Nah, people would still vote for someone who wants the opposite…

“Come on JFK Jr., it’s not M, like Mc’Donalds. It’s W, like Wumbo”

For a person from an actual democracy in Europe, this person cult is cringe.

It’s December for me…

New fear unlocked?

W like Wambo

Why would exactly this change lead to a nuclear war??? The 45 other times, it did not either.

Come on! Let the kiddo feel proud!!!111

Republicans: We want to get rid of the elite in power.

Republicans:

Isn’t it a self driving car? Why is Putin steering? 🙃

The current period of the war will maybe end faster.

The problem is that Russia will not see this as as the end of the war, but rather a pause for a few years.

It has always been a proxy war!!!

North korea versus the west!!!

North korea will let all the Russians die on the battlefield…

/s

Dammit… BP found out…

Can we please not destroy the word algorithm? It’s such a nice word…

You are saying “Be careful with the words here” and that there a different definitions…

I am the one here who is careful with the G-word. Others just throw that word in (of course without mentioning which definition they refer to)…

Let’s be honest: In the end, the legal definition (and therefore the legal decision) is the one that has actual consequences.

I agree that that’s probably the difference.

“They should not be the final authority anymore.” And who should be? Creating something new that the whole world agrees on seems like a hard task right now.

I’d rather accuse a country of genocide too soon than being a fucking denialist.

It’s not that we agree on whether it’s a war or whether children die. It’s a Genocide accusation, which is pretty much the hardest accusation possible. My view: I don’t want to accuse a country too soon.

I’d rather get called a denialist for now reason (just, because I don’t throw the hardest accusation on the target) than potentially having to back-pedal later. I think, that our language(s) has/have a lot of potential to describe the terrible things that happened in Israel on Oct 7th and in Gaza since then (which is the opposite of denial) without using the word “Genocide” like there was already a decision by the ICJ.

What are you afraid off? Less people dying?

What is your hope by using the word before there is a ICJ decision? Less people dying? Because I don’t see a causal connection there.

There is the UN with its ICJ. That’s what pretty much the whole world agrees on.

They are the final deciders, but we can agree that it will take time for a decision.

What might be interesting, is what happens and how various people (including the scholars or you) react, if the ICJ decided differently. But that’s just speculation at this point.

I prefer to not throw words on something based on emotions.

There are usually 3 views on the internet:

1. “It’s a genocide!!! I am sure.”
2. “It’s not a genocide!!! I am sure.”
3. “I was not a virologist during Corona and I’m not an expert on genocides right now, but others are. So, I’ll wait for the experts of ICJ to decide.”

Mine is Nr. 3! If you think, that Nr. 2 and Nr. 3 are the same, the problem is on your side.

That’s the worst. If it’s worth it in the end, this will not be tge last war in Europe.