A Political Thread pt. 2

[Al Bangor]

 

[McTallshort]

Single-sex toilets required for new buildings under proposals

Legislation is needed to address safety, privacy and dignity concerns, minister Kemi Badenoch says.

www.bbc.co.uk

Yay culture war bullshit. I love never been to a venue other pop up ones that used shared bathrooms.

Actually the pop venue was great everyone in queue was actually saying how much more safer it felt. (Obviously had our own cubicles)

Sod that have you seen the queue at ladies toilets?! It's my right as a man not to have to wait 15 minutes for pee. Shared toilets are a bad idea.

 

[Becca]

Sod that have you seen the queue at ladies toilets?! It's my right as a man not to have to wait 15 minutes for pee. Shared toilets are a bad idea.

Shared toilets are a bad idea, full stop.
As a woman, it certainly doesn't make me feel safer in an environment like that. But I'll stress, this is my opinion. Before someone jumps on me !

 

[ncurd]

Shared toilets are a bad idea, full stop.
As a woman, it certainly doesn't make me feel safer in an environment like that. But I'll stress, this is my opinion. Before someone jumps on me !

It's fair opinion, have you actually been in that situation? Not trying to jump on you just my wife had a similar opinion until she experienced it.

 

[Becca]

It's fair opinion, have you actually been in that situation? Not trying to jump on you just my wife had a similar opinion until she experienced it.

I have been in that situation, yes. I'm afraid I still feel single sex toilets are the best option for everyone.

 

[ncurd]

I have been in that situation, yes. I'm afraid I still feel single sex toilets are the best option for everyone.

That's fair personal experience far more important to these debates. Personally I've been in favour of unisex indivdual cubicles rather than group restrooms. But I also worry on that angle that everyone will truly be alone and that's the most likely scenario where something untoward will happen regardless of what gender the sign says.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Sounds like we could be getting closer to a ceasefire with Hamas willing to accept a proposal but kind of sounds like it's their own proposal and Isreal are in the process of examining it.

 

[Gavin]

Sounds like we could be getting closer to a ceasefire with Hamas willing to accept a proposal but kind of sounds like it's their own proposal and Isreal are in the process of examining it.

Israel rejected the deal Hamas accepted and are now heading into Rafa

From reports I think the deal was brokered by Egypt

 

[General Melchett]

Israel rejected the deal Hamas accepted and are now heading into Rafa

From reports I think the deal was brokered by Egypt

Not a big surprise. You can just tell that Netanyahu is itching to obliterate Rafah. I don't see how anyone can think that his primary concern is the release of the hostages. His only way of clinging onto power is to prolong the war.

 

[TRF_Olyy]

From reports I think the deal was brokered by Egypt

Yeah, sounds like Egypt/Qatar/USA was backing it
Israel claiming Hamas changed the terms of it after Israel agreed to it - Hamas now offering to return the corpses of some of the hostages as a show of good faith(??)


Say what you want about Mackelmore but this is hard, tbf


Isn't UNRWA the dodgy AF one, though?

 

[Reiser99]

Tbh at this point, whether or not Hamas would obliterate Israel is purely academic. There is only one side that is continuing to attack and kill large numbers of civilians and it ain't Hamas.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Tbh at this point, whether or not Hamas would obliterate Israel is purely academic. There is only one side that is continuing to attack and kill large numbers of civilians and it ain't Hamas.

You know killing civilians is allowed in war, right?

The genocide brigade don't quite seem to get that which is why they never mention the ratio of enemy to civilian death. Most importantly, though, is that intent is key and literally the most important thing when determining whether someone is committing genocide.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Yeah, sounds like Egypt/Qatar/USA was backing it
Israel claiming Hamas changed the terms of it after Israel agreed to it - Hamas now offering to return the corpses of some of the hostages as a show of good faith(??)


Say what you want about Mackelmore but this is hard, tbf


Isn't UNRWA the dodgy AF one, though?

**** rapper and a pretty **** video with surface level talking points.

Ending it with not voting Biden when he's running against Trump. Nice one dick head.

