just suggested that maybe people who dislike it aren't just cartoonishly evil. That's how little it took for her to spiral which surprised me. Anyway this is merely a footnote in my history of avoidipussy.

>>6850

>>6844 I didn't even tell her I dislike the jewish ethnostate just suggested that maybe people who dislike it aren't just cartoonishly evil. That's how little it took for her to spiral which surprised me. Anyway this is merely a footnote in my history of avoidipussy.

she spiraled into a frenzy because until like 2010 it was basically game over in the West to even slightly critize israel and now u have turbonormies posting Hitler phonk edits under their real names on insta. What did you expect? Next time just dont bother, I mean what even is the point of telling a jew you dislike israel in the first place? /pol/ was way ahead of its time, by like 20 years. now average normie and /lit/pseuds on petrachan are copying the stormfront rethoric from like 2005

The point was to inoculate her to reality. I wonder what she's soin

*doing now. God I keep butchering my posts here even though the avoipussy somehow worked.

>>6838

how do you define antisemitism in contemporary terms? as in anti-israel, anti-jews, anti-zionism? like which one is it? is it hitler stye antisemitism or some libtard coded pro-brown people idea?

I'm antisemitic because I strongly dislike Jews, simple as.

>>6851

>>6850 she spiraled into a frenzy because until like 2010 it was basically game over in the West to even slightly critize israel and now u have turbonormies posting Hitler phonk edits under their real names on insta. What did you expect? Next time just dont bother, I mean what even is the point of telling a jew you dislike israel in the first place? /pol/ was way ahead of its time, by like 20 years. now average normie and /lit/pseuds on petrachan are copying the stormfront rethoric from like 2005

Actually I still don't understand why you think I'm at fault for failing to predict that a nice leftist jewish woman would turn into Theodor Herzl the moment I mention that Israel may have done some things that were wrong. I wouldn't expect any e.g. Armenian or Belarusian woman to react like this because typically they don't struggle with reality and can distinguish between their ethnicity and their state. Even if they're ultra nationalistic they'd probably just go "well they deserved it" instead of calling me racist. I will assume that the person I spoke to was an outlier. I regret causing her pain and discomfort but you can't be that detached from reality and expect everyone to play along.

>>6838

how do you define antisemitism in contemporary terms? as in anti-israel, anti-jews, anti-zionism? like which one is it? is it hitler stye antisemitism or some libtard coded pro-brown people idea?

>how do you define antisemitism in contemporary terms? I hate Judaism and Jewish culture, the religion is an ethnoreligious cult similar to the likes of Scientology (which it's totally okay to call a cult btw, but not Judaism) which compounds with a culture of indefinite victimhood and nepotistic kleptoparasitism. I do indeed hate Israel, but hating Israel alone isn't antisemitic, also before anyone says it: yes the holocaust did happen and yes 6 million Jews were killed, but it was almost a century ago and three times as many slavs died during the same time period so I don't care. Ironically enough I used to be very philosemitic with all the textbook retorts for any antisemitic arguments like "oh their culture just encourages learning" or "oh they were unfairly targeted in the past so yk they probably deserve their own state now" but seeing what Israel has done the past 2 years has encouraged me to actually challenge these beliefs and I pretty easily came to the conclusion that they have a poisonous culture/religion which should've died with Hadrian.

It's just another ethnic group bro. No more no less...

It's clear people aren't really concerned about Palestinians as human beings and are just using The Spectacle as an excuse to flex their hitherto tamed and underused bigotry muscle; you wouldn't open your own doors for them, would you?

>>6870

It's clear people aren't really concerned about Palestinians as human beings and are just using The Spectacle as an excuse to flex their hitherto tamed and underused bigotry muscle; you wouldn't open your own doors for them, would you?

