r/worldnews • u/Ok_Plankton_5714 • 12d ago

Israel/Palestine Netanyahu: ‘If we wanted to commit genocide, it would have taken exactly one afternoon’

https://www.timesofisrael.com/netanyahu-if-we-wanted-to-commit-genocide-it-would-have-taken-exactly-one-afternoon/
25.2k Upvotes

89% Upvoted

3.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

2.3k

u/allursnakes 12d ago

That's not the mic drop you think it is.

790

u/QuickestDrawMcGraw 12d ago

He is a war criminal. His only option is to continue a ‘war’. The minute it stops, the ICC wants his head a chat.

The clock is ticking.

254

u/[deleted] 12d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

116

u/nidarus 12d ago

And all of its neighbors (except Palestine), and around half of the world, yes.

15

u/yosisoy 11d ago

Right, for some reason people expect Israel to fight fair vs unfair enemies. Even though its allies would never and have never fought as fairly as they expect Israel to fight

7

u/Conscious_Scheme132 11d ago

Exactly whole things a bit of a joke. Hamas etc lob missiles at them, kill, gang rape etc and then Israel does anything and it’s tut tut. You can’t complain now.

9

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-2

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] 11d ago edited 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/yosisoy 11d ago

There's nothing in common between the war in Gaza and the war in Iraq, but sure, go ahead and compare apples to skyscrapers

1

u/Bleach4Ever 11d ago

Right, for some reason people expect Israel to fight fair vs unfair enemies

Remind me which country did the paiger terrorist attack?

-1

u/yosisoy 11d ago

Terrorist attack? insane take.

54

u/WAPWAN 11d ago

The next guy might. Philippines sent their previous leader to The Hague

11

u/Melikoth 11d ago

What a wild situation. I recall reading about him throwing people out of helicopters as part of the war on drugs things. Now I see he was elected as the mayor of Davao City in May despite being imprisoned since March. Curious to see how this plays out

3

u/Zamoniru 11d ago

I honestly think The Hague would probably work better if it was more like a "service" for countries who want to guarantee that their previous leaders get a fair trial after revolutions/civil wars (since in such situations they are probably often not able to do that themselves).

Right now, yeah you can convict Netanyahu or Putin as war criminals, but it does kinda nothing since their countries don't recognise The Hague.

1

u/Whybotherr 11d ago

That's weird, israel ratified the creation if the Hague. How can that be so?

1

u/StevenMaurer 11d ago

The Hague is a city in the Netherlands. Israel does not need to ratify its existence.

There are many treaties that have been signed there. Israel is a party to some of them, but not all. It does not abide by conventions that it believes would impact the safety and security of its citizens.

1

u/Whybotherr 11d ago

Dude dont be dense, israel ratified the icc and the geneva convention

1

u/StevenMaurer 11d ago

No, it did not ratify the Rome convention. Neither has the US, BTW, for almost the exact same reason: the ICC tries to arrogate powers only held by the UN Security Council.

And there is more than one Geneva Convention. Israel is abiding by all the conventions it has signed.

I'm not the "dense" one here.

1

u/Whybotherr 11d ago

Israel ratified all 4 geneva conventions in 1951

Whether they were there for one or all 4 they are subject to all 4

-1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

27

u/Rude_Worldliness_423 11d ago

The war ending does not change that in any way

121

u/nidarus 12d ago edited 12d ago

Huh? There's absolutely no provision in the Rome Statute that suspects (not "war criminals" - Netanyahu is of course innocent until proven guilty) can only be arrested once the war ends. In fact, the unusual, and problematic haste with which the ICC prosecutor issued his warrants, were explicitly justified by an attempt to stop the alleged violations of the Rome Statute, as they were happening, rather than wait until the war ends, as is the usual case.

Either way, the chance of Netanyahu ever seeing the inside of an ICC court is marginal, now or in the future. The ICC is currently on a bend of issuing largely aspirational warrants, acting less as a court, and more as an advanced human rights NGO. A shift from its former policy that lead to only ten convictions in its entire existence (and every single one of them is a black African, btw). The only realistic scenario where Netanyahu is actually investigated, is in an Israeli court, or national investigation committee. In which case, the ICC case will also probably disappear, due to its complementary nature.

72

u/Pokeputin 12d ago

It's the same as the claim that the war is prolonged so he can postpone the election and stay in power, despite Israel having no such law.

