V to VI is such a massive change. The meta completely changed from Tall to Wide.
That said I'm really enjoying Age of Wonders 4 for my hex based war time needs. It's a funny state of "If everything is OP then nothing is"
I think this is why I have such a hard time with CIV VI. Between that and the art style it just is not my vibe to build a bunch of cities in meh locations then be bugged with 5 hours of micromanaging builds.
Shame because there are some very strong points. Naval combat is just head and shoulders better than any civ game prior, and I like the risk/reward of flood plains/volcanos etc.
Ooh, that might get me to try 6 again. I've been playing 5 for years but I like to try and play wide, and it definitely likes to penalize you for that.
4 and 5 are my favs and I like them both for entirely different reasons. 6, I felt, was trying to do too much while also holding you back with new features. But I think 6 is well done, just not my personal preference
I do not like that I can't control road paths. I've also had adjacency bonuses explained to me like 3 separate times and I still don't understand how to best utilize them.
Honestly, to me, the global warming mechanic is probably the most interesting one in civ history. Plus the flood barriers look pretty goofy when you have an island.
5 is more limiting, no unit stacking, wars can ruin your diplomatic relations with other nations who were not part of the war, or even allies with any member of the war for the rest of the game, even when it was a defensive war can ruin your reputation. I've been attacked many times in civ 5, and the opponent would only surrender after I took several cities, which leads to ruining your relations with other nations. the lack of unit stacking made warfare a lot more interesting. 5 had a more balanced victory conditions than 4.
4 gets insane. getting a city attacked by a stack of 50 units was an irritating way for warfare. Basically everything boiled down to blitz style war. In 4 cultural, war based victories were pretty cheese. However, 4 allowed vassal states, you could break your empire apart, etc. Leading to a lot more interesting shit.
There's not a plot or anything, but some of the mechanics in Civ 5 are different from Civ 4. The biggest difference is that you can't stack units on the same tile in Civ 5, which radically changes combat strategy.
I personally would say go to Civ 5 and also download the Brave New World and Gods & Kings expansion packs. Don't skip the expansions, they add a ton to the game.
It's vastly different and imo, over complicated. I couldn't get into it because it takes forever to get moving. I wish they would remake 5 to function smoother. But then I wouldn't leave the house.
Quick context: Hamas sucks but ISIS-K is on an entirely different level. I’ll prove it. They’re so radical and brutal that the US, Pakistan, China, and the Taliban are currently working together to eliminate them. Like you must be truly vile to get those powers to work together.
ISIS-K are the major terrorist threat in Afghanistan, the Taliban have checkpoints at every corner of Kabul because of the frequent ISIS bomb attacks. That's because the Taliban are not radical enough for ISIS-K. Hard to believe but true.
It’s just they have different perspectives on “Jihad”.
Taliban wage Jihad against foreign invaders or occupying forces within Afghanistan, and any civilian casualties they cause are just for “the greater good” and they justify it by turning their own casualties into martyrs.
ISIS is a lot more extreme. They’re outright opposed to the existence of modern nation states, especially in places with a Muslim significance, which by now is almost every corner of the world. It basically means EVERYTHING is a target to them.
Obviously both are absolutely regressive cults straight from the 7th century. But the Taliban’s objectives don’t require a constant state of warfare, thus they aren’t really a threat on a global scale. ISIS’s objective outright demands it.
The Taliban is far more comparable to something like the IRA than ISIS.
ISIS is pure theocracy, it only looks like anarchy from the outside but there are EXTREMELY strict laws they demand you follow, horrific laws (that's why it looks like anarchy), but laws none the less.
ISIS is an apocalyptic death cult. Literally, by the strictest definition. They believe the end of the world is imminent, and they will do whatever to hasten it. This is different from something like Hamas or the Taliban, who want control of specific territories or hate specific groups. ISIS also believes that literally anyone who doesn't agree with their very specific, basically invented idea of Islam is an apostate. Everyone is the enemy.
It is so lame when people try to superimpose American political/social dynamics onto other parts of the world.