It's actually bigoted to speak up against genocide and ethnic cleansing

>>6872

>>6870 It's actually bigoted to speak up against genocide and ethnic cleansing

It's giving Women of Afghanistan vibes by a demographic who isn't normally champing at the bit to dearly appreciate Arab Muslims

>>6873

>>6872 It's giving Women of Afghanistan vibes by a demographic who isn't normally champing at the bit to dearly appreciate Arab Muslims

If the humanitarian aspect isn't appealing to you then whatever, Israel can do whatever the fuck it wants, but I don't want billions of my dollars being wasted on a bunch of big noses in the desert. Biggest recipient of foreign aid is Israel, and second biggest is Egypt which we're only sending money to as a way to bribe them into not attacking Israel. It's not pro palestine or pro israel, it's pro keeping my money or pro throwing it in a hole that keeps getting deeper every year.

>It's clear people aren't really concerned about Palestinians as human beings >If the humanitarian aspect isn't appealing to you then whatever Stop skimming and arguing with the archetype you have in your head. Read the words on the screen fuck damn it!

I feel a little bit blessed (but also cursed) to live in a country that neatly fits all the criteria for me to not really exercise any care about Gaza genocide: We're *extremely* servile towards both US and Israel/jews in general, Jews passionately hate us (and were we to share the border with them we'd probably get palestinian sort of treatment but it's verbotten to express that suspicion in public) and we're too much of a bitch to be able to shape events in any way whatsoever. And as I am not much into performative protest it really just boils down to "it's horrible but what can you do?".

>>6876

>>6873 If the humanitarian aspect isn't appealing to you then whatever, Israel can do whatever the fuck it wants, but I don't want billions of my dollars being wasted on a bunch of big noses in the desert. Biggest recipient of foreign aid is Israel, and second biggest is Egypt which we're only sending money to as a way to bribe them into not attacking Israel. It's not pro palestine or pro israel, it's pro keeping my money or pro throwing it in a hole that keeps getting deeper every year.

I would love to see aid to Israel pause for a year just so we could see it quell exactly zero of this retarded libertarianism and never have to address it again. Who has time for this motte-and-bailey shit? If you believe in a fictional genocide, say that. If you have a reasonable lamentation about the violence, one that doesn't wander off into a slew of double standards or bog standard antisemitism about "big noses," then say that. Don't pretend to care about the sanctity of life or fiscal responsibility.

>>6880

>>6876 I would love to see aid to Israel pause for a year just so we could see it quell exactly zero of this retarded libertarianism and never have to address it again. Who has time for this motte-and-bailey shit? If you believe in a fictional genocide, say that. If you have a reasonable lamentation about the violence, one that doesn't wander off into a slew of double standards or bog standard antisemitism about "big noses," then say that. Don't pretend to care about the sanctity of life or fiscal responsibility.

Not this guy, but please appreciate how hard it is going to be for most people to expel the mental image of long nosed person rubbing hands together when they are confronted with " How antisemitic of you you to care to know for what gain or reason is your government sending tithe of billions of dollars of your tax money to foreign country on the other end of the world!" line of argumentation.

>>6873

>>6872 It's giving Women of Afghanistan vibes by a demographic who isn't normally champing at the bit to dearly appreciate Arab Muslims

Your complaint would make sense if it was addressed at specific people but you sound like you assume everyone who expresses dislike towards Israel online belongs to the same demographic. Only brain dead US conservative boomers have no issue with Israel at this point. You can no longer assume anything about someones political views based on their opinion of Israel. Aside from that the situation in Gaza is such that it's not hard to imagine even your typical anti muslim anti immigrant right winger being genuinely outraged out of humanitarian compassion. These people typically want muslims to stay in their own countries, starving them to death and bombing hospitals is obviously too much even for them.

>>6881

>>6880 Not this guy, but please appreciate how hard it is going to be for most people to expel the mental image of long nosed person rubbing hands together when they are confronted with " How antisemitic of you you to care to know for what gain or reason is your government sending tithe of billions of dollars of your tax money to foreign country on the other end of the world!" line of argumentation.