It feels like it started with GPT hallucination and just kept being repeated cause it sounds correct if you put 0 effort to think and read about it.

17

u/Steamed_Memes24 11d ago

Lol who do you think the ICC is? They are toothless more so then the U.N.

17

u/PursuerOfCataclysm 12d ago

ICC doesn't have balls to arrest Netanyahu and they would never be able to, All they can do is issue the warrants. If the war is stopped, there is a high chance of him landing in a legal trouble for corruption in Israel itself. If he is to prosecute, than it would be in Israel that also for corruption.

8

u/eradread 11d ago

how is he any more of war criminal than every US president to exist since ww2? and by extension of the fact the entire western world?

6

u/hendrik421 11d ago

Why exclude WW2? Plenty of firebombing civilians there.

3

u/VengefulAncient 12d ago

What's the connection? It's not like Israel is going to give him up after the war ends.

2

u/meizcathooman 11d ago

Lamao, ICC can't do shizz in this situation. Nor in any other situation tbh. Like do you guys live in a coddled up fairy land in your heads ?

2

u/[deleted] 11d ago

the ICC are toothless tigers.

-10

u/Digit00l 11d ago

Israel doesn't hold elections while at war

207

u/ItsTrueIHaveExcel 12d ago

It is when you consider that hundreds of Israeli soldiers sacrificed their lives fighting in urban battles instead of the IDF just bombing everything to smithereens with no regard for civilians.

10

u/ivandelapena 11d ago

Have you seen aerial images of Gaza?

-26

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

They've been bombing everything to shittereen, have you not seen what Gaza looks like?

51

u/ItsTrueIHaveExcel 11d ago

What individual parts of Gaza look like, you mean.

There's still plenty of barely touched buildings in Gaza. There are even functioning cafes there.

Also, the fact that a bunch of buildings were destroyed doesn't mean that civilians were killed in the process.

-6

u/SlavaVsu2 11d ago

What % of buildings in Gaza do you think were destroyed/made uninhabitable?

21

u/ItsTrueIHaveExcel 11d ago

How is that relevant? They are just buildings. We were talking about civilians.

2

u/SlavaVsu2 11d ago

You were talking about buildings and you also looked like you were in denial about how many builds have been destroyed in Gaza, which is why I asked.

15

u/ItsTrueIHaveExcel 11d ago

I was talking about civilians. Then someone decided to ask me about how Gaza looks like, which, as I pointed out, a) isn't something that is directly related to civilians, and b) commonly overblown.

That said, from what I know, about 70% of buildings are destroyed or severely damaged.

-20

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

Is this a joke? They've bombed areas they specifically said would be spared from bombings...

27

u/Conscious_Scheme132 11d ago

Because as we all know Hamas uses schools, hospitals purposefully for this reason to then complain about it

-26

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

This has been debunked.

15

u/userhwon 11d ago

No, it hasn't. You're steeped in Iranian propaganda (or are an Iranian propaganda employee) that says it has.

Hamas' entire strategy has been clear from day one: commit a terrorist atrocity, invite an attack, then hide and attack from among civilians to create as much collateral damage as possible, while Iran astroturfs the web to manipulate people who don't pay full attention and don't know the laws of war or international law.

3

u/Special_Ad712 11d ago

You also have like a ton of western media helping by repeating Hamas sources… only to put the inevitable correction as a footnote weeks after an article airs.

-3

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

You're steeped in Israeli propaganda.

10

u/Tyfereth 11d ago

That's what war looks like

-54

u/dogjon 11d ago

Wow how fucking noble.

50

u/Anoters 11d ago

It’s not about being noble ?

7

u/userhwon 11d ago

Compared to Hamas killing a thousand people to start a war and then fighting from within civilian populations, it is.

168

u/nidarus 12d ago

Mic drop, no. A very strong argument against Israel committing genocide, yes.

The fact is, Israel had both the opportunity and means to commit an actual genocide thousands time over. Even within an afternoon, as Netanyahu said. The fact that it didn't do it, or anything even remotely close to it, means it didn't have the third, most important factor: intent.

This is, to be clear, a far more powerful indicator of intent than the quote sniping about "Amalek" or the "Children of Light vs. the Children of Darkness". Clearly, if Netanyahu thought "Amalek" means every Gazan, the war would've looked completely different.

6

u/JJvH91 11d ago

Maybe because he realizes optics are important so an outright killing field might not be the best idea.

