Because it isn’t everyone in Israel or the IDF, just like every Palestinian isn’t Hamas,

What? What is the IDF doing other than oppressing Palestinians? That’s literally their whole thing. Israel has sent hundreds of thousands of soldiers in Gaza whose whole purpose is to kill and displace Palestinians, not to mention their operations and enforcement of Apartheid in the West Bank. There is no way to be an innocent IDF soldier., because everything they do is evil.

Inciting violence leads to more innocent death, because everyone becomes a target.

Well there’s nothing can Palestinians can do to stop Israel except violence.

It’s never a good time when the government is accusing political enemies of being traitors. RIP America.

“Knife fight” you mean one side has a knife and the other has a rocket launcher and has made it clear they have no problem using it against unarmed people. Only one of these has the luxury of not fighting.

Do you want to see how easy it is to be against Israels actions, support Palestinian freedom, and not support Terrorists while inciting violence?

I mean, why would you not incite violence against violent genociders and occupiers? Also you meant Israelis. Israelites are the Biblical group.

Narrator: They did not, in fact, request anyone get along.

Fuck yeah!

Then everyone else should also talk to the province’s manager.

The flimsy excuse is that the war is over so Afghanistan is “safe” now. The real reason is of course racism and xenophobia.

These countries have to realize the long-term side effects here.

What long-term side effects? Will they affect the ruling class?

Israel’s current public-facing goal is to indefinitely occupy Gaza, and their real goal is genocide, so Hamas surrendering would simply mean fewer people lobbing IEDs at Israel while they murder and displace Gazans. Israeli ethnic cleansing created Hamas, not the other way around.

I’m pretty sure the vast majority of English speakers know about Hitler not getting into art school.

You might be small c conservative, but there’s no time period where you’d be capital C Conservative; those guys have always been defending and furthering at least one abhorrent system or institution. Monarchy, slavery, segregation, neoliberalism, you name it.

I don’t know about Bush, but the people who voted for Trump decidedly did not do well enough with Obama. Radical wealth redistribution is necessary to fix American society and Obama was not that.

This sort of nativism is a root of fascism. Your problem is government unwillingness to antagonize NIMBYs, not “floods” of Indians trying to live better lives. Also the reason politicians are hesitant to seriously cut migration is because first world economies are dependent on immigration to sustain population and economic growth; mess with it too much and suddenly you have a recession.

Removed by mod

I mean most of their immediate neighbors do hate them for the most part (Pakistan being a notable exception), and other than Russia and North Korea don’t really have allies, but they do have cordial relationships with quite a few countries. More importantly though, their non-flashy foreign policy also doesn’t make enemies. America’s escapades in the Middle East and South America have earned them worldwide scathing hatred China could never match.

And when it comes to Taiwan I’d say it is flashy.

There’s certainly a lot of saber rattling, but with very little action to back it up.

I have a script that turns this – into this — on my computer, but tbf I’m probably an AI so that tracks.

Not only would China fare even better, I suspect that it’d be much harder to say that America’s reputation is falling apart, because it’d be clear that most (or at least a good chunk) of the world hates America no matter who is in charge. I find it weird that articles like these try to paint a global narrative using data only from countries that were favored by past admins, and which would therefore be most likely to negatively react to Trump’s isolationist agenda.

Away from China’s what? China being basically an information blackhole and their foreign policy not being very flashy means there’s usually little to pay attention to in the first place.

Global views

In its latest survey of 24 countries,

Holy Eurocentrism batman.

So that would be the lower limit.

Why would it be the limit? Couldn’t you keep stuffing more and more energy and get a bigger black hole? Also would such a blackhole move at the speed of light?