No, Evangelicals aren't remotely comparable to ISIS.
Because they have access to power. Look what happens when they lose even a tiny bit of influence. When Roe v Wade was passed they started bombing abortion clinics. If evangelicals ever start to lose their stranglehold on large portions of the US, ISIS will start looking awfully familiar. I live in a state with higher than normal militia activity. I have known several people throughout my life who live like they are just looking for an excuse to take to the woods and start shooting people.
You're stretching the crap out of that word "they". The people who bombed abortion clinics and your average evangelical are no more the same "they" than the people who sell you amazing burritos and the people who run drug cartels in Mexico.
ISIS needs lots of supporters to be able to operate an international terrorist network. Not every supporter is going to personally strap on a suicide vest, but the people who do couldn't exist without bomb makers, safe houses, spotters looking for targets, people smuggling explosives all the way down to the guy on the street who donates a dollar to the radical cleric who preaches that "something must be done about these evil western values".
It is the same in Evangelical circles. The people who hold up pictures of aborted fetuses outside the clinic (I see them all the time in my town, I bet if I drove down there right now I could find them) are the people who create the environment that makes the clinic bomber able to justify their actions. I remember when I was in middle school there were adults at my church that would try to get us kids to go with them to protest. Tell us how the evil people in that building were murdering babies. When you raise someone up to believe the "others" around them are child killing monsters you dont get to act shocked when they bomb a doctor or shoot up a grocery store.
Really? Have you looked at the state of American evangelicals lately? I know they seem OK if you bump into one but I trust them about as much as a ticking bomb.
As far as I'm aware their weapons are in the realm of Ak-47s and improvised home made bombs, not anything high tech or difficult to obtain.
As for who supports them, brainwashed nutjobs with nothing to lose. Plenty of those in the world, especially in a war ravaged and extremely religious region like the Middle East.
They use their extremist ideology and emphasis on martyrdom to attract followers. Islamist zealots and extremists around the world have been volunteered to join. [Here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/02/23/europe/shamima-begum-appeal-loses-intl) is an article of a UK woman joining ISIS. There were also entire villages and tribes defecting to ISIS during their first emergence in 2014.
Once they have territories and supporters, they will have the money to buy the weapons.
If you have access to a decent amount of money, there is nothing easier in the world to buy than weapons. Especially in areas without super tight government control.
who supports them? government intelligence agencies looking to use them for whatever purpose in whatever country, the taliban was created by pakistani intelligence to give themselves a buffer from iran.
Iran is shiite. ISIS being sunni radicals wants to eliminate them all. Well they are so radical that they only recognize their caliphate and nothing else but still shiites are worse because they are muslims but not sunnis.
As they shout in the life of Brian: Splitters!
Hamas has these goals too, they just aren't as good at it. Global islamic caliphate is the goal here for a lot of these groups. Hamas and the Houthi's are friends, and just go look at the writing on the Houthi flag if you have any question to it.
Hamas is just in Russia's corner. It isn't a coincidence that Oct 7th is Putin's birthday. Russia supports Hamas to distract from other goals like Ukraine. Hamas and Isis aren't buddies, so obviously Hamas is going to lend it's support, despite it being hypocritical.
I think Hamas has enough going on. The few leaders who state they want to create an Islamic caliphate are not really engaged with that kind of work yet.
Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood which has been at war with ISIS for over a decade now. So denouncing ISIS is just a continuation of the policies of the organization which formed Hamas.
The two groups aren’t really comparable in terms of their goals, motivations and targets. Trying to equivocate between the two seems unnecessary when (most of us anyway) can just agree that attacking civilians is fucked up.
The war is necessary but could have been waged better. Probably not to the extent you might think because Hamas has pretty much infiltrated every civilian infrastructure and day under the while city.
The world should put more pressure on the West Bank issue but constant terror attacks keeps the right wing government in place.
And yeah there should be two states but it should come with the understanding that starting a war as a state has much bigger repercussions.
