Wars should be consensual. If one side doesn’t want war then that should be that. If the other pursues the world should stop ‘em. Kinda like same principle as rape. Like sex is great. Rape not so much.

[–] Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

What Israel is doing isn't a war, it's a genocide. They aren't targeting militants, they're targeting civilians.

Even Hamas (the eeeevillll terrorists) have done more to minimize civilian casualties, something like 80% of the people they've killed were confirmed to be soldiers, the other 20% unconfirmed but fairly likely to have been combatants as well, or at a maximum accidental crossfire.

"But Israel said-" You don't think they miiight have been projecting a little when they said Hamas was out for civilian blood...?

[–] el_abuelo@lemmy.ml 4 points 11 months ago

Really? The 1500 people that Hamas killed in the attack were 80% soldiers? Or is that stat over the last few decades of conflict?

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

There isn't many times when either side wants the war. They usually want something else and the war is the result of one side doing something and the other stopping them.

Everyone wants peace, every war is fought for peace. It's just the type of peace that causes war.

Israel doesn't want war, they want all of the people in Gaza gone. Gaza doesn't want war, they want Israelis gone. Both have a preference for peace, just not a peace both sides will agree to.

Of course some defense companies and those that seek violence want war. But nations and most people don't. Wars never great.

[–] SiriusCybernetics@lemmy.ca 7 points 11 months ago (1 children)

I expect most Palestinians (i.e. not Hamas) would be happy with a one-state solution with equal rights for all regardless of religion or background. Even after all the history and injustice.

[–] ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world 2 points 11 months ago

When I said Gaza wants Israeli gone, it was probably an over simplification. They would probably be happy without the Israeli boot on their neck. If that's a one state or two state solution. Being recognised as citizens with rights is probably the desire of most Palestinians.

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Seriously?

What nation goes: "Hey neighbor, you wanna kill a bunch of each other's soldiers and use a bunch of resources and pollute the earth? Maybe we can also kill some innocent babies while bombing hospitals for funsies?"

Wars are usually fought because one nation (or group) wants what the other has. If a side could get exactly what they want, there wouldn't be a war over it.

Wars are about taking: land, people, resources, revenge.

There's nothing consensual about it

[–] SiriusCybernetics@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago (2 children)

That’s my point. My view is an international law about consent to war would be a good thing. Generally speaking, most countries deserve territorial sovereignty and shouldn’t have someone fucking around with them. I don’t think the “want what the other has” justifies wars. Corporations can do that well enough…

[–] rosymind@leminal.space 2 points 11 months ago

There are laws against breaking into people's houses, but it still happens. Just because someone proclaims something illegal doesn't mean it just stops happening. That's just not how the world works

[–] interolivary@beehaw.org 1 points 11 months ago

This idea just begs the question of how exactly do you think international law works

[–] TotallyHuman@lemmy.ca 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

This would indeed result in no more war, at all. I fail to see the problem. (Besides that it wouldn't work, of course -- but it's a nice fantasy.)