• 0 Posts
  • 68 Comments
Joined 8 months ago
cake
Cake day: March 20th, 2024

help-circle





  • You might well be right but I find it troublesome at best.

    I mean, the gestapo simply couldn’t have rounded up that many Jewish people without huge help from the local population, as the area they had to cover with such small numbers made that impossible.

    People knew that no one came back from the camps people were sent to or were even heard of again.

    People did put up real fights where they could. The problem was the collective punishment the nazis used really curtailed much of this. Also, people don’t ever think they’re going to die. We understand it in an abstract way but, in turn, the concept is too abstract for us to fully realise.

    Personally, I lean towards it being a far more uncomfortable truth. Although, i understand why others might not.





  • Child, you made up that a a hostile army had to be displaced when you said:

    Dumbo, the definition of occupation from the Hague Regulations of 1907, Title 42, makes specific reference to a “hostile army,” which would be displaced in the case of occupation.

    I then quoted the exact part of that regulation you lied about

    Art. 42. Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation applies only to the territory where such authority is established, and in a position to assert itself.

    As can be seen, there is no reference at all to a hostile army having to be displaced for it to be an occupation. So you lied.

    You’re talking shit and you have been the whole time. Its hilarious that you think being utterly proven wrong can be dismissed by claiming the person who’s outsmarted you at every step and proven you wrong is the stupid one here.

    If I’m stupid, I dread to think what that makes you.



  • Art. 42. Territory is considered occupied when it is actually placed under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation applies only to the territory where such authority is established, and in a position to assert itself.

    No wonder you didn’t quote it.

    You just can’t stop lying can you? Well, i hope its that you’re lying and you parents didn’t spend money on getting you “some education on (sic) international law at an accredited^^^^tm law school” only to get it so spectacularly wrong, while being so far up you’re own ass about it too.

    I hope it wasn’t the latter because that would be really embarrassing for you.


  • It made the point just fine and its only you who failed to understand it. Youre the problem here.

    You spoke about law and international law falls under “law.” You just don’t want to talk about the laws Israel are breaking, as it shows you to be full of shit when you talk about how bad it is that laws are being broken. Appartide is illegal too but you don’t care about that.

    No, you only care about the laws you feel will justify Israel illegally colonising yet more land they have no right to.

    Also, you just made up your own definition of “occupation” and then declared Israel to not being doing you own, personal definition of the word. The word actually means:

    the action, state, or period of occupying or being occupied by military force.

    ‘Not being able to handle independence’ (however its worded) is never an excuse or justification for illegally occupying or refusing to leave occupied land. It was like one of the first rulings on colonialism the UN ever made.

    From start to finish, all you gave was lies.