Current Events > Should Biden go to jail for his handling of Israel one day?

(+) Yeah! (+)

ssjevot posted...

Look at the fucking map. The shipyards were not targeted. Stop bringing that shit up like it was the target when it obviously fucking wasn't.

I'm an anti-nationalist. I completely oppose the Japanese right, who like you, dismiss the lives of Korean victims of the atomic bombs. You keep bringing up Japan forced them to work like that's some point in your favor. I brought up to begin with, because (I know this is hard for you to imagine) I'm not a nationalist for any county. I don't support or defend Japan, China, America, or any other country's war crimes. You make your identity revolve around defending America and assume everyone else must do the same.

I wish more Japanese war criminals were punished. I wish America hadn't let the worst of them go and covered up their crimes. I wish America also hadn't engaged in war crimes themselves. I don't defend any of them, regardless of who did them.

I'm noticing you only ever couch your opposition to this in terms where you All Lives Matter It and Both Sidesing while making shrieking accusations at anyone who deviates from thinking Jaan is amazing.
Jagus posted...

If the us didnt care u cant use that to justify the bombs. You can claim they led to a positive result in the end, but thats not the same as the us having positive intentions. And intentions do matter when evaluating if something was a war crime.

at no point did he say anything the Japanese did was justified.

Yeah, actually, the mass slaughter of many, MANY innocent people being something Japan wanted to continue with their fake surrender offers is a pretty important point and it's not something SSjevot will admit was even happening

Looking at the map, it seems like they dropped the Nagasaki bomb on schools, churches, and hospitals. That one is definitely a war crime.

LightSnake posted...

He likewise acts angrier that slave laborers were killed by American bombs without ever being interested in addressing (at all) why they were enslaved to begin with and seems real fucking keen to deflect blame over that.

ssjevot posted...

Also more Korean forced laborers were killed than Japanese soldiers (about 1/5 of deaths were Koreans, many forced laborers being made to work against their will)

Why are you such a blatant liar? Everyone can read for themselves that I brought up them being forced laborers from the fucking start. That was my fucking point. You don't care about the victims of Imperial Japan. You only care about using them to advance your agenda.

I completely oppose Imperial Japan. Their colonization, their war crimes, their forced labor, their forced prostitution, every single one of their crimes I oppose. And I oppose those alive today who try to deny or cover them up.

You however don't oppose US war crimes. As this topic makes obvious. You make excuses and deflect to other crimes. Just because you can't conceive of not defending a government like your life depends on it doesn't mean everyone else needs to.

LightSnake posted...

Yeah, actually, the mass slaughter of many, MANY innocent people being something Japan wanted to continue with their fake surrender offers is a pretty important point and it's not something SSjevot will admit was even happening

Why do you keep saying this? What do you think I am denying wasn't happening? We got another topic on here where I decry people pretending Japanese soldiers weren't committing war crimes that was linked already and you're like "he won't admit it was happening!". Seriously what the fuck are you talking about? What war crimes do you think I am not admitting were happening? This is like when people constantly say "why won't you condemn Hamas!" when you say you don't support them killing civilians either.

I oppose US war crimes.

Just actual war crimes. Like My Lai and the bombing of the Vietnamese Hamlets, the actions in Iraq, the coups in South America, etc. You keep saying "I oppose THIS!" but you always do it in such a way where you couch it as an All Lives matter equivalent as a way to actually avoid addressing the actual facts.

You also fly off the handle and pick fights in unrelated topics while trying to draw a moral equivalence that doesn't exist. So yeah, bye.

What is your reaction to seeing the map that shows the Nagasaki bomb was targeting schools, hospitals, and churches? Theyre very close to the epicenter.

Jagus posted...

What is your reaction to seeing the map that shows the Nagasaki bomb was targeting schools, hospitals, and churches? Theyre very close to the epicenter.

I mean, I would love to discuss this with you without veot foaming at the mouth and screaming a false moral equivalency, but I don't think this is now the topic for it

I dont see why not.

Jagus posted...

I dont see why not.

probably because hes making actual discussion very difficult.

I would not consider Hiroshima a war crime. Nagasaki is a greyer area and theres historical debate on it. Claiming it was just a civilian area and contributed nothing to the military is just false thiugh

ssjevot posted...

