This has been going on for decades. There are thriving palistinian communities in California, New York, several other US states and in various countries. It just seems that there are a lot of folks living good lives abroad. My question is, considering that this kind of horrific behavior by Israel was inevitable based on their hideous previous behavior, why haven’t they all left before now?
They’re poor people without the resources necessary for international resettlement. Now you have politicians demonizing Palestinian civilians as all terrorists. Some have even proposed deporting Palestinians BACK to Gaza.
Zionists had resources and western political support, so they took the land instead of settling somewhere they were welcome.
Palestinian civilians have no resources, so their land has been stolen.
There are literally twice as many Palestinians living abroad in Europe and the rest of the world than live in isreal. It’s a tightly knit community even so. People that stay there are making this choice for other reasons than that they can’t travel.
I’m not sure it helps to say this.
But something motivated the two million Palestinians who have left to leave.
Sorry but you make it sound like it’s easy to just get up and leave. If that was the case, all the people I know back in my 3rd world home country would’ve left already. Just because there are communities around the world, it doesn’t mean it’s easy to get there, especially with how strict immigration is nowadays. Not to mention these are people coming from the middle east, in a region where countries are wary of accepting people from.
Emigrating isn’t free. People are reluctant to leave their families, friends, and jobs behind. Foreign governments aren’t exactly rolling out the red carpet for Palestinian immigrants, especially low income families with zero connections in the destination country.
On top of all that, human beings are really good at denial and thinking “it won’t happen to me.”
How nicely you avoided the fact that Israel was in fact attacked. It didn’t try to conquer the other countries. On a contrary, other countries aimed to eliminate Israel. Some of them are still trying and you’re actively helping them.
The injustices constantly change, along with the victims and perpetrators, depending on how far back in history you look. No party is a clear hero or villain. What Hamas has done is inexcusable, but killing more civilians is not the answer.
According to the IDF they made 15000 strikes on Gaza strip in the last month. Even if you take clearly made up number of victims from Hamas, you’ll see the efficiency of those strikes, and how Israel is trying to avoid civilian casualties.
Where people could leave any time they wanted, and many Palestinians worked in Israel. Not a very good prison.
Their response is disproportionate, and it seems their goal is genocide and complete control of the land.
Israel doesn’t want Gaza. They literally left it in 2005 precisely because they didn’t want anything to do with it. But while Hamas exists, there will never be peace. Tbh, there will never be peace there anyway. It’s the Middle East. War is the only thing they know.
I don’t know if the Air & Space Museum has an online gift shop, but they have stuff for all ages. Even if you’re not close to the ones in DC, they have storage hangars all over that they open to the public. Keep an eye out for that.
Has the child flown on a commercial airline, yet? My son loved having a Southwest branded toy airplane - realistic looking one - after he had flown on that carrier. It let him relive his flight and expand on it in his imagination.
I’m monogamous myself, but personally know two different polyamorous relationships. 1 is pretty damn good, and the other is rife with drama. Besides that, I tangentially know of others, and all of those are rough, though since I’m hearing of these from mutual friends and acquaintances, I could just be getting the juicy drama and none of the good parts. Could very well be that my info on those are bad
It does seem to mirror the general expectation, though, that most are unstable, and I wouldn’t call it surprising. Relationships are complicated, and anything that has more moving parts is going to be more complicated. I’m not trying to suggest here that monogamy is the way to go by any means–different people have different wants and needs, and some people are just good for polyamory. I just think that a working arrangement like this is tough to pull off
Besides, this gets asked a lot about polyamorous relationships, but there are so many fucked heteronormative relationships, and you never see the argument that monogamy is wrong, so yeah. Just whatever makes you happy
True although I think most relationships are unstable and have drama particularly when young, which is why people can move through so many. Most people have multiple relationships in their lives until they find someone that works (or keep going). That's seen as normal.
I think there is a bias when people look at poly relationships as they seem novel and if they fail it's easy to say it was because it was poly. But if a 2 partner relationship fails it's "normal" and we accept all the reasons like "I didntnlove them anymore" or "we grew apart" etc.
There’s also the fact that in polyamory ending is not necessarily a failure for a relationship. Monogamy has an expectation of forever or certain circumstances. But in polyamory it’s sometimes acknowledged that a casual relationship can end in everyone having gotten everything they wanted out of it and deciding to move on.
Yeah, I just think the poly relationship has more places where things can go wrong. In a monogamous one, you need to two people who like each other and are compatible. In a poly, even with only 3 people, you need A and B to be compatible, A and C, and C and B. Adding one extra person into the mix complicates the relationship 3-fold depending on the nature of those relationships. They don’t all have to be in a relationship with one another, but you’re still adding more avenues for drama and collapse in one relationship, not to mention how one relationship could impact the other. If A is having drama with C, the frustration of that failing connection could also impact their relationship with B. I think it’s easier to fail not by any sort of moral failing of polyamorous people, only that the nature of those relationships is inherently less stable through its myriad of moving parts
But there is for sure an element of bias, where heteronormativity gets a pass for being the standard
Yeah you can hold a bad traditional relationship together with duct tape and societal expectations indefinitely. You shouldn’t but there’s no kaboom or juicy details. Polyamory has more room for the failure to be catastrophic instead of a slow long decay to a couple snidely commenting on each other in a retirement home.
Most of the heteronormative relationships I’ve known of or experienced were rife with drama and problems, so I would assume poly relationships would be, too. Even if the rate is the same, you’ll be at least twice as likely to end up with a shitty relationship in a poly relationship (with at least one partner), right?
Doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with poly relationships, only that there’s plenty wrong with people.
Why not just go to sources that don't have a real leaning? OK, they are hard to find, but they still do exist. Try the BBC for an English-speaking source, or ARD and ZDF in German.
I noticed when I fly a lot of airlines include models of the plane you’re on in the in-flight purchase pamphlet. They’re pretty simple, probably fine for a kid - on the off chance you’re flying somewhere for the holidays.
The Honor Harrington series. Would have to be 3d animated IMHO- One major component of the books is humans have received lifespan extension treatments which greatly slows down human aging. So you would need a ton of 18 to 25 year-old actors who can pull off playing 50 and 100-year-old characters.
asklemmy
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.