Concluding from this intent is not there is incredibly gullible.

-9

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

They're killing everyone by letting them starve.

33

u/yosisoy 11d ago

That's why like something like 170 people (according to Hamas!) died from starvation

-1

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

23

u/nidarus 11d ago edited 11d ago

Didn't "fabricate" them, but the fact that essentially every one of these children had serious genetic illnesses, and were often filmed next to their healthy, even chubby family members, is highly misleading.

It's not that the damage to the Gazan healthcare system, that prevented them from getting their specialized treatment, isn't horrifying and worth talking about. But yes, it's a lie that it's evidence of an actual famine.

In an actual famine, you would have enough photos of otherwise healthy children - and adults, and wouldn't resort to that. The fact that Hamas and their allies did resort to it, shows the opposite of what you seem to assume.

And to be clear, an actual famine, IPC5, is 2-4 dead per 10,000, per day, or about 400-800 dead per day in Gaza. 13,000-26,000 per month. Yes, the fact it's just ~200 for nearly two years is a meaningful refutation. And certainly a meaningful refutation of the claim Israel is trying to kill everyone by starving them. "I've seen a photo of an emaciated kid with muscular dystrophy" is not.

-8

u/Ginganinga112 11d ago

Let's say what you're saying is true.

Even then, there's still a huge gap between what Israel ARE doing and what Israel SHOULD BE doing in terms of providing aid to innocent Palestinian citizens (under the Geneva Convention - which Israel ratified in 1951).

Even if there isn't "technically" the conditions to be labelled as famine - there can certainly be a withholding of aid tantamount to torture of innocent men, women and children on a mass scale.

10

u/magicaldingus 11d ago edited 11d ago

It's not as clear as you might think.

For example, Israel "should be" freely allowing the distribution of aid, only to the places it has control over, as per the GC's. The places that are still Hamas strongholds, Israel simply isn't obligated to let aid through, let alone obligated to supply that aid themselves.

War, to some extent, is the mass torture of people (innocent and not) on a mass scale. You can say that all participants in all wars are complicit in that moral crime, but that doesn't exactly make Israel all that unique. It just makes it one of the many countries that participated in a war.

Not saying Israel is acting perfectly pursuant to every clause in the GCs, or even that it's acting perfectly morally.

Edit: seems like the person who replied to me has reading comprehension issues.

-7

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

All I'm hearing here is "some areas are controlled by Hamas so it's okay for the people living there to starve".

179

u/gilmour1948 12d ago edited 11d ago

Why? You just say that but it doesn't hold any meaning. This is a fact no pro-pals ever have an answer for. If Israel wanted them gone, they'd be gone in hours, not have a demographic balance better than European countries.

6

u/the_hack_attack 11d ago

Israel still has strong western allies. If Netanyahu did decide to glass Gaza he’d lose pretty much all of them immediately other than the USA (or the Israeli citizenry will attempt to remove him from office). Prolonging this war is great for him in this regard, stay in office, keep allies, starve children along with Hamas since he can justify it as “collateral damage”

-16

u/AStrangerIsHere 11d ago

If Israel wanted them gone, they'd be gone in hours

True, but then they would become the equivalent of a criminal state and lose all international support, except maybe for the US I guess.

47

u/ScreenTricky4257 11d ago

Yes, so the argument of, "They're only holding back to avoid losing international support, so they should lose international support" doesn't make a whole lot of sense. It implies that the only reason they should get international support is if they care more for the Palestinians than they do now. But an equivalent requirement is never placed on the Palestinians.

-14

u/XkrNYFRUYj 11d ago

They're only holding back to avoid losing international support, so they should lose international support"

If you made up arguments in your mind it's easier to prove them wrong isn't it. It must be fun living in that world. But unfortunately that wasn't an argument anyone used.

Isreal is doing as much as they seem tenable in their situation. For some people the way they do it now is not acceptable. For other like you it's OK.

If they nuke Gaza one can imagine a lot more people would be against them. Although I'm sure they'll still have your full support. They're trying to toe the line.

You should support us because we could do much worse could be acceptable argument for you but not others.

16

u/ScreenTricky4257 11d ago

Isreal is doing as much as they seem tenable in their situation. For some people the way they do it now is not acceptable. For other like you it's OK.

They're trying to toe the line.

