If you truly think Hamas is not as bad or worse than Israeli counter-actions, you should reflect on your own beliefs. In this conflict, the military wings of both sides ARE deplorable and deserve universal condemnation. Hamas’s goal is the eradication of Jews; any benefit to the Palestinians under their thumb is accidental at best. If you support Hamas, you support genocide. If you support the IDF’s actions, you support genocide. Full stop.
And what Hamas is trying to accomplish is also genocide - but this is all besides the point. The larger question is this: what would it take for you to believe even a fraction of what the Israeli military claims?
Can it be true that the IDF is indiscriminately killing Palestinian civilians as well as telling the truth?
Would you claim that Hamas is justified in their killing of civilians if the Israeli military also kills civilians?
Even further: what happens if all foreign governments stop sending aid to Israel and Lebanon/Hamas/etc. attack Israeli citizens with the intent of purging them? Would you suddenly support the IDF in it’s struggle to protect Israeli citizens from these groups who have already made it clear that their primary purpose is the genocide of the Jews in the Levant?
Regardless of anyone’s feelings on the IDF, it is incumbent on all of us to take the claims of Hamas and Israel with a massive grain of salt - you may not believe in the credibility of the IDF but you certainly cannot dismiss the engrained antisemitism of Hamas and others in the region and believe them at face value.
Which is more likely for underground tunnels that don’t hold many people and are kitted for permanent subterranean living:
At what point will people, who bend over backwards to defend a designated terrorist organization who exclusively target civilians, admit that the conflict is more complicated than “Israel bad” - when Hamas revives indiscriminate bus bombings of Israelis (or do they pine for the 90s/2000s again)? Netanhanyu needs to go, but Hamas doesn’t even try to distinguish between military targets and civilians - all Israelis are military targets (genocide). The victims in this conflict are Palestinian and Israeli civilians and this needs to not be forgotten in their haze of Israeli bloodlust.
Blood libel is anti-Semitic.
Just because you don’t understand these code phrases or dog whistles doesn’t mean anti-Semitism doesn’t exist.
So genocide is ok as long as enough time passes from the event? It’s such an obvious dog whistle when those opposed to the current genocide are magically unopposed to the genocide perpetrated against a certain group of people “before 1930”. It’s not ok to perform acts of genocide against the Palestinian civilians today nor is it ok for the historical Jewish populations to have had acts of genocide perpetrated against them.
Outspoken libertarians aren’t going to be bullied in college - outspoken anything in college generally leads to people ignoring you. College students that think they’re being bullied most likely attribute normal behavior to bullying - just like incels treat normal human interactions as impediments to getting laid.
In the English speaking world, it is a slur regardless of whether or not you use it as slang for a cigarette. Do you really believe that using a word is more important than making sure others don’t feel marginalized? Emotional intelligence is partly about empathy and using that to recognize harmful behavior. A sign of maturity and positive personal growth is realizing that your behavior causes others to feel unwelcome and correcting that behavior. It’s fortuitous that, in a thread about signs of poor education, we are having this discussion. Criticisms are learning experiences, not made with malice; malice is purposefully saying something harmful and celebrating it. Will your life truly be ruined by substituting that word so you don’t accidentally hurt someone?
If you knew saying that word could cause pain in others, why would you say it and further celebrate it? OP may not have meant their question this way, but your comment is how I identify people with poor emotional intelligence.
^ this right here
Biden did not “strike it down”, he halted all EOs not in effect so their administration can review them (see: the first paragraph of the linked article). Instead of re-issuing an EO, something that can be withdrawn on a whim (see: your post), Biden did the actual hard work of working with Congress to help pass the Inflation Reduction Act. The $35 cap is now backed by law rather than by diktat. Trump took the lazy path and issued the EO in the last days of his Presidency - a Presidency he spent quite a long time using to try and repeal the Affordable Care Act.
Try understanding the issue instead of spamming MAGA talking points.