2023 Israel-Palestine Armed Conflict

Interesting take from a Lebanese Christian.
IMG_0760.jpegIMG_0761.jpegIMG_0762.jpeg
 
  • Feels
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Broken Cuddles, On a Journey and 139 others
Pentex said:
Progs have well-documented ideations and fantasies of terrorizing/slaughtering their political opponents. They are also total cowards who would knowingly or willingly hazard their own precious skins to do so if there were any genuine risk of their victims retaliating. So, being that they are almost entirely overeducated failed elites, they try to rile up and justify the underclasses/lumpenproletariat to do their violence for them against the 'class enemy.'

To paraphrase David Hilliard of the Black Panther Party when former head of the Students for a Democratic Society and Mao-fanboy Tom Hayden said that the Panthers should shoot down a police helicopter while the white libs sat safely back at a distance, it was just another instance of Hayden trying to "get a nigger to pull the trigger."

Eventually, the Progs will successfully indoctrinate/propagandize their ideal band of barely sentient niggers to fight a Class/Race War on their behalf.
Click to expand...

They are trying.


jack.jpg

 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • DRINK!
Reactions: biozeminadae1, lurking for the deets, Johnny Salami and 23 others
Adding something like "i stand with Israel" to your profile, bio or sig around the net, especially places with large young or prog numbers.. it is a surefire way for endless entertainment.


Erasmus of Rotterdam said:
We are tolerant and we shall kill anyone who says otherwise
Click to expand...

The most peacefulist religion ever, that just can't catch a break, LITERALLY wherever they go or are!
 
  • Like
  • Feels
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Mion Sonozaki, Victory Leo and 8 others
MMS-China said:
Would be helpful if the US could stop funding the radicals to use them as pawns in their international wars so you Americans never see coffins.

View attachment 5406252
Click to expand...

The enemy of my enemy line of logic is always a calculated risk when it involves helping them with more than moral or argumentative support. No doubt. But it doesn't make one responsible for them from then on. Like Iraq or ANY country that might have been friendly at one point but not at another. That is always the most retarded of takes/copes. "But you were their friend a few decades ago? OMG GOTCHA!!!"

Osama had money and influence regardless of US or western support. In fact that's why we got involved in the first place. Above argument applies especially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Ira the Weatherman, TheGuntinator and 6 others
pikachudidnothingwrong said:
The enemy of my enemy line of logic is always a calculated risk when it involves helping them with more than moral or argumentative support. No doubt. But it doesn't make one responsible for them from then on. Like Iraq or ANY country that might have been friendly at one point but not at another. That is always the most retarded of takes/copes. "But you were their friend a few decades ago? OMG GOTCHA!!!"

Osama had money and influence regardless of US or western support. In fact that's why we got involved in the first place. Above argument applies especially.
Click to expand...

US being a superpower is the only one who can really recruit murderous radicals internationally. No other country able to produce money out of thin air at a whim to do so. No other country has that level of logistics. There were numerous reports on ISIS being linked to the US Government after the Iraq war, their intention to use them against Syria. The CIA was probably quite upset with Donald Trump for getting in and demolishing most of ISIS.
 
  • Disagree
  • Dumb
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Jump, Rome's rightful successor and 10 others
SpergioLeonne said:
If you listen to her discussions where she explained her disdain for altruism, it’s because superficial altruism, or the demand that the citizenry engage in it, was the official excuse for the establishment of the Soviet Union.

She points out that there’s always a disguised motive. People don’t give anything for free, and you should know what they expect they’re buying.

You mind telling me where you got your quotes from?
Click to expand...
It was one google:

You don’t know my conception of self-interest. No one has the right to pursue his self-interest by law or by force, which is what you’re suggesting. You want to forbid immigration on the grounds that it lowers your standard of living — which isn’t true, though if it were true, you’d still have no right to close the borders. You’re not entitled to any “self-interest” that injures others, especially when you can’t prove that open immigration affects your self-interest. You can’t claim that anything others may do — for example, simply through competition — is against your self-interest. But above all, aren’t you dropping a personal context? How could I advocate restricting immigration when I wouldn’t be alive today if our borders had been closed? (Ayn Rand Answers: The Best of Her Q&A, edited by Robert Mayhew, p. 25.)
Click to expand...

jews gonna jew, kikes gonna kike

MMS-China said:
You've probably seen the screenshot of the SPLC or ADL youtube video, where the person zooms in on the background and you see a chart tracking population drop of Europeans in the US posted on the board behind him over the last 50 years. You can't really be more obvious than that.
Click to expand...
SPLC but yeah
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: sophanome, Fatniggo1488, RedditorsAreFags and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back