Hiroshima:
90,000166,000 killed
80,000156,000 civilians
10,000 soldiers
12 Allied prisoners of war
Nagasaki:
60,00080,000 killed
60,00080,000 civilians
150 soldiers
813 Allied prisoners of war

Nagasaki was literally dropping in a primarily residential neighborhood, not near the port, so bringing that up is nonsense. It did almost no damage to any military infrastructure in the port because it wasn't dropped near it (ground zero was a prison for the Korean and Chinese prisoners you like to pretend to care about). Also more Korean forced laborers were killed than Japanese soldiers (about 1/5 of deaths were Koreans, many forced laborers being made to work against their will). I know you love pretending to care about victims of Imperial Japan, so you might need to pretend to care about that too.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/f/f81c84a5.jpg

If you didn't lie constantly while defending US war crimes maybe people would take your claims more seriously.

worth noting Nagasaki was not the preferred target, I was supposed be Kokura which held an army arsenal. Just weather screwed it up and forced them to go to the 2nd target instead.

Hiroshima being picked as it was the least damaged from fire bombing is new info for me.

https://www.history.com/articles/nagasaki-atomic-bomb-drop-secondary-target

Is it really gray when Nagasaki wasnt originally the target and the epicenter was schools, churches, and hospitals? That one at least seems pretty clear to me. They didnt even target military infrastructure.

Biden is an 82 year old man with stage IV prostate cancer. He isn't going to jail.

Jagus posted...

Is it really gray when Nagasaki wasnt originally the target and the epicenter was schools, churches, and hospitals? That one at least seems pretty clear to me. They didnt even target military infrastructure.

it was primary a trade port, but at that point you are over enemy territory and its either drop it, or risk never getting another chance.

also economic targets are also valid if you are trying to end a war in my view. If they cant get resources, it both starves the people and the war machine. Its not preferred as military should be first picks, but war is about winning whatever your objective is, in this case, breaking the Japanese military spirit was the goal. And showing Russia we had the biggest bomb

texanfan27 posted...

it was primary a trade port, but at that point you are over enemy territory and its either drop it, or risk never getting another chance.

also economic targets are also valid if you are trying to end a war in my view. If they cant get resources, it both starves the people and the war machine. Its not preferred as military should be first picks, but war is about winning whatever your objective is, in this case, breaking the Japanese military spirit was the goal. And showing Russia we had the biggest bomb

you shoudnt drop a bomb on schools churches and hospitals and justify starving people Jesus Christ. Show Russia we have the biggest bomb? You sound psychopathic. Priorities man. They absolutely ahould never have dropped it.

youre the same as people who justify terrorist attacks on American civilians

Jagus posted...

you shoudnt drop a bomb on schools churches and hospitals and justify starving people Jesus Christ. Show Russia we have the biggest bomb? You sound psychopathic. Priorities man. They absolutely ahould never have dropped it.

youre the same as people who justify terrorist attacks on American civilians

The warhawks were literally ready to coup the Emperor to keep fighting.

LightSnake posted...

The warhawks were literally ready to coup the Emperor to keep fighting.

ok? Bombing schools churches and hospitals makes sense and is justified then? That doesnt help

LightSnake posted...

If it ended the genocide in Palestine, bombing Tel Aviv to force them to stop would have been justified.

I hope you realise you've just justified the 7 October 2023 attacks.

LightSnake posted...

There's also a misconception these were civilian targets when they weren't. Hiroshima was an army HQ and Nagasaki was a military port.

No, there was an army HQ in Hiroshima and a military port in Nagasaki, which is very fucking different.

LightSnake posted...

Yeah, THAT'S an interpretation.

No, it's the only possible meaning of what you said. No interpretation needed.

LightSnake posted...

I'm sorry, while they were waffling on their conditional surrender, the Imperial Japanese Army was massacring civilians on a daily basis and yeah, the US was NOT motivated by care for those people but it doesn't change the fact it was happening and Ssj either pretends it wasn't happening or deflects.

FFS, you're the one deflecting - every single time you deflect from the actual point by bringing up something that you keep pretending Ssjevot is saying or believes.

LightSnake posted...

probably because hes making actual discussion very difficult.

Oh my frigging god...

Acting like Japan was this helpless lamb begging to surrender and the US decided to sadistically target their civilians just to evil and ignoring literally all the context around this isn't doing this argument any favors.

Hiroshima was unequivocally a military target and army HQ and even after nuking it, the hawks still wanted to keep fighting. Anami at one point stated he wouldn't care if they had a hundred nukes and used them on Tokyo.

