I think that would be awful. I also think equating a color revolution with the holocaust is fascist apologia.

Removed by mod

Well fuck nato lol

we need more soldiers soviets tbf tho

The history understander has logged on lol

How can ukraine even win? Like there is no venue left other than NATO troops… oh…

Removed by mod

The facts are there, it was the students lynching the soldiers. You can deflect from that all you want, it won’t change history.

Removed by mod

Yeah as they fucking lynched the soldiers

oh no not the evil forced labour in china

I say as I eat another delicious Kit Kat™ chocolate bar

Yet you support israeli terrorism…

Actually you can

https://wid.world/country/russian-federation/

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Gaza Strip (South Africa v. Israel)

Full text: Order of 26 January 2024

• Summary of the Order
• Press release 2024/6

Individual judge opinions

• Declaration of Judge Xue
• Dissenting opinion of Judge Sebutinde
• Declaration of Judge Bhandari
• Declaration of Judge Nolte
• Separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Barak

All the documents relating to this case are on its ICJ webpage

The full text of the operative clause of the Order reads as follows: “For these reasons, THE COURT , Indicates the following provisional measures:

(1) By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall, in accordance with its obligations under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, in relation to Palestinians in Gaza, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of this Convention, in particular:

(a) killing members of the group;

(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

© deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and

(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

[…]

(2) By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall ensure with immediate effect that its military does not commit any acts described in point 1 above;

[…]

(3) By sixteen votes to one, The State of Israel shall take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the direct and public incitement to commit genocide in relation to members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;

[…]

(4) By sixteen votes to one, The State of Israel shall take immediate and effective measures to enable the provision of urgently needed basic services and humanitarian assistance to address the adverse conditions of life faced by Palestinians in the Gaza Strip;

[…]

(5) By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of acts within the scope of Article II and Article III of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide against members of the Palestinian group in the Gaza Strip;

[…]

(6) By fifteen votes to two, The State of Israel shall submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to this Order within one month as from the date of this Order.

omissions by “[…]” are just the names of each judge and whether they approved or dissented.

Any worker has the right to strike. If what is affected is critical infrastructure then the government has to step in on the side of the workers to force a settlement.

Just because you want unlimited flow of treats does not mean laborers should not be able to fight for better working conditions

Removed by mod

The wrong Germany lost 😔

Why not? If you are looking to diminish someone’s right you need a better reason than “I don’t like it”. If you are looking to restrict someone’s rights you need to give a reason not the other way around.

Let me give you an example of what I would think would be a good argumentation. I think we should illegalize circumcision. While this would restrict a parents right to raise their children with the religion of their choosing, circumcision goes against the childs right to be free from bodily harm which trumps the parents right to raise their children in the religion they see fit. The protection of a third persons rights is in my opinion a valid reason to diminish someones right.

Why should your beliefs dictate whether another person has to choose between their religion and job? And why these two things in particular, what about Orthodox Jews, people with a bindi and so on?

Do you have any material reason to discriminate against people like this? Particularly since this discrimination will be felt by minorities more harshly than the rest of the populace.

good talk