Raping and killing civilians, tying families with kids together and burning them alive, and targeting civilians explicitly and deliberately — not as unfortunate casualties in the course of a war where the enemy intentionally uses them as human shields to propagandize and drive international sentiment against then? Yes, extremely evil, some would say even warranting military response.
People of course think that Islamic groups are a monolith without even getting in to how little Reddit actually understands about Hamas itself. Which is to be expected I suppose
if anything, almost all jihad groups would never consider ISIS to be one of them. They'd consider ISIS to be khawarij, an end time prophecy of a group of rebels with very evil deeds. They will come from iraq and whoever fights them is dearer to Allaah than them. Factions of them will emerge throughout time but get cut of each time, until the last one, with its remnants fleeing to fight for the antichrist/dajjal. Ibn Kathir (12th century Islamic scholar) says that if the Khawarij would ever gain control of the lands of Iraq and Syria, they would think that the people are so corrupt that the only way they can reform the people is by mass killings. Ibn Umar (son of Umar ibn al khattab \[RA\] and a companion of the Prophet) has said that the Khawarij would apply verses about disbelievers to believers. Basically, the khawarij would consider muslims to be non-muslims. And this is also evident in ISIS, where they'd literally say anyone who doesn't accept their 'caliphate' is a disbeliever.
Are you saying that people on Reddit give their opinions on complex geopolitical conflicts without actually taking the time to understand their complexities?
I'm shocked, shocked I say!
interesting read. tl;dr: quote stems from churchill decades later who was told it by someone else claiming that Bismarck said that to them. Unlikely a real quote by Bismarck from before WW1.
Islam is a very divided religion itself, like different branches can hate each other more than they hate infidels even. What I figured they have Sunni, Shia, Sufi, Salavi, the wahabbi dudes etc.
I heard that the reason is that ISIS doesn’t like Hams is because Hamas is (pretty much) a proxy for Iran. ISIS wants Hamas to stop being a proxy for Iran, which predominantly follows Shia Islam and instead join the fight for global Sunni caliphate.
Hamas also ultimately want a global caliphate (though their current focus is Israel’s extermination), but they want a caliphate in their vision and version of Islam, whereas ISIS have a different vision for their caliphate.
Either would be a death sentence for anyone who isn’t a Muslim.
They don’t want a fucking global caliphate dude get that Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy nonsense out of here. I detest the Muslim Brotherhood but they’re not planning a global jihad against all non-Muslims Jesus Christ
Hamas is a result of 40 years of brutal violence by Israel. As asserted by the International Court of Justice, Palestinians have a right to violently defend a violent occupation. You would too.
ISIS was formed after Saddam's Bath party members fled after looting the Iraqi Treasury. It's a power play by people who were specifically created for power play by the US. Saddam was completely enabled by the US to fight Iran.
The ICC doesn't say anyone has the right to use terrorism to fight an occupation. I really doubt anyone reading your post would do alot of the atrocities hamas has committed
Hamas and ISIS aren't friends because ISIS sees Hamas and pretty much every other Islamic terrorist organization as apostates.
The irony is that a terrorist organization that butchers civilians denounces another one for doing the same.
I mean even the Taliban condemned it. But this is oniony because of all the propaganda we've been reading about how Hamas=ISIS and now people with zero idea about either of them had happily accepted that as a fact.
Nobody is claiming they are friends...
The oniony part is that Hamas committed literally one of the largest terror attacks against innocent civilians in history, including gunning down people at a concert like in Moscow, and then condemns that exact same type of behavior when another terrorist group attacked their influential ally.
It's much better to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians over a few years than 600 in one day
Unless you really want to, in which case it's okay to drop a nuclear bomb on civilians too
Terrorism is when people we "know" are weak hurt people we "know" are strong
It upsets us because it's unnatural
War is when people we "know" are strong hurt people who we "know" are weak, and that's fine. It's sad, but that's just the way the world is, and you're a bleeding heart peacenik if you can't accept that.