Yeah, it was horrific and killed and did horrible harm to a lot of innocent people. It also didn't happen in a vacuum

Whether Japan wanted to surrender or not, nuking fucking schools churches and hospitals is evil Jesus Christ.

we can debate Hiroshima at this point if you want but Nagasaki is clear cut evil

Bombing cities wasnt a war crime in WWII, all sides did it on the regular. Hiroshima and Nagasaki get a lot of attention for the fact that it was one bomb that did it apiece, but plenty of Japanese cities were obliterated almost as much, as much, or even more so over the course of the war through conventional and firebombing than they were. Hell, a single firebombing raid on Tokyo killed more people than either bombing. Plenty of Chinese, Soviet, German, British, etc. cities were heavily bombed to various extents as well, too.

Calling any of those war crimes is retroactively applying a war crime definition by modern standards or attempting to reintroduce a pre-war definition that had been flagrantly disregarded for years by 1945 by both the Allies and Axis.

Fixating on individual buildings as victims when the entire city/military facilities around the city were a target is missing the forest for the trees.

It doesn't count as a war crime until Canada does it anyways.

K181 posted...

Bombing cities wasnt a war crime in WWII, all sides did it on the regular. Hiroshima and Nagasaki get a lot of attention for the fact that it was one bomb that did it apiece, but plenty of Japanese cities were obliterated almost as much, as much, or even more so over the course of the war through conventional and firebombing than they were. Hell, a single firebombing raid on Tokyo killed more people than either bombing. Plenty of Chinese, Soviet, German, British, etc. cities were heavily bombed to various extents as well, too.

Calling any of those war crimes is retroactively applying a war crime definition by modern standards or attempting to reintroduce a pre-war definition that had been flagrantly disregarded for years by 1945 by both the Allies and Axis.

Fixating on individual buildings as victims when the entire city/military facilities around the city were a target is missing the forest for the trees.

Buddy it was evil and unjustified no matter what legal technicalities exist. Its only not considered a war crime cuz America won, thats it.

Jagus posted...

Buddy it was evil and unjustified no matter what legal technicalities exist.

Pal you're just describing war. I don't think anyone is arguing that war is a good thing.

K181 posted...

Bombing cities wasnt a war crime in WWII, all sides did it on the regular.

The second bit may be true. The first is not.

Jagus posted...

Buddy it was evil and unjustified no matter what legal technicalities exist. Its only not considered a war crime cuz America won, thats it.

If thats your opinion, then basically every commander of every major Air Force was evil and a war criminal.

K181 posted...

If thats your opinion, then basically every commander of every major Air Force was evil and a war criminal.

Sherman's march would also thus fall under war crimes

Jagus posted...

you shoudnt drop a bomb on schools churches and hospitals and justify starving people Jesus Christ. Show Russia we have the biggest bomb? You sound psychopathic. Priorities man. They absolutely ahould never have dropped it.

youre the same as people who justify terrorist attacks on American civilians

no, I justify ending a fight by what means are needed and not holding past actions to current standards. War isnt nice, its tragic and bloody. The best course is always to end it quickly in your favor so less have to die in the long run

also saying I would justify of terrorist attacks against America? That kind of stupid doesnt even justify a response

A_Good_Boy posted...

It doesn't count as a war crime until Canada does it anyways.

ok this got a good laugh from me

K181 posted...

If thats your opinion, then basically every commander of every major Air Force was evil and a war criminal.

If they intentionally targeted civilians as the primary objective, not as collateral, then absolutely yes. The epicenter wasnt a military target. Schools. Hospitals. Churches.

HighSeraph posted...

Pal you're just describing war. I don't think anyone is arguing that war is a good thing.

no Im describing terrorism

texanfan27 posted...

no, I justify ending a fight by what means are needed and not holding past actions to current standards. War isnt nice, its tragic and bloody. The best course is always to end it quickly in your favor so less have to die in the long run

also saying I would justify of terrorist attacks against America? That kind of stupid doesnt even justify a response

ok this got a good laugh from me

You justify terrorism when it suits your goals. You literally support terrorism. If Muslims bombed hospitals churches and schools youd lose your mind. Evil fanatic.

Jagus posted...

