Is it intentionally hostile on Apple’s part to bar androids from joining? Yes. But the reactions from Apple users aren’t entirely unjustified

The reaction from Apple users is to blame Android users - which is entirely unjustified.

But of course, post purchase rationalization and brand loyalty play a big part in why people want to externalize blame rather than questioning their own decision or blaming their favorite company for providing a shitty cross-platform messaging experience.

Because Israel always gets held to a different standard.

Now the question is: why is that?

Saying Fuck Gaza is like saying fuck Wyoming, so sure why not? We say fuck Texas, or fuck Florida all the time.

The West Bank is ruled by Fatah. Gaza is ruled by Hamas, partly because after Israel withdrew from Gaza, removed all Israeli settlers in Gaza, tore down illegal Israeli settlements and handed over other Israeli infrastructure to the Palestinians, Hamas got into power and never held elections again. Oh, and they also murdered Fatah members and instituted a de facto dictatorship.

So it makes sense to look at Gaza separately from the West Bank.

Saying fuck Palestine would be the equivalent to Saying fuck Israel.

Well, all right then: are you okay with people saying 'Fuck Palestine" if they just dislike Hamas?

Just because no one said that about America doesn’t mean this one isn’t genocide. Just because one nation got away with it in the past does not make this any less genocide than it is.

That’s right.

However, if incredibly different standards are being used depending on the nation in question, that certainly raises suspicions that people are not actually criticizing the act (a military intervention to combat a terrorist organization), but rather the nation itself.

If two countries can have the exact same experience (a terrorist attack that killed hundreds of its citizens), react to that in the exact same way (a military intervention determined to root out there terrorist organization at any cost, willingly accepting that thousands of civilians are being killed as “collateral damage”), but one gets accused of committing genocide while the other one gets celebrated (remember “Mission Accomplished” or the spontaneous celebrations when bin Laden was killed?), doesn’t that warrant the question why identical actions get treated so differently?

It took decades to build a strong case against genocide in Israel. It’s not a word people toss around lightly.

America occupied Iraq and Afghanistan for decades. Why wasn’t the same “strong case” never built against America? Why are people accusing Israel of genocide for killing thousands, but nobody has ever bothered accusing America of genocide for causing the deaths of hundreds of thousands?

You say that America is to powerful, that nobody could stand in it’s way - but that shouldn’t have stopped human rights organizations from saying that America is committing genocide, that shouldn’t have stopped the UN from accusing America of genocide, that shouldn’t have stopped people to demonstrate in the streets with Iraqi or Afghan flags demanding “free Afghanistan.”

Why did none of that happen?

Would you apply those same standards to Gaza?

Would you say you hate “Gaza” if you hated the government that rules it, but not the millions of Palestinians living there?

Would you say “fuck Gaza” if you had no issues with the majority of Palestinians?

Because to me, it just seems that people apply wildly different standards. People seem to explain “here is my standard” when talking about one side, and then they absolutely refuse to adhere to their own standard when talking about the other side.

They could also apply asymmetric warfare strictly against military targets, and guerilla movements in other conflicts have done exactly that.

Nobody forces Hamas to murder civilians. It’s something they’re doing out of their own volition.

I’m not defending the tactics used by the Israeli military.

At the same time, they’re using tactics that are pretty similar to the tactics used by the United States in Iraq and in Afghanistan - yet even back then, despite all the opposition took America’s military interventions, we didn’t see people around the world claim that America was committing genocide or that America was s terrorist state.

Yet those labels are constantly applied to Israel.

Why do you think there’s this difference?

And I never said that, either. I was asking whether or not somegeek was equating Israel with all Israelis, since they didn’t make a distinction (e.g. by saying “the state of Israel” or “the IDF” or “the Netanyahu administration”).

Seems fair in light of the broad statement made by somegeek.

I’m not the one justifying any mass murder.

Sure. Equating Israel with all Jews is just as wrong as equating the state of Israel with all those living within it.

Yeah, you’re right. If you put it like that, that totally justifies the cold blooded murder of 265 people.

Well, is the poster up there saying that all Israelis are terrorists?

Conversely, what would saying “Palestine is the terrorist of the human race imply?” That some Palestinians are terrorists? That many Palestinians are terrorists? That all Palestinians are terrorists?

There’s not one single person in the world who should own a thousand million dollars, never mind hundreds of thousands of millions of dollars.

The pure existence of billionaires is unethical and immoral - doesn’t matter whether they’re being stupid and fascist in public, or quietly pulling strings and bending society to their will in the background.

Instead of posting a rant about “short sighted leftists,” why don’t you explain precisely why it would be so horrible if users were able to install whatever operating system they wanted to install on the devices they’ve purchased with their own money?

“But it would be bad for my favorite trillion dollar corporation and for their bottom line!!!”

I’ll never understand consumers who insist to take the side of the corporation rather than the side of the customer on these issues.