They're my tax dollars too and I am fully supportive of people opening a book to learn about introductory level geopolitics. Israel as an ally enables America to do all sorts of shit on the cheap. Yes, a lot of it is spycraft we don't get access to, that's fair, but plenty is plain as day. Consider how expensive it would have been for us to clear the path for those B2 bombers against Iran ourselves. To put it mildly, we couldn't. Even though we have the military capacity to do that, with a higher standard of safety for our troops, we didn't have the political will for it. It was only an option we had on the table because Israel was there to get dirtied.

>>6883

>>6881 They're my tax dollars too and I am fully supportive of people opening a book to learn about introductory level geopolitics. Israel as an ally enables America to do all sorts of shit on the cheap. Yes, a lot of it is spycraft we don't get access to, that's fair, but plenty is plain as day. Consider how expensive it would have been for us to clear the path for those B2 bombers against Iran ourselves. To put it mildly, we couldn't. Even though we have the military capacity to do that, with a higher standard of safety for our troops, we didn't have the political will for it. It was only an option we had on the table because Israel was there to get dirtied.

This is such a bad faith/brain dead take that it's making me question my decision to spend time on this website

>>6883

>>6881 They're my tax dollars too and I am fully supportive of people opening a book to learn about introductory level geopolitics. Israel as an ally enables America to do all sorts of shit on the cheap. Yes, a lot of it is spycraft we don't get access to, that's fair, but plenty is plain as day. Consider how expensive it would have been for us to clear the path for those B2 bombers against Iran ourselves. To put it mildly, we couldn't. Even though we have the military capacity to do that, with a higher standard of safety for our troops, we didn't have the political will for it. It was only an option we had on the table because Israel was there to get dirtied.

Good. You could use a little more self-doubt. Maybe next you could use it to learn what bad faith means. Or to actually address an argument instead of lobbing empty accusations at people.

Sorry, typo, meant that for >>6884

>>6883 This is such a bad faith/brain dead take that it's making me question my decision to spend time on this website

>6883 Israel has literally stolen US nuclear material and destroyed US ships while helping us in exactly zero of the wars they dragged us to in the middle east. We will always have the GCC as allies since they're scared to death of Iran as well as Turkey which is literally a NATO member. This whole notion of them being our only ally is bs, and we'd have far more good will in the region if we just dropped Israel already. Have you considered why we even NEED to be using B2 bombers against Iran? I know you're a pseud who thinks he's some geopolitical genius, but genuinely think this through for a sec. Israel is nothing but a drag on America and they provide absolutely nothing beneficial for us that couldn't be supplied better by actual allies like South Korea or the EU.

>>6891

>6883 Israel has literally stolen US nuclear material and destroyed US ships while helping us in exactly zero of the wars they dragged us to in the middle east. We will always have the GCC as allies since they're scared to death of Iran as well as Turkey which is literally a NATO member. This whole notion of them being our only ally is bs, and we'd have far more good will in the region if we just dropped Israel already. Have you considered why we even NEED to be using B2 bombers against Iran? I know you're a pseud who thinks he's some geopolitical genius, but genuinely think this through for a sec. Israel is nothing but a drag on America and they provide absolutely nothing beneficial for us that couldn't be supplied better by actual allies like South Korea or the EU.

>60s shit Wow so relevant to America's current strategic position. >Have you considered why we even NEED to be using B2 bombers against Iran? Because we're opposed to nuclear proliferation. Not merely from a human existential risk standpoint, but from the simple level of it giving us greater relative power. I know you think the answer to this rhetorical question is instead that it's all Israel's fault, but the reality is that the Middle East is full of fanatical immoral nutjobs and those countries would happily use nukes to extort the world the way they have through oil. Mind you, the B2 operation was more Trump posturing than it was a meaningful delay. I wasn't calling that particular move effective, just pointing out why it was an option the way it was. >This whole notion of them being our only ally is bs No, what's bullshit is morons lecturing me about how I'm less of a geopolitical genius when all I'm really announcing is that I understand basics like, hey, a tiny country's contribution to American fighting capability is much better represented through stuff like intelligence and technical contributions than it is whether or not they contributed boots on the ground to our misadventures. If you knew fuck all of what you were talking about, you'd know we explicitly asked them NOT to because it interferes with out ability to cooperate with other partners in the region filled with Islamic bigots. In the Gulf War, Iraq specifically launched Scuds at Israel for that purpose, and they listened to us when we told them to stand back. >they provide absolutely nothing beneficial for us You are ignorant of what benefits they provide. That's not the same thing.