If they intentionally targeted civilians as the primary objective, not as collateral, then absolutely yes. The epicenter wasnt a military target. Schools. Hospitals. Churches.

no Im describing terrorism

LOL at the notion that a major war is distinguishable from terrorism writ large. In theory yes, but never in practice.

EPR-radar posted...

LOL at the notion that a major war is distinguishable from terrorism writ large. In theory yes, but never in practice.

There is a difference between collateral and targeting civilians on purpose. I hate war in general

Jagus posted...

You justify terrorism when it suits your goals. You literally support terrorism. If Muslims bombed hospitals churches and schools youd lose your mind. Evil fanatic.

i do not justify terrorism, but I understand war. Nagasaki was a valid target due to factories and a port. Hiroshima also had schools and hospitals that were affected, but you dont call them out.

it was a major loss of life that shouldnt happen, but at the end of the day, it was done, it wasnt a war crime at the time. Lets be thankful that none of those weapons or worse have been used since.

I realize this is harsh, but Imperial Japan was the country who started a genocidal war of conquest and were proclaiming they'd fight to the last. The US forced their surrender through brutal means, but the context is pretty important.

I also have to admit I'm not too broken up about the civilians who died when the allies bombed Berlin. And yes, they knew full well they'd kill civilians in those, too. As Germany had also started a genocidal war of extermination and conquest, they were undertaking ways to stop them. And yes, civilians were going to die in that.

LightSnake posted...

I realize this is harsh, but Imperial Japan was the country who started a genocidal war of conquest and were proclaiming they'd fight to the last. The US forced their surrender through brutal means, but the context is pretty important.

I also have to admit I'm not too broken up about the civilians who died when the allies bombed Berlin. And yes, they knew full well they'd kill civilians in those, too. As Germany had also started a genocidal war of extermination and conquest, they were undertaking ways to stop them. And yes, civilians were going to die in that.

Honestly the Soviet declaration of war had more impact than the nukes. Not to downplay them, but destroying a city was hardly a novel concept at this point. More people already died in Tokyo than Hiroshima or Nagasaki and they didn't really blink. Japan wanted an out to the war that was to their benefit and was hoping to broker that through the Soviets as a third party. When they declared war (on the same day as Nagasaki fwiw) that obviously closed that option.

I have to question if this logic also holds true for the fighting between Israel and Palestine.

reincarnator07 posted...

Honestly the Soviet declaration of war had more impact than the nukes. Not to downplay them, but destroying a city was hardly a novel concept at this point. More people already died in Tokyo than Hiroshima or Nagasaki and they didn't really blink. Japan wanted an out to the war that was to their benefit and was hoping to broker that through the Soviets as a third party. When they declared war (on the same day as Nagasaki fwiw) that obviously closed that option.

I have to question if this logic also holds true for the fighting between Israel and Palestine.

Israel is not equivalent to Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan. Not even close. I said earlier here I would favor treating them more like Serbia in the 1990s, tbh

Israel is pretty close to Nazi Germany these days, one of the closest cases we have seen since. You already said you support killing Israeli civilians in order to end the genocide so what's the point in acting like the country isn't evil.

LightSnake posted...

Also "lol you're the only one who brought up war crimes!!!" is such a ridiculous deflection. What do you think "Go to jail for his handling of" actually means? Of course that's a reference to war crimes and it's absolutely dishonest to pretend otherwise.

Bro with how you've been deflecting the conversation by continuing to pivot to "but ssj bad" you got no room to be talking about dishonesty lol

And it's not a deflection it's pointing out how you are completely misunderstanding the topic and unable to grasp that you're misunderstanding the topic.

The fact that you can't see how your attitude towards civilian killing, whether they are war crimes or not, makes you look like a weird contemptuous smug person is why everyone in this topic is so offput by you. You can hold the beliefs you have without being like this.

El_Dustino posted...

Israel is pretty close to Nazi Germany these days, one of the closest cases we have seen since. You already said you support killing Israeli civilians in order to end the genocide so what's the point in acting like the country isn't evil.

No, actually, it is pretty far off what Nazi Germany was. It is much more akin to Serbia in the 1990s. Anyone who says this simply does not understand what Nazi Germany was. Israel is a brutal ethnonationalist nation turning increasingly fascist and genocidal, but it is not engaging in anything close to what the Germans in Poland and Czechoslovakia or turning every facet of its economy and military into industrialized extermination.