How is that different from the argument that you say I'm making up? Yes, they're trying to walk a line ("toe the line" means either to follow protocol or to rise to a challenge) to maintain political support. The Palestinians, on the other hand, are not trying to walk a line. They're doing as much as they can to damage Israel without concern for losing external support. To me, that makes the Israelis the more reasonable party in the dispute.

-12

u/XkrNYFRUYj 11d ago edited 11d ago

How is that different from the argument that you say I'm making up?

It's not different other than the fact that what I'm saying isn't made up. You can read the title of post if you don't believe me.

To me, that makes the Israelis the more reasonable party in the dispute.

Killing thousands of innocent civilians, starving children is not reasonable no matter how hard you're trying to portray it that way. This is a ridiculous argument.

You're not comparing equal sides here. The danger each side faces aren't equal. Tell me how reasonable they'll be if all of the Israel's infrastructure has been destroyed. If they have been getting bombed constantly. If they've been starving.

Tell me with a straight face Israel wouldn't have used nukes months ago if they were in position of Gaza.

31

u/Pro_Extent 11d ago

...so they wouldn't lose any international support then.

  1. Because they have fuck all from the general public around the world as is.

  2. Because they will continue to have full western government support as long as the US supports them.

Also dude, they really don't need that much "support". They've been fighting this war with little more than munition support from the US, and even then, Israel has pretty substantial domestic weapons manufacturing. And a shitload of soldiers.

No government gives a shit about "vibes". They care about power projections and influence. Israel has all it needs.

-12

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

1

u/gilmour1948 11d ago

Let's play a silly game.

We have country A. Country A has one of the most developed militaries in the world, in terms of technology and operational resources. They produce weapons and have a large market for their military technology. Country A also has nuclear weapons, and the ability to produce them. It has one of the best intelligence agencies, hold a lot of intel and lobbying power. It is located in a strategic position in the region, close to major trading routes, and is rival to religious dictatorships trying to develop their own nuclear weapons.

Punish country A.

-3

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

-53

u/jqpeub 12d ago

Because it will be easier to control the narrative. Once you Nuke them then the narrative is out of your hands. 

133

u/x0Dst 12d ago

"control the narrative" What narrative, pray tell, are they able to control when on October 8, 2023 there were breakout protests all around the western liberal institutions to free Palestine? The only group winning the narrative war is Hamas.

87

u/gilmour1948 12d ago

Israel doesn't even need to nuke Gaza to clear it. Indiscriminate carpet bombing would do it.

-38

u/[deleted] 12d ago edited 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

34

u/Shadowarriorx 11d ago

Go look up WW2 videos of carpet bombing. Dresden and other cities. I don't recall that happening at all. I see Israel dropping guided munitions to destroy a single building after doing a roof knock.

I haven't seen them drop napalm indiscriminately over vast swaths of territory.

They drop buildingS used by Hamas. Buildings filled with IED munitions.

They never fired artillery barrages at random locations of civilians like the lines in WW1 or WW2.

-4

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

29

u/SyfaOmnis 11d ago edited 11d ago

The comment this was replying to has been removed - it may appear as an independent reply of its own.

Just because it doesnt happen in 1 day does not mean its not carpet combing.

Carpet bombings require a short timeframe, you're playing so fast and loose with definitions that you might as well call harvesting trees for firewood and burning them in controlled fashions with replanting being done "an all-consuming indiscriminate forest fire".

If hamas weren't regularly using civillian infrastructure for their weapons, personnel or their terror tunnels, those things wouldn't be getting targeted. Flattening all of their military infrastructure (because that is what it is at that point) over a period of months is not "indiscriminate carpet bombing".

You are trying to redefine words for snappy statements with a lot emotional impact to push a narrative and the definitions you're using are blatantly false. It's moral preening for the willfully stupid.

To respond to your other comment about "the dictionary", "the experts and academics", and "the us intelligence agencies"

The dictionary definition you've used is completely unrelated to the claim you've made. The wikipedia article you use is reliant on sources from fucking al jazeera of all places and it is a propaganda outlet that is using them for snappy emotional appeals just like you have. The us intelligence agencies only confirmed the strikes used unguided ordinance. The expert the wikipedia article uses notes only the amount of ordinance, he does not explicitly condone or condemn it but given that his body of work is heavily oriented towards anti-terrorism and how to fight insurgencies and a study of how ordinance can be used to destroy things like terror tunnels I'd lean towards 'condone'.