>>>they provide absolutely nothing beneficial for us >You are ignorant of what benefits they provide. That's not the same thing. This is the quickest and most reliable metric to judge whether someone understand international relations even a minuscule amount, or if they learned everything they know from social media.

>>6892

>>6891 >60s shit Wow so relevant to America's current strategic position. >Have you considered why we even NEED to be using B2 bombers against Iran? Because we're opposed to nuclear proliferation. Not merely from a human existential risk standpoint, but from the simple level of it giving us greater relative power. I know you think the answer to this rhetorical question is instead that it's all Israel's fault, but the reality is that the Middle East is full of fanatical immoral nutjobs and those countries would happily use nukes to extort the world the way they have through oil. Mind you, the B2 operation was more Trump posturing than it was a meaningful delay. I wasn't calling that particular move effective, just pointing out why it was an option the way it was. >This whole notion of them being our only ally is bs No, what's bullshit is morons lecturing me about how I'm less of a geopolitical genius when all I'm really announcing is that I understand basics like, hey, a tiny country's contribution to American fighting capability is much better represented through stuff like intelligence and technical contributions than it is whether or not they contributed boots on the ground to our misadventures. If you knew fuck all of what you were talking about, you'd know we explicitly asked them NOT to because it interferes with out ability to cooperate with other partners in the region filled with Islamic bigots. In the Gulf War, Iraq specifically launched Scuds at Israel for that purpose, and they listened to us when we told them to stand back. >they provide absolutely nothing beneficial for us You are ignorant of what benefits they provide. That's not the same thing.

Yea the 60s shit is still relevent when it was never acknowledged and still has effects on the region today. By the way, don't give me any of this "we're against nuclear proliferation" nonsense. If the US actually gave a shit about that we wouldn't have allowed Israel to build up a """secret""" stockpile of nukes without joinging the non-proliferation treaty. Also I'd much rather break bread with a shitty theocracy like Iran, which has actual shown incredibly restraint as of recent, than I would with a rogue settler state which can't stop getting itself into genocidal wars and actively sells our military secrets to China. I don't like mohammedans, but they are 1000x more moral and less discriminatory towards outsiders than your average steinberg shekelstein. Not to mention the fact that Israel is the perfect example of extortion using nukes, look no further than the Samson option. Like I said, you are a pseud because you think you know things when you can't even give one concrete example of what Israel provides us positively. >"They couldn't join us in the wars THEY caused! That would play right into the hands of the mudslimes!" Like you genuinely cannot be this retarded. As I said in the original post, anything that Israel provides us with intelligence, regional outposts, and weapons manufacturing can be much more easily provided by nations like South Korea and Turkey as well as regional alliances like the GCC and EU. Nothing about our "relationship" with Israel is mutual, it's parasitism at its most obvious. Of course you're gonna reply with more kvetching because that's all faithful goyim like you are good for, just try not to get a hernia.

Are you the same retarded zoomer that called me a pseud in the other thread? Now you've whipped it out for another anon who clearly has a more formal understanding of international relations than you do. Is this your first time reading long-form discussion in text on an internet forum or engaging with it? Be honest.

>>6900

Are you the same retarded zoomer that called me a pseud in the other thread? Now you've whipped it out for another anon who clearly has a more formal understanding of international relations than you do. Is this your first time reading long-form discussion in text on an internet forum or engaging with it? Be honest.

