• WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    I too am intrigued why tankies would support islamic fundamentalists murdering leftist french journalists… Doesn’t add up… My only guess (beyond the general mental illness tankies display) is that French colonialism fucked up cultures around the world for centuries — across south America, Africa, and Asia — and they still hold political and military control over a few of them… But why cheer islamic terrorism? Why cheer the murder of leftist journos?

    This sub should require links to the offending thread, so users can view in context. Otherwise this could’ve been posted anywhere. I’d expect this screenshot from the likes of Truth Social.

    • goat@sh.itjust.worksOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Tankies are very simple things. They operate by US bad

      If something, like jihadists, says the US is bad, then the Tankies will support them.

      until…

      BWARK 🔪🐔

      This sub should require links to the offending thread, so users can view in context. Otherwise this could’ve been posted anywhere. I’d expect this screenshot from the likes of Truth Social.

      I also am not allowed to link to the content. I also don’t link to it because then they can edit or change the content.

      • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I was going to reply but yeah you said it

        Gradbears would see a group of Taliban gangraping a 6 year old and say it’s all on US voters for not breaking the status quo

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 month ago

      They’re leftists but not the right kind of leftists. That makes them deserving of being murdered in the tankies’ eyes.

    • archomrade [he/him]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 month ago

      They are reacting to this comic from ‘Liberation’ newspaper last year about the genocide in Gaza during Ramadan:

      The woman in a hijab is slapping the hand of an emaciated Gazan chasing after a rat, presumably to catch and eat it, and saying “Not before sunset”

      • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 month ago

        Ha, that is funny though. Sad on those people saying the caartoonist should be murdered for it

        On a sidenote: after one year of fighting, most residents of Gaza now believe that the Holy Attack was not worth it. I think that this cartoon rightly mocks the idea of a ‘Holy War’, even if some of its victims never made that choice

        • archomrade [he/him]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          Funny that they’re mocking muslims for their faith while they starve during the Israeli-manufactured famine?

          • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 month ago

            This war/famine is a religious construct

            Israelis (in general) are no better or worse in this regard

            • archomrade [he/him]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              This conflict is as related to religion as a doughnut is related to the cultivation of sugar cane. Impossible to exist as it does without it, but could (and probably would) have arisen under different circumstances and with slight differences without it.

              Reducing this conflict into its religious factions conveniently ignores the cascading history and various material interests that allied imperial states have within the region. It also happens to be an easy way to ideologically frame the conflict about out-of-touch religious fanatics, even though it never would have happened at this scale or on this timeline without the vested contributions of secular liberal states.

              I hope you’re not one of those reactionary evangelists who believe the rapture will come once Israel is destroyed and are therefore aroused by the boundless death of innocent people.

              • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 month ago

                The ‘scale of this conflict’ is still very small if you compare it to, say, the Syrian, Yemeni or Sudanese civil wars.

                Of course you’re one of those reactionary evangelists who’ll claim none of these have anything to do with religion and the people in the region are just puppets waiting for the secularist liberals to pull their strings.

                Or maybe they’re just donuts

                • archomrade [he/him]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 month ago

                  Of course you’re one of those reactionary evangelists who’ll claim none of these have anything to do with religion and the people in the region are just puppets waiting for the secularist liberals to pull their strings.

                  Religion is only the rationalization of universal self-importance and a justification for unjustifiable violence, but the desire for violent domination is always rooted in an intense desire for material security and liberation.

                  compare it to, say, the Syrian, Yemeni or Sudanese civil wars

                  And yet they each were still ultimately fighting over the control of land, water, and the material production of their countries. The justification may have been couched in religious symbols and significance, but the outcome was still definitively material.


                  Edit:

                  I’ll also add - the existence of secularist liberal states investing in the conflict isn’t an attempt to frame it as an ‘evil secular proxy war’, it is to show that secularist liberals have reason to involve themselves even without a religious justification. It’s a counterexample to the assertion that this conflict is a religious one: if that were true then it leaves more than half the involved parties without any apparent rational to engage in the bloodshed.

                  • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    30 days ago

                    but the outcome was still definitively material

                    Yeah, because they wanted their religious group to hold control over the land, water and production