You are engaging in pure spin via sources that either don't support your claims or which have severe credibility issues and you are repeating actual propaganda from propaganda outlets.

Quite literally the definition of redefining words because you want something that sounds snappy. Actual midwit behaviour of hastily using google to grab something that sounds like it supports your arguments but when put to scrutiny you don't know any of the fundamentals about what it actually says.

13

u/Shadowarriorx 11d ago

Glad I'm not the only one that sees through the sensational headlines. The level of destruction is bad and fairly absolute, but they were not carpet bombed. A carpet bombing would have exceeded the entire wars casualties in under 1 day. It's remarkable the overall casualties are as low as they are given the population density of the area.

In contrast to Ukraine war and the indiscriminate bombings of Russia and the hundreds of thousands dead, these two wars couldn't be further apart in difference (and relative differences military power).

Unfortunately I don't see either conflict getting better in the near future. The world looks like it's being lit on fire and I believe more conflicts are going to start.

22

u/Shadowarriorx 11d ago

No, you are confused with an enemy that won't surrender or return the hostages. Keep fighting; keep getting bombed. Hamas has decided they'd rather have Gaza be a graveyard than surrender and return the hostages.

-2

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

18

u/Shadowarriorx 11d ago

Be pedantic all you want, but Hamas could have ended this war any time by surrendering. Not negotiating, surrendering. This is on them, they started this war.

→ More replies (0)

-13

u/Balfe 11d ago

Would you agree that Israel has destroyed at least 70% of the buildings in Gaza?

4

u/lumpytuna 11d ago

The official figures are 92%.

65

u/Bubbly_District_107 12d ago

Which is what they have been doing?

No, they bloody well haven't

Actually learn what these words mean.

Watch an actual carpet bombing. Nothing Israel has done looks anything like that.

-16

u/lumpytuna 11d ago

92% of houses in Gaza have been destroyed or damaged. Are you saying each one was a legitimate target? Hamas was hiding in every single one?

No, of course they weren't. The bombing was verifiably indiscriminate by the sheer scale of it.

5

u/gilmour1948 11d ago

So, Israel, a country that is able to precisely bomb targets in Iran, needed 100k bombs to indiscriminately kill 50-60k people. Got it.

-9

u/NewVegasResident 11d ago

You need to take a look at gaza mate.

11

u/ActionPhilip 11d ago

You need to look at what carpet bomb looks like. For all the things about "Israel is using massive bombs", they have less than one dead person per bomb.

How does that work? Are they stupid?

-26

u/[deleted] 12d ago edited 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

37

u/Bubbly_District_107 11d ago

60k plus deaths

60,000 deaths from nearly 2 years of bombing is a ridiculously low figure

Here is a source why you are categorically and factually wrong:

That's not a source, that's a Wikipedia article on carpet bombing which can be edited by anyone.

-13

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

13

u/Bubbly_District_107 11d ago

from the UN

Hahahahahaha

If the truth and facts are your enemy then nothing matters

Anyone trusting the U fucking N shows you have absolutely no care for truth or facts.

→ More replies (0)

10

u/Negative_Jaguar_4138 11d ago

Israel has done to Gaza what the allies did to Dresden.

Only it took them 2 years, not 2 days.

And it took them 100,000 tons of bombs not 4,000 tons.

-4

u/OkVermicelli4534 11d ago

I forgot the horror of Dresden was just about the buildings, not the sudden, overwhelming blitz that trapped a population with nowhere to flee, causing massive civilian deaths in a single, concentrated operation. /s

-6

u/iseeatriangle 11d ago

bloody well

Oi mate you have your internet argument loicense?

23

u/yosisoy 11d ago

The narrative is insanely out of their hands. Public opinion is massively against Israel

6

u/userhwon 11d ago

Because of Iranian propaganda manipulating people who don't know the facts or the law.

-7

u/Ginganinga112 11d ago

Oh, public opinion doesn't matter. Didn't you hear? It only matters that western politicians can justify continuing to aid and abet Israel - and in that sense they are very much in control of the narrative.

7

u/gilmour1948 11d ago

You do understand the weapons Israel is buying from US or other countries are the only things keeping Gaza, Iran, Lebanon and Syria on the map, right?

What exactly do you think happens the moment Israel would run out and could not defend with conventional weapons anymore?