This is my thread, and the only one I've ever posted to on this site since I'm currently banned from the chans. If other random people are telling you that you're a dipshit then maybe you should stop being a schizo for a sec and self reflect a bit.

No one who engages in retarded hypothethicals like "the US would have to bomb Iran alone if we didn't have Israel" has a formal understanding of anything. The world you're running thought experiments on diverged from our timeline 60 years ago. Actually I think the guy who said that needs to be banned it genuinely makes me uncomfortable to encounter such drooling idiocy here. In other news Israel continues to kill children through starvation so the hour is too late to convince anyone who is not a compromised career politician that supporting them can be justified. Supporting Israel means supporting your own silencing, subjugation and moral bankruptcy at this point. See the hundreds of people arrested in the UK today for daring to protest.

>>6900

Are you the same retarded zoomer that called me a pseud in the other thread? Now you've whipped it out for another anon who clearly has a more formal understanding of international relations than you do. Is this your first time reading long-form discussion in text on an internet forum or engaging with it? Be honest.

No that was me, you ran away like a little bitch the moment I pointed out your lack of understanding in linguistics. Very interesting to see you supporting Israel.

>>6838

how do you define antisemitism in contemporary terms? as in anti-israel, anti-jews, anti-zionism? like which one is it? is it hitler stye antisemitism or some libtard coded pro-brown people idea?

pre/post-2016

>don't give me any of this I’m not giving you it. Even you can find this: “The United States is committed to upholding and strengthening the NPT while restoring U.S. leadership on arms control and nonproliferation.” NPT entered effect after Israel nuclearized, btw. Even the retard-in-chief is good on this: https://www.whitehouse.gov/articles/2025/06/president-trump-has-always-been-clear-iran-cannot-have-a-nuclear-weapon/ >I'd much rather break bread with a shitty theocracy like Iran Thankfully your values aren’t very aligned with the average American. >I don't like mohammedans, but they are 1000x more moral and less discriminatory towards outsiders than your average steinberg shekelstein. In fact, you seem like a bad person. I generally don’t like to argue that way but in this case it’s blatant enough to be worth calling to attention. >you can't even give one concrete example I gave you one already, unprompted. There are plenty of others, from Arrow to Stuxnet to Operation Opera to Operation Outside the Box, but it’s moot. It’s glaringly obvious that we get something from the relationship and no one reasonable would attempt to claim otherwise. It doesn’t matter what I say, you’re not honestly looking to be satisfied. It’s just stubborn rhetorical denial. >much more easily provided by nations like South Korea Actually, when you include USFK with aid to South Korea, it’s actually almost exactly the same cost as the aid we give to Israel. Maybe a bit more. I believe Japan is similar and Germany the outlier where the investment paid out best. You know know what the difference is in cost for us? America incurs the geopolitical risk of being there and puts the lives of its own people on the line. We don’t do that for Israel, though idiots are constantly bleating that we’re about to without any basis. You know what the difference was in outcome? North Korea is nuclear. Iraq’s nuclear program? Israel bombed it. Syria’s? Israel bombed it. Iran’s? We just covered this. You have it entirely backwards. >Turkey Turkey is, like France, too well positioned geopolitically for the current moment to be a good ally. For various reasons, they have a relative ton of room to maneuver and largely don’t need to listen to us. Even if you were right about such a pivot, international relations are not fungible. It’s much more of a Lights Out puzzle you don’t seem to have the curiosity to grasp. >Actually I think the guy who said that needs to be banned it genuinely makes me uncomfortable This level of intellectual cowardice would make me seppuku.

modern antisemitism (anti-israeli, antizionistic) sentiment feels like social issue #345678. Idc about kikes, nor do I care about towelheads in gaza either. Feels like both races are antithetic to civilization in general, at least the liberal one which I subjectively prefer to live in

