• RavingGrob@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Troll? You haven’t answered either of my questions? Lmao. Not everything is black and white my guy.

      Again, I am legitimately curious what your opinions about this are.

      You can sling insults all you want. It doesn’t further your argument in any legitimate way.

        • RavingGrob@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          I am not disingenuous in asking them.

          I’m not even necessarily talking about the current situation here.

          I’m asking you, where your line in the sand is.

          If someone was in your home, threatening your life, or your loved one’s lives, and they absolutely were not empty threats, would violence to the point of killing be “justified”?

          For example, should the Ukrainians not defend their sovereignty, on their own soil, because killing at all is immoral?

          You came at this with a black and white statement, but there are nuances to the world that shape the decisions outside of a binary “they killed/didn’t kill”

        • Caveman@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          If one side kills 100 for each one of their own killed there’s a big difference. Other factors to consider is when your land is blocked off from the outside world by land, sea and air and being routinely invaded. The Geneva convention says there is a right to resist occupation on top of that which Israel did sign.

    • J92@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 day ago

      Jesus, those are some thoroughly piss-soaked chips you’ve got there, petal.

        • J92@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          Your ability to admit you don’t understand it is a big step. Now you just need to address your previous commenters in the same light, with the questions you’ve been asked and are too afraid to answer. We believe in you, champ.

            • J92@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              Ahhhh, I get it. No instances of me cheering at the death of others, so the other party has to fake the argument. Petty, and a pity.

              Come now, you’ve started discourse with others, you really ought to answer their questions.

                • J92@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  23 hours ago

                  Saying that killing is morally wrong, or saying that an individual is hateful, is a nothing sentence. It’s not an opening of discourse or planet brained insight. When asked a follow up, to elucidate, you assume the position of actors and extol your own virtue by putting down the rest.

                  It’s nout but antagonism for the purpose of whysoever a troll would do anything. Getting jollies off by calling high horse, or moral corruption.

                  You make playing in the shit look like fun, and then feign upset when others join you.