Just for point of comparison? From 1939 to 1941, The Germans had invaded multiple nations, overthrown their governments, resettled them, and liquidated hundreds of thousands of civilians.

El_Dustino posted...

Bro with how you've been deflecting the conversation by continuing to pivot to "but ssj bad" you got no room to be talking about dishonesty lol
And it's not a deflection it's pointing out how you are completely misunderstanding the topic and unable to grasp that you're misunderstanding the topic.

The fact that you can't see how your attitude towards civilian killing, whether they are war crimes or not, makes you look like a weird contemptuous smug person is why everyone in this topic is so offput by you. You can hold the beliefs you have without being like this.

I have to say, Dustino, I don't really care how I come off to you. You're repeatedly one of the most uninformed people on this board and painfully ignorant and dishonest on almost every topic you try to engage with. You have absolutely no thoughts of your own beyond what you absorb from leftist social media and it really shows

LightSnake posted...

No, actually, it is pretty far off what Nazi Germany was. It is much more akin to Serbia in the 1990s. Anyone who says this simply does not understand what Nazi Germany was. Israel is a brutal ethnonationalist nation turning increasingly fascist and genocidal, but it is not engaging in anything close to what the Germans in Poland and Czechoslovakia or turning every facet of its economy and military into industrialized extermination.

Just for point of comparison? From 1939 to 1941, The Germans had invaded multiple nations, overthrown their governments, resettled them, and liquidated hundreds of thousands of civilians.

These distinctions do not matter as much as you think they do.

LightSnake posted...

I have to say, Dustino, I don't really care how I come off to you. You're repeatedly one of the most uninformed people on this board and painfully ignorant and dishonest on almost every topic you try to engage with. You have absolutely no thoughts of your own beyond what you absorb from leftist social media and it really shows

I will make no claims for my own ability to argue, but we have plenty of examples in this topic alone of you either being wrong or trying to misinterpret facts in a weaselly way. I'd rather be ignorant and get to learn than to spend any amount of time dying on the hill defending the slaughter of innocent people.

El_Dustino posted...

These distinctions do not matter as much as you think they do.

Yeah, actually they do. Like I just said, you have no independent thought but what you absorb from leftist social media. So when provided with actual facts, you're not equipped to make the argument. You just stutter out a "nuh uh!" because you don't actually know about the Nazis, what they did, or why they're bad. You just think "theyr'e bad. Israel is bad. Israel is the closest thing to being bad"!

Yeah, it wasn't Assad who gassed people to death, ran a war based on genocide, forced displacement, torture prisons, etc. on scales unmatched by Israel. It's not Russia, which is actively engaged in massive territorial expansions, ethnic cleansing, genocide, and war crimes also on scales Israel doesn't match. It's not Xi Jinping in China who has literally placed an ethnic minority in concentration camps to eradicate their culture. Leftist social media has spent literal decades covering for these groups and excusing them. It's not enough Israel is "bad," they must be the equivalent to the Nazis, who at the height of Ww2 were killing literally tens of thousands on a daily basis.

I will make no claims for my own ability to argue, but we have plenty of examples in this topic alone of you either being wrong or trying to misinterpret facts in a weaselly way. I'd rather be ignorant and get to learn than to spend any amount of time dying on the hill defending the slaughter of innocent people.

The real issue seems to be you lack the ability to comprehend, understand, or discuss facts. Like you babbling out about "lol you brought up war crimes" when the topic was literally about people being jailed for war crimes. I actually don't think you even understand that.

The bombing of Japan were in response to the Japanese government's actions and refusal to surrender. I have already the bombings were terrible and killed many civilians, but I have to say my concerns are more for the people being massacred en masse in the territories Japan had conquered. If that bothers you? I couldn't even begin to care less.

The topic isn't "Should Biden go to jail for the war crimes he committed" it's "Should Biden go to jail for his handling of Israel?" The reason for the lol war crimes, which I wasn't even the first to bring up I just commented on it, is because no one is in argument that what Biden did was legal. Everyone already knows, the topic is if people believe he should be held accountable regardless.

"But it's not a war crime" is all you have and it's not relevant to the topic, you're making a strawman out of the topic and attacking a point no one was making and you keep doing it after it has been pointed out which is either a sign of poor comprehension or being disingenuous.

El_Dustino posted...