>we NEED Israel as an ally in the region because they're completely beholden to us >and because they stop other nations from going nuclear >why do we need to stop these nations from going nuclear? >because they oppose Israel and them having MAD would be catastrophic to (((our))) interests in the region! This is the logic of your average ziotard, like I said, if we actually gave a shit about preventing nuclear buildup we would've forced Israel to comply with literally any international nuclear regulations, but we don't. I also like how you called me a bad person because I said a couple mean words about God's chosen whereas you deny a genocide kek. Most people in the US would prefer we completely get the hell outta that region, which is way closer to my opinion than yours, not to mention how we are literally already alligned with a shitty theocracy in Saudi Arabia but that doesn't seem to matter since they're very passive towards Israel.

>>6296 Don't waste your keystrokes on this literal 15 year old, no amount of paragraphs will magically make him understand basic international relations. He has constructed his holographic view ex nihilo from internet memes

this website sucks, everybody's either antisemitic or a zionist

There is not one serious Israeli or Zionist in this whole website. No one has ever written one post in defense of Israel or what they are doing. Explaining why the US is allies with Israel and what the US gains from this allyship in the region is not defense of Zionism. It is plainly and clearly obvious that all the overly online idiots who wandered in from their usual hangouts care more about hating Jews than concern over Palestinian lives. Calling that out also isn't defending Zionism, it's just calling a spade a spade. Bad faith appeals to morality drag down genuine intellectual inquiry, and so deserve to be called out whenever possible. But again, the conversation keeps being dragged back to square one when these too young and too retarded people come in here and try to debate with the few adults left about how much politics they really surely do know. So we are back to writing and re-writing IR 101 for them in this pitiful attempt to squeeze juice from this forum. Sad, sad, sad.

Actually Im the the only real antisemite here, because I hate both Jews and Arabs

Do you hate Ethiopians though?

>>6957

Do you hate Ethiopians though?

Ive actually really liked every Ethiopian Ive ever met. I'm the worse anti-Semite in the world ☹️

>The most popular thread on the intellectual site is about Israel and Palestine Literally everybody came to the same conclusion about Israel, I thought you guys were supposed to be smart.

>>6959

>The most popular thread on the intellectual site is about Israel and Palestine Literally everybody came to the same conclusion about Israel, I thought you guys were supposed to be smart.

It's just one guy holding the hasbara fort vs everyone else

>>6683 Oh wow, look at those savings!!

>This is the logic No, you start with a premise of Israel bad and that algorithmically sautéed brain of yours keeps circling back to that when it has nothing to do with the underlying logic. America opposes Middle East nuclear proliferation because we oppose nuclear proliferation generally and of fanatical backwaters in particular. If you don't understand the reasons for that, I encourage you to go study on your own. We did in fact try the Iran-style nuclear inspector route on them under Kennedy. They caught us with our pants down and then deftly used novel strategic ambiguity while we had much bigger fish to fry. Nonproliferation is about prevention and minimization, not punishment. MAD is a doctrine for great powers that already have nukes, not a global strategy for peace and prosperity good for everyone and their uncle. Each additional nuclear power just makes the world a more fragile powder keg. I know some have this idea that America is this big bad empire and everything will be rainbows and sunshine if the world were more multipolar, but that’s delusional and gets history backwards. Also it’s not “genocide denial.” Tens of thousands have died in an avoidable, tragic war. Words have distinct meanings. Both are true. You just resort to maximalism the same way many jump to terms like murder or hate crime the moment they see a victim in a story is nonwhite. I don’t think you’re a bad person just because you use bad words. I think it because you’re both stubbornly ignorant and behaving inline with what >>6870

It's clear people aren't really concerned about Palestinians as human beings and are just using The Spectacle as an excuse to flex their hitherto tamed and underused bigotry muscle; you wouldn't open your own doors for them, would you?

called and I don’t care to toss out which is your more dominant paradigm. They’re right that I shouldn’t be bothering at all. Sadly even your poor arguments are better than: >I strongly dislike Jews, simple as >I am uncomfortable, ban them >Everyone is either one extreme or the other >Intellectualism is when I make no arguments but whip votes by pretending everyone agrees with me >It’s just a Russian bot, or whatever Sincerely, congrats on at least taking home the gold among these Special Olympics participants.

