NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel in graduation speech
NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel in graduation speech

NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel in graduation speech

NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel in graduation speech
NYU withholds diploma of student who condemned Israel in graduation speech
Can anyone tell me who's actually right that GD conflict, at this point I think we'd be better off nuking the area and going on with life. Its been decades, time for actual resolution.
The area will probably be uninhabitable in 20 years (give or take) due to climate change. Israel's "victory" over Palestine will be short-lived.
It could be uninhabitable tomorrow.
so you support genocide, huh?
I support the lesser of teo evils.
It's really one of the most uncomplicated conflicts in human history, I think. Israel took the Palestinian's land by force, and has killed thousands upon thousands of innocent Palestinian civilians over the past 77 years. It's really as simple as the Holocaust to figure out who's in the wrong here. Sure, the Palestinian's fight back with little effect, but so did the Jews in WWII, and no one thinks the Holocaust was complex.
My local model gave me this, I'm gonna go with this.
"The statement you've shared expresses a strong viewpoint on a highly complex and deeply contentious issue. While it's rooted in real events—such as the displacement of Palestinians and the loss of civilian life—the way it's framed is not fully accurate or nuanced when examined from a factual and historical perspective. Here's a breakdown:
What’s true:
In 1948, the creation of the state of Israel was followed by war and the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians—this is known as the Nakba ("catastrophe" in Arabic).
Since then, Palestinians have lost significant territory, and many still live as refugees or under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza.
Thousands of Palestinian civilians have indeed been killed over decades, especially in Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.
Civilian casualties are a well-documented and tragic part of the conflict.
What’s oversimplified or inaccurate:
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is widely regarded by historians, diplomats, and political scientists as one of the most complex geopolitical conflicts in modern history, involving:
Colonial history (British Mandate)
Competing nationalisms
Religion
Refugee crises
International law
Military occupation and terrorism
Internal divisions within both Israeli and Palestinian societies
Comparing the conflict to the Holocaust, where 6 million Jews were systematically murdered in a state-run genocide, is historically and morally problematic.
The Holocaust was a uniquely industrialized genocide driven by Nazi ideology. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, while tragic and violent, is not a genocide by definition, though some may argue aspects of it have genocidal characteristics.
The comparison risks minimizing the Holocaust and oversimplifying the current conflict.
Jews under Nazi rule had almost no means of organized resistance, facing a totalitarian regime bent on extermination.
Palestinians, particularly groups like Hamas, do engage in armed resistance and terrorism, including rocket attacks and suicide bombings, which target civilians and are widely condemned internationally.
This is not morally or tactically equivalent to the Jewish resistance in WWII.
Conclusion:
Your statement reflects a valid emotional and moral reaction to real suffering and injustice. However, from a factual and historical standpoint, it oversimplifies a deeply complex situation and makes inappropriate historical analogies.
If you're interested, I can offer a more balanced summary of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the key historical events."
How do you publicly let AI do your thinking for you without even a hint of shame or embarrassment?
I check its claims against verified sources. 🤷♂️
The problem is letting the AI digest the information for you. It is impossible to engage in critical thinking when you're not actually doing the thinking yourself.
I think it's possible for people to do that, probably a lot. But it's not what I'm doing.
Well, I don't think I've ever heard of a morally good colony. Kinda gotta be a dick to be a colony.
Doesnt even kind of answer my question.
Israel is a colony. Do I need to explain why showing up to a place, claiming it as your own and violently repressing natives to make it so is bad? Sorry I don't mean to be snarky, I just wanted to be simple
Which group of people on the planet hasn't done that?
My ancestors did, as did theirs and yours. Should we all suicide over it, to make it right? Or try and pack ourselves back into where we came from? Get everyone to head back to Sumer?
What's done is done and not accepting that seems to be the problem to me. For all parties involved.
The problem is that it isn't done. Its happening right now. This isn't like the native Americans where they have already been completely displaced and whatnot. Its happening right now before your eyes.
The main solution has been a two state solution. That would be what your saying as "what's done is done and accept it"
But Israel has rejected a two state solution for its entire existence, and continued colonizing and genociding folk to get the land they claim
That's right now at this moment. I cannot stress this enough, it's like going to a native American before the trail of tears and saying "I don't know, seems like what's done is done" when we have only just started starving and slaughtering their entire population. There's so much slaughter left to go.
This isn't done. Israel is committing a colonizing genocide right now. Today. Right now. Today. Right. Now. Today.
I'd say it's done, look at the damned place. If that's not done it's close enough.
Brother in Christ, do you want to just be pro genocide at that rate? No reason to stop the Holocaust now, it's basically over, might as well let them finish? Is that the actual position you want to take
I dont agree with that comparison to the holocaust, it's an insult to its victims. And I dont believe it's anywhere near over, that'd be the millionth time thats been said in 60 years.
So I dont think you know my position, we obviously have diferent views of objective reality.
It's not an insult to compare a genocide to a genocide. It's a genocide. An extermination. The point is to put that weight of history on you. If you cannot bring yourself to see the wholesale slaughter of a people as the same due to who those people are and who's committing it, that's a issue.
See, we agree we don't agree, the end.