The topic isn't "Should Biden go to jail for the war crimes he committed" it's "Should Biden go to jail for his handling of Israel?" The reason for the lol war crimes, which I wasn't even the first to bring up I just commented on it,

"It wasn't "Should he go to jail for war crimes! It was should he go to jail for this specific war crime!"

come on.

is because no one is in argument that what Biden did was legal. Everyone already knows, the topic is if people believe he should be held accountable regardless.

The thing I was initially discussing was Bill Clinton and Biden, as you know.And yes, the discussion of war crimes there is completely valid!

"But it's not a war crime" is all you have and it's not relevant to the topic, you're making a strawman out of the topic and attacking a point no one was making and you keep doing it after it has been pointed out which is either a sign of poor comprehension or being disingenuous.

"Why are you discussing war crimes when people are discussing jailing people for war crimes!"

I really can't tell if you're dishonest or just not following the conversation. And given how quickly you switch topics when you can't hold a conversation, it might be best for you to just stop this one

Once again, Japan was on the verge of surrender and the U.S. dropped the bombs mainly to intimidate the Soviet Union. It is ridiculous to argue it wasn't a war crime.

Beany posted...

Once again, Japan was on the verge of surrender and the U.S. dropped the bombs mainly to intimidate the Soviet Union. It is ridiculous to argue it wasn't a war crime.

Someone was saying the United States war crimes against Japanese civilians along with the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq created a situation. This situation displayed to countries like Israel and Russia certain things.

If this is how the worlds police act, it lowers the bar for everyone. It's like imperialism wrapped up with a pretty bow of spreading democracy and keeping the world safe from terrorists. Many people believed these lies.

I think there might be truth to this for these reasons. Russia repeatedly referred to national socialists in Ukraine which they labelled terrorists. They used this as a justification to invade after they watched the USA slaughter the middle east. We have little moral high ground at that point to confront them for their invasion of Ukraine after invading Iraq.

Same with Israel. Hamas are indeed terrorists and the message was sent out immediately. Some of us have probably heard the narrative how October 7th terror atrocity committed against Israel was like their 9/11. Israeli hard-line supporters bring this up often and they use our invasions to justify the way they treat Gaza. Furthermore if Americans speak up, some of then will endlessly bring up our war crimes previously mentioned. "Oh you fire bombed Japanese civs so shut the fuck up". I've seen these things said many times, even by famous mouthpieces.

I don't say this to just blame and shit on the USA but honestly if you look at it logically, and from a non American pov, both of these countries mimicked our behavior and used our actions to justify their bad deeds.

Trump and Netanyahu first, but yes.

LightSnake posted...

Israel is not equivalent to Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan. Not even close. I said earlier here I would favor treating them more like Serbia in the 1990s, tbh

In terms of scale? You're absolutely right.

In terms of "started a genocidal war of extermination and conquest"? I mean they're not building death camps or carrying out experiments on the people of Palestine, they're just bombing and shooting them. I feel that's little solace to the people being killed though.

LightSnake posted...

And given how quickly you switch topics when you can't hold a conversation, it might be best for you to just stop this one

There is a lot I could say but this conversation has grown more contentious than I'd like, and I take some blame for that coming in snarky as well.

I'll end that my overall point is I think it is very callus to defend attacks on civilians as a war tactic while not condemning the slaughter of the civilians at all. I think being more bothered by the idea of people calling Obama a war criminal than innocent people being killed is not a good look when you could easily make your same points without resorting to that.

reincarnator07 posted...

In terms of scale? You're absolutely right.

In terms of "started a genocidal war of extermination and conquest"? I mean they're not building death camps or carrying out experiments on the people of Palestine, they're just bombing and shooting them. I feel that's little solace to the people being killed though.

I'm saying Israel is bad and genocidal, but it's not like what the Nazis were doing. Yes, it's of very little solace to the victims, but Israel is also pulling back after this ceasefire agreement. The Nazis' goal was conquering all of Europe and vast swaths of Asia with a worldwide influence and the eradication of every Jew on earth and resettlement of territories with Germans

Beany posted...

Once again, Japan was on the verge of surrender and the U.S. dropped the bombs mainly to intimidate the Soviet Union. It is ridiculous to argue it wasn't a war crime.

This is, again, not true and obscures key details

LightSnake posted...

but Israel is also pulling back after this ceasefire agreement

You willing to bet money on that?

https://polymarket.com/event/israel-withdraws-from-gaza-in-2025?tid=1761139918553