>>6976

>This is the logic No, you start with a premise of Israel bad and that algorithmically sautéed brain of yours keeps circling back to that when it has nothing to do with the underlying logic. America opposes Middle East nuclear proliferation because we oppose nuclear proliferation generally and of fanatical backwaters in particular. If you don't understand the reasons for that, I encourage you to go study on your own. We did in fact try the Iran-style nuclear inspector route on them under Kennedy. They caught us with our pants down and then deftly used novel strategic ambiguity while we had much bigger fish to fry. Nonproliferation is about prevention and minimization, not punishment. MAD is a doctrine for great powers that already have nukes, not a global strategy for peace and prosperity good for everyone and their uncle. Each additional nuclear power just makes the world a more fragile powder keg. I know some have this idea that America is this big bad empire and everything will be rainbows and sunshine if the world were more multipolar, but that’s delusional and gets history backwards. Also it’s not “genocide denial.” Tens of thousands have died in an avoidable, tragic war. Words have distinct meanings. Both are true. You just resort to maximalism the same way many jump to terms like murder or hate crime the moment they see a victim in a story is nonwhite. I don’t think you’re a bad person just because you use bad words. I think it because you’re both stubbornly ignorant and behaving inline with what >>6870 called and I don’t care to toss out which is your more dominant paradigm. They’re right that I shouldn’t be bothering at all. Sadly even your poor arguments are better than: >I strongly dislike Jews, simple as >I am uncomfortable, ban them >Everyone is either one extreme or the other >Intellectualism is when I make no arguments but whip votes by pretending everyone agrees with me >It’s just a Russian bot, or whatever Sincerely, congrats on at least taking home the gold among these Special Olympics participants.

How are you still struggling with the idea that middle eastern states seeking nuclear weapons is not a guarantee under a scenario where they do not live next to a state that is hostile and emboldened by the unconditional support they get from the most powerful country in the world? Can you please elaborate on the alt history you're engaging in to bring us all to the same page? At what point does it diverge from our reality?

Also for the record I'm Sabbatean so even regular jews are basically goys to me and I cannot be an antisemite by definition. In fact you're all antisemites for evoking my displeasure. Remember that Sabbateans are the true chosen ones (doubly chosen we like to call it) and unlike other jews have not miscegenated.

>>6977

>>6976 How are you still struggling with the idea that middle eastern states seeking nuclear weapons is not a guarantee under a scenario where they do not live next to a state that is hostile and emboldened by the unconditional support they get from the most powerful country in the world? Can you please elaborate on the alt history you're engaging in to bring us all to the same page? At what point does it diverge from our reality?

The only nuclear state next to North Korea was China. America's superpower capacity means every authoritarian country knows they could get their shit rocked at any moment and that would be true even if Israel had never existed. Likewise states in the Middle East have their own conflicts that have nothing to do with Israel. Some of them seek American patronage even though they hate Israel would again do that even if it didn't exist. Support for Israel is not unconditional. Are you capable of holding your absurd views for even a second without a buttress of hyperbole? >>6978

Also for the record I'm Sabbatean so even regular jews are basically goys to me and I cannot be an antisemite by definition. In fact you're all antisemites for evoking my displeasure. Remember that Sabbateans are the true chosen ones (doubly chosen we like to call it) and unlike other jews have not miscegenated.

Deranged to lie about.

There is literally nothing unique to the middle east in your comment. You cannot even predict that they would be authoritarian states. Does the 53 Iran coup still happen in your headcanon? What prevents Egypt from transitioning into a democracy without their military dictatorship being propped up by the US? Actually no you're right. I agree with you so much that I think the US needs an Israel next to every country to prevent nuclear proliferation. What if Philippines decides to develop nukes? What if Uruguay does? Clearly there needs to be hostile nuclear armed apartheid states next to each of these countries to help the US in their future conflicts with them.