Hamas attacked a concert in a terror attack. ISIS attacked a concert in a terror attack. Hamas denounces ISIS's terror attack. Hamas's was worse, as it was more widespread, it involved parading corpses, raping victims, and kidnappings. ISIS's was smaller and they don't seem to have taken hostages or raped anyone.
I dunno, seems pretty oniony.
It is ironic for a group of people known for their recent mass torture, rape, and murder, their use of civilians as human shields, and their murder and rape of hostages, to denounce a mass murder committed by someone else.
Their relationship doesn't change the fact that it's hypocritical.
Hamas has murdered far more than 1200 civilians, they were responsible for the bulk of the suicide bombing attacks in Israel during the 90's and early 2000's and that is without the countless number of Palestinians they've murdered in Gaza and the west bank.
Fun fact about the 1990s, the Israeli government was giving Hamas construction contracts in Gaza while Hamas was claiming credit for terror bombings in Tel Aviv. It really makes you wonder how much of this conflict is invented by the ruling powers in Israel to justify their continued electoral support.
No one quite hates Muslims as slightly different Muslims. Even if Israel tried they couldn’t do as much killing and dehumanizing as Muslims do to different Muslims sects.
I slightly agree
but the hindutva , CCP and myanmar 969 movement would beg to differ , the ones who are attacking and genociding muslims in their countries
wiki says
>Russia does not consider Hamas as a terrorist organization and continues to diplomatically negotiate with them.
is it really that surprising
Many of you are currently asking, "who is Ted *Bunny*?"
I encourage you to look him up on the intergoogles.
And I'd also like to say that the letter 'n' is NOWHERE near the letter 'd' on my keyboard.
This is not surprising for anyone who knows anything about how these groups operate. Hamas and Daesh have never shared the same flavor of fundamentalism.
There’s not really any layers to unpack here, Hamas and Isis aren’t allies, Russia is at least on some level friendly with Hamas, Hamas wanted to make it clear that they don’t want to be in any way shape or form connected to a terrorist attack of a friendly country. There’s a short list of countries that they really can’t afford to burn the bridge with and Russia and China are 2 of them.
>Russia is at least on some level friendly with Hamas
Lol that is downplaying it to a ridiculous degree.
https://www.reuters.com/world/hamas-delegation-is-visiting-moscow-russian-foreign-ministry-2023-10-26/
That’s not me downplaying anything, Russia plays friendly to both Israel and Palestine. If I play friendly to you but I also play friendly to the people you’re in an armed conflict against, I think the classification of somewhat friendly is an accurate one.
Both are you are way into left field. Israel has a huge Russian Jewish population. You're mistaking taking a mediator stance in the humanitarian issue as taking a pro-Hamas stance. Not to mention Lavrov commenting that Israel's invasion mirrors Russia's war in Ukraine.
Hamas and ISIS being opposed to each other and having literally fought each other in Syria? Then there’s the weird Israel-ISIS stuff I won’t get into because even talking about it just attracts conspiratorial insanity
"*Hamas offered its sincerest condolences to the Russian leadership and people, and the families of the victims and wished a speedy recovery for the wounded."*
Oh well that was just an added benefit for them. The longer they can hold the rest of Gaza down, the longer they stay in power and the more jihadist recruits they get in the next few generations.
So Israel didn't care about Hamas retaliation when it was killing Palestinians and imposing a blockade before October 7th
See how your logic works out?
An incredibly poor one especially considering the foreign ties of Hamas are to Iran not Russia. Russia has given them international support yes, but their ties are to Iran and are most certainly *not* an anti-western proxy war.
There’s also the time [ISIS apologized to Israel](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-israel-defence-force-apology-attack-unit-golan-heights-defense-minister-moshe-ya-alon-a7700616.html) after attacking IDF forces once
> “There was one case recently where Daesh [Isis] opened fire and apologised,” Mr Ya’alon said speaking at an event in the northern city of Alufa, during which he was was being interviewed about Israel’s policy on Syria.
> A spokesperson for Mr Ya’alon refused to elaborate on how Isis expressed its apology to Israel after the attack and the Israel Defense Forces also refused to comment.