 

[die_mole]

It's gonna be an issue for Biden. Whole bunch of first time voters who should be democrats who might not show up cause of this.

 

[Welsh Exile]

It's gonna be an issue for Biden. Whole bunch of first time voters who should be democrats who might not show up cause of this.

Hopefully not too much of an issue for old "Genoicde Joe"

 

[Reiser99]

You know killing civilians is allowed in war, right?

The genocide brigade don't quite seem to get that which is why they never mention the ratio of enemy to civilian death. Most importantly, though, is that intent is key and literally the most important thing when determining whether someone is committing genocide.

Wow, using the 'it's legal' argument about people being killed. Even if I accept that argument, at what point is it too many? At the moment over 30,000 civilians have been killed by Israel. But hey ho, it's allowed.

 

[Welsh Exile]

Wow, using the 'it's legal' argument about people being killed. Even if I accept that argument, at what point is it too many? At the moment over 30,000 civilians have been killed by Israel. But hey ho, it's allowed.

It would totally depend on how many Hamas they've killed. If it turns out they've only killed 1000 then clearly that ratio would not be acceptable and you'd have to start investigations into how that happened. If it turns out they've killed 10 thousand Hamas then that's a pretty good ratio in terms of urban warfare as far as I understand it. I think even 5-1 is acceptable by international standards.

To even go into this conversation, though, you'd have to state whether you think they are genociding the Palestinians or whether you think they are engaged in urban warfare. If the latter then we can have a discussion about their conduct and whether it's acceptable but then we can at least leave the genocide talk alone.

 

[Reiser99]

It would totally depend on how many Hamas they've killed. If it turns out they've only killed 1000 then clearly that ratio would not be acceptable and you'd have to start investigations into how that happened. If it turns out they've killed 10 thousand Hamas then that's a pretty good ratio in terms of urban warfare as far as I understand it. I think even 5-1 is acceptable by international standards.

To even go into this conversation, though, you'd have to state whether you think they are genociding the Palestinians or whether you think they are engaged in urban warfare. If the latter then we can have a discussion about their conduct and whether it's acceptable but then we can at least leave the genocide talk alone.

I'm sure putting a ratio on human life is the right way to go. I'm not actually talking about genocide now. I'm talking about how one side has blatantly superior military might and is killing far more people than the other. You continually ignore that Israel has the power here. In terms of military power Hamas are more like rebels than an opposing army. Netanyahu and many of the extremists around him want this war to continue regardless of the cost. 695 Israeli civilians were killed on October 7th. Even rounding up to 700 that's still a ratio of over 42 Palestinian civilians killed for every Israeli. I know we disagree here, but for me the ends do not justify the means here, not even close.

 

[Welsh Exile]

I'm sure putting a ratio on human life is the right way to go. I'm not actually talking about genocide now. I'm talking about how one side has blatantly superior military might and is killing far more people than the other. You continually ignore that Israel has the power here. In terms of military power Hamas are more like rebels than an opposing army. Netanyahu and many of the extremists around him want this war to continue regardless of the cost. 695 Israeli civilians were killed on October 7th. Even rounding up to 700 that's still a ratio of over 42 Palestinian civilians killed for every Israeli. I know we disagree here, but for me the ends do not justify the means here, not even close.

I'm just pushing back against the genocide claims/implication.

I think it's fine to have the view that the ends don't justify the means, it's a view that could prove to be right over time, but I also think it's fine to say that, looking at other urban conflicts and international military standards in said conflicts, Isreal seems to be keeping in line with regards to civilian death toll but, again, we won't know until we get some proper numbers on Hamas fighter death toll (I've seen Hamas confirm 6 thousand and IDF say as much as 14 thousand)

I'm not ignoring Isreal having more power, it's undeniable I just don't really see the relevance in that point but maybe you could elaborate on why that matters so much. After all, Wars are rarely even and there will inevitably be some power imbalance, to varying degrees, in any conflict.

 

[Becca]

Can we really trust either side to give accurate figures on any deaths ?