I can't believe this bitch is literally denying the existence of causality to defend Israel Next up: it's a good thing 911 happened because the US was gonna invade Iraq anyway. I saw it while examining alternate timelines like Dr Strange

Fella, it's your alternate history fever dream, not mine: >middle eastern states seeking nuclear weapons is not a guarantee under a scenario where

Your entire argument is that even without Israel the timelines would converge and the US would have to bomb Iran, so in fact Israel is a very useful ally and totally not stirring up these conflict in the first place. I am just calling you out because you think this sort of fantasizing constitutes a formal understanding of international relations. Reflect on the fact that this is what you see fit to argue during a genocide.

It's your fantasizing. You appear to have cooked this into something it's not where I'm changing the variable of whether Israel exists in 1948 and imagining some alternate history, but that's just in your head. The point I made can be rendered: What if America wanted to strike Iran's nuclear sites, but Israel didn't want to help for literally any reason? The answer being that we don’t have the political will for the large scale DEAD deed Israel did for us, just our little MOP up stunt. This was not “my entire argument” but rather the first example that came to mind of Israel benefiting us, in response to your silliness that they offer none. I mentioned others, but again, I don’t think any of this matters because you have this maximalist bent where you’d rather pursue a thoroughly confused idea of what I’m saying rather than concede an inch on your hyperbolic claims. Similarly, regardless of whether anything I said constitutes a formal understanding of IR, I sure as hell never claimed it did. Someone else called this tendency out way back at >>6878

>It's clear people aren't really concerned about Palestinians as human beings >If the humanitarian aspect isn't appealing to you then whatever Stop skimming and arguing with the archetype you have in your head. Read the words on the screen fuck damn it!

: >Stop skimming and arguing with the archetype you have in your head. Read the words on the screen fuck damn it! I have to agree with their assessment. I won’t be reflecting on rhetorical bullshit, thanks, but I am sanguine about the reality of war.

>What if America wanted to strike Iran's nuclear sites, but Israel didn't want to help for literally any reason? And pray tell how the fuck that situation arises in a manner that simultaneously causes no political will for such an action. The US barely did the strikes even with Israel inciting the war, goading the US into it, and blackmailing the president with Epstein tapes for all we know. And you imagine them happening without any of these because the US wants to prevent nuclear proliferation? Even in that situation the reason for the conflict would be traced back to Israel due to them being a hostile nuclear armed state being the whole reason why Iran is resolute on developing nukes. This is why your examples diverge from reality. You consider US actions in the middle east in a void, regardless of any cause and effect. Any benefit of Israel as an ally would have to arise from a situation that does not directly stem from them being an ally to avoid circular logic. But when you take Israel being a US ally out of the causal chain of US actions in the middle east you run the clock back so far that it becomes impossible to extrapolate any conclusions.

>>7093

>What if America wanted to strike Iran's nuclear sites, but Israel didn't want to help for literally any reason? And pray tell how the fuck that situation arises in a manner that simultaneously causes no political will for such an action. The US barely did the strikes even with Israel inciting the war, goading the US into it, and blackmailing the president with Epstein tapes for all we know. And you imagine them happening without any of these because the US wants to prevent nuclear proliferation? Even in that situation the reason for the conflict would be traced back to Israel due to them being a hostile nuclear armed state being the whole reason why Iran is resolute on developing nukes. This is why your examples diverge from reality. You consider US actions in the middle east in a void, regardless of any cause and effect. Any benefit of Israel as an ally would have to arise from a situation that does not directly stem from them being an ally to avoid circular logic. But when you take Israel being a US ally out of the causal chain of US actions in the middle east you run the clock back so far that it becomes impossible to extrapolate any conclusions.

How would you feel about counterfactuals if you hadn't eaten breakfast?

Ask that to the people doing/supporting the starving