https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-49464546

US backed Israel bombing targets

@Death in June Exactly what it says is what I mean

Israel being an imperialist created state.

i mean every civilian death is avoidable no

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Revolution

No it's not

I wish it were all avoidable

The West overthrowing governments

i mean if you didn't declare war on the country then you wouldn't have killed any of those civilians

Dude, I'm not denying bad things weren't done by the west

I'm denying the numbers of tens of thousands that were slaughtered, which implies they were wrongfully killed

i think it just implies they were killed

No, slaughter is something else

The act of them being killed due to Western influence is unjust..

Objective language is casualty

That's just simple "death"

We have no right, duty or reason to be there

Other than for, imperialistic necessity / reasons

And society has agreed that Imperialism is unjust..

We actually do have a right, and a duty, and a reason to be there, which is not to say there aren't maybe better ways

And is wrongful.

Society as a whole disagrees.

well i certainly don't agree that imperialism is unjust

Sorry.

The majority of society disagrees

If you want to debate the question of whether these wars should be fought at all, ok fine that's something where we can maybe find common ground

Because I'm anti-war myself

but it irks me when people aren't willing to call a spade a spade

It's not slaughter when you kill a bunch of Taliban fighters who are holding civilians hostage

Again, my argument isn't just one point about "muh numbers"

That's my point basically

Yet you've said that it is.

That's fine Weez, but if you say something like this, you need to understand that people will attack your points

https://discordapp.com/channels/462008211378012160/613770471938195467/616624189780262923

You're not even doing a good job at attacking them

I'd be fine if you were..

And "tens of thousands slaughtered and still being slaughtered" is a huge allegation, you can't just drop such a bomb and not expect scrutinty

Which I've supported.

Very easily.

No you gave links that do not support this narrative

The numbers are way lower, unless you include simple war casualties outside of innocent civilians, or if you include those killed by opposing forces

Yet if you're able to do some simple addition..

Come on man, this is too easy.

Addition or not, the narrative is completely false

Yet it isn't and I've proved it isn't.

This is why I said I didn't think you were worth my time, because you reject objective numbers

I'm non-partisan about this shit, have always been

I want the truth, not a story

Yet you argue it when it's stated

Deny evidence when provided.

The numbers are wrong

We could half the numbers and they would still be in my favour...

Half would still be wrong

They would still meet the "tens of thousands"

Yet, you cannot support that.

The true numbers are very low

If you care about the "truth" then you should have the the 'actual numbers'

Which you do not.

That's not how it works bro

You may do for ONE war or conflict, but there's been a lot more than that.

"you don't know the exact numbers therefore you're wrong"

No, I only need to know that your numbers are completely overblown

You don't have any numbers..

etbrood why do you think the numbers are wrong

You're just complaining about my numbers being wrong yet providing none of your own

You'e basically just saying "no you're wrong, I'm right"

When I ask you to show me that

You can't.

@Death in June They are simply wrong, I don't need to think anything

"They are simply wrong"

Yet can't show us that.

I have shown that your numbers are wrong, but you're not willing to look at the evidence

And that's what I said earlier

You're not worth my time, I'm leaving

For one part of one conflict

I've linked more than that

And you're arguing they're "all" wrong

I'm done, you can keep spreading your narrative if you like, I won't stop you. I've said what needs to be said.

"I'm not mad, the world is"

Is virtually the same thing that you're saying

"I know the truth, everyone else is wrong"

Egotistical much?

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/566324895466913802/616629425219567627/image0.jpg

based poles

i can settle this

etbrood's numbers are better followed closely by weez

"the west overthrowing governments"

https://tenor.com/view/jewish-dancing-jews-gif-5354462

Why are they writing in English in foreign countries?

Because it's more universally understood around the world than any other language, probably. It's the lingua franca of commerce, science, technology, politics, etc. Many countries have dual language signs in their own language and English because there's a higher chance people wealthy enough to be tourists will also be educated enough to read and speak some English.

@Weez That video you linked Weez, was quite a good justification as to why the US should keep doing what it is doing

Which video?

US military bases

The ability for a single hegemony to project power across the world, whilist also not being able to sit at ease and become a mindless tyrant, means that rather than having dosens or more of regular wars between competing global powers, said single nation can keep open the lanes of trade allowing for much more prosperity and far less death for all nations involved.

Something the UN should be doing tbh

But I kinda agree with you

Yes they will reap the benefits, but that is the reward for such diligent behavior in ending a lot of conflict that would otherwise arise

Pah

The UN has no people