If you only criticize civilian casualties when Palestine resists, then your concern isn't civilian casualties. Your concern is Palestine resisting massacre.
This meme is from 2004. History repeats itself.
You're viewing part of a thread.
I'm not parsing people parading around with corpses for their "resistance ✊" just because they would make a good "opressed good guy" in a movie
Is there a coherent argument here for me to respond to? If so, state it clearly and directly. Your movie analogy makes no sense.
I don't see how i can make my comments any more clear unless i draw little pictures on a piece of paper. You're not too sharp, are you?
I take it you don't understand what "directly" means. Not surprising.
Dude had a clear idea he was expressing. The world isn't a marvel movie, there are no good guys or bad guys, only subjective observations of two different people with different motivations. Depending on how you interpret the situation, you could come to the conclusion that retaliation was inevitable and not have empathy for the perpetrators. You can also hold the opinion that killing sucks, regardless of the circumstances despite this. Making this a good vs evil thing frames this entire complex situation as much more simple than it is, and could be a harmful lens to view the world with.
It is truly not clear that what OP is saying is the explanation you gave, so it was valid to question it.
In any case, "the situation is complex!" is not argument. You have to explain why the person's view is an over simplification. Declaring that an issue is complex is not enough. There are many complex issues where "X is evil" is still a valid view. Example: WW2 and Nazi Germany.