• Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I wasn’t suggesting anything, I was asking what the numbers are like. I think how many people will die as a result of each policy is something that probably does make sense to consider.

      • MyEdgyAlt@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        I’m sorry, it’s hard to tell if someone is sincere or Just Asking Questions. In this case, the options are a slow genocide (West Bank) or a fast genocide (Gaza), so the short term numbers alone paint a misleading picture of the relative merits of each strategy. Israel’s gonna remove the brown people either way.

        • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’d just be interested to see how over time if those two numbers differ. If there’s a big difference then that’d of course weigh on the considerations. If they’re close to each other, then that’d also affect it. I just found population estimates and death estimates for current Gaza conflict but not really a good comparison for the two.

          • MyEdgyAlt@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 months ago

            Sure, the slow genocide will be slower of course. It’s hardly worth bothering to google something that obvious. Still genocide though. Israelis are using violence to kill and/or displace Palestinian residents of the West Bank. They’ll take it all, eventually.

            • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              If it is way slower or much less deadly in the short/moderate time, then it’s not hard to see why some would prefer that. Death now or death maybe somewhere in the future.