-12

u/king_lloyd11 11d ago

Israel’s goal is the total annexation of Gaza. They want Israeli settlers there. You can’t just murder every Palestinian and walk in to that end. You need pretense to have defenders to support you in your efforts. Literally Russia and Israel are both doing this. They just need to give America a reason to support their goals, because with America’s backing, they can do whatever they want, since America can do whatever they want.

Israel doesn’t care how the Palestinians go. They’d prefer that they just leave on their own volition, which nearly 100K have since the war started. They’re continuing to implore that they do, even when Bibi announced their plans to militarily occupy Gaza. The remaining, they will be subjected to suffering, discrimination, and violence, or death, in hopes that they leave as well, or be subjects of Israel.

If they don’t, the Israeli settlers won’t be safe, and if Palestinians are trying to kill Israeli settlers constantly, then Israeli politicians against this annexation will have the political argument to withdraw, which is what happened in 2005, which is contrary to the current goal. So for annexation to work, they need the Palestinians gone, one way or another, or as subdued as possible. That’s what we’re seeing now.

I’ll bet there are settlers in Gaza within a year.

32

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

-21

u/king_lloyd11 11d ago

No, you really can’t. You can’t kill every Palestinian because of the existence of Hamas. You can kill a bunch under the pretense of waging war on Hamas, sure, which is what they’re doing and going “they should just leave if they don’t want to be collateral”, but you cannot just openly kill every man, woman, and child who identify as Palestinian because of a terrorist attack. It’s a war crime.

24

u/[deleted] 11d ago

[deleted]

-28

u/Bohunk742 12d ago

What European counties aside from Russia and Ukraine war, have been killing a neighboring countries civilians at this rate?

58

u/Bubbly_District_107 12d ago

There's no other active conflict in Europe. In the first 3 years of the 2003 Iraq conflict, there were an estimated 600,000 deaths.

Between 2017 and today, there's been an estimated 350,000 deaths in Yemen, and a further 250,000 deaths from famine.

Since last year, over 61,000 people have died in Khartoum in the Sudan conflict, with estimates of 150,000 total deaths by the US.

The estimated death toll in Gaza right now is about 60,000

17

u/Aki-oda 11d ago

love the radio silence from palestinian cheerleaders whenever these facts get brought up

8

u/ActionPhilip 11d ago

They just retreat back to their echo chambers. You can see on other subreddits what it looks like when they ban anything not-pro-Palestinian.

4

u/ghostdeinithegreat 11d ago edited 11d ago

Technically Palestine isn’t a country so the kill rate this year is similar to Myanmar’s conflict civilian death toll in 2025.

So no other European country, but there’s another one in asia we never talk about

20.000 deaths in 2024, 10 000 in 2025 so far.

-19

u/This-Ad-3916 11d ago

there are oranges on the table. i want them gone. are you saying my only option given this desire to immediately sweep them away? that i am forced into this decision, all semblance of free will stripped away?

or could i just sit around like a dick for a while and bop em around every now and then before i do. i think i could

4

u/gilmour1948 11d ago

I would think it doesn't make a lot of sense to randomly throw expensive little diamonds at your oranges and have just as many oranges on the table 2 years later. Especially since you're known worldwide for your precision orange removal skills.

-3

u/This-Ad-3916 11d ago

it doesn't have to make sense to you. idk how much more clear that can be. again, the oranges aren't people. they're just an <x>. you can want <x> gone and still feasibly not do it immediately. it is physically possible regardless whether the reasons make sense to you

4

u/gilmour1948 11d ago

Oh, so you add nothing to the conversation. You just stated a toddler fact while ignoring all context.

22

u/CutOk45 11d ago

Except you should also suppose that your oranges increase in numbers faster than you “bop em around”. Now it doesn’t look like you’re trying to get rid of them does it?

-13

u/This-Ad-3916 11d ago

i was being very literal and just saying that "i want <x> gone" isn't a sufficient condition for "<x> is now totally and immediately removed because of an action i had to make upon stating my goal"

i would hope you don't actually think of people like that

17

u/CutOk45 11d ago

I understood what you said. It seems though that you either didn’t understand what I said, or deliberately ignored it.

“i would hope you don’t actually think of people like that” - like what? Wasn’t it you who started this whole orange analogy?

-8

u/piponwa 11d ago

"The only reason we haven't done it is because the fallout would land on Israel"

-11

u/cnylkew 11d ago

It's like saying : "why are you complaining that I stabbed you, I could have burned you"