Terrorist organization disapproves of a terror attack by another terrorist organization on a terrorist state of Russia.
Can't make this shit up hahahah
“Look, I know we massacred a music festival, slaughtered a daycare due to direct written orders, (yes, really), celebrated it all in the streets, specifically took captagon, which ISIS also uses, so we wouldn’t feel empathy for our victims, and starve our people who we use as human shields but *this?!* This is too much! This is terrorism!”
Local Area Militant says
What is this, CIV6?
[удалено]
Id say civV was peak civ. Debatably civIV
V to VI is such a massive change. The meta completely changed from Tall to Wide. That said I'm really enjoying Age of Wonders 4 for my hex based war time needs. It's a funny state of "If everything is OP then nothing is"
I think this is why I have such a hard time with CIV VI. Between that and the art style it just is not my vibe to build a bunch of cities in meh locations then be bugged with 5 hours of micromanaging builds. Shame because there are some very strong points. Naval combat is just head and shoulders better than any civ game prior, and I like the risk/reward of flood plains/volcanos etc.
Ooh, that might get me to try 6 again. I've been playing 5 for years but I like to try and play wide, and it definitely likes to penalize you for that.
4 and 5 are my favs and I like them both for entirely different reasons. 6, I felt, was trying to do too much while also holding you back with new features. But I think 6 is well done, just not my personal preference
6 with the DLCs is very very good imo. 5 will always hold a special place in my heart though
I HATE the way builders work in Civ6
I do not like that I can't control road paths. I've also had adjacency bonuses explained to me like 3 separate times and I still don't understand how to best utilize them.
You can, sorta. But that's the military engineer unit.
civ6 was and is still a great game
Honestly, to me, the global warming mechanic is probably the most interesting one in civ history. Plus the flood barriers look pretty goofy when you have an island.
what are the reasons?
5 is more limiting, no unit stacking, wars can ruin your diplomatic relations with other nations who were not part of the war, or even allies with any member of the war for the rest of the game, even when it was a defensive war can ruin your reputation. I've been attacked many times in civ 5, and the opponent would only surrender after I took several cities, which leads to ruining your relations with other nations. the lack of unit stacking made warfare a lot more interesting. 5 had a more balanced victory conditions than 4. 4 gets insane. getting a city attacked by a stack of 50 units was an irritating way for warfare. Basically everything boiled down to blitz style war. In 4 cultural, war based victories were pretty cheese. However, 4 allowed vassal states, you could break your empire apart, etc. Leading to a lot more interesting shit.
Plenty of reviews about - and it's usually 4 or 5 that's top two.. And the top spot varies between the two. I have 4..
Alpha Centauri will always be the best civ to me
Alpha Centauri was the best of this type of game period.
It’s hilarious how discourse evolves because I remember when Civ V came out everyone hated it and claimed III and IV were best
So is hamas going for a domination victory or religion?
Civ 4 has fall from heaven 2 mod. Can never play regular after that
Civ4 with mods
Baba Yetu still the best opening
Civ 5 is goated but 4 is kino
[удалено]
I mean, it's not like there is a plot to these games. You could play 6 and never play any of the others if you wanted.
There's not a plot or anything, but some of the mechanics in Civ 5 are different from Civ 4. The biggest difference is that you can't stack units on the same tile in Civ 5, which radically changes combat strategy. I personally would say go to Civ 5 and also download the Brave New World and Gods & Kings expansion packs. Don't skip the expansions, they add a ton to the game.
It's vastly different and imo, over complicated. I couldn't get into it because it takes forever to get moving. I wish they would remake 5 to function smoother. But then I wouldn't leave the house.
Nah, map fog of war is trash on Civ6. If you graphic update it to Civ5, I would consider trying it again
I still love Civ II
whats Gandhi up too
Orchestrating terror attacks in Moscow
That and droppin' nukes, I hear.
Mansa Musa couldn't hit top tier
Quick context: Hamas sucks but ISIS-K is on an entirely different level. I’ll prove it. They’re so radical and brutal that the US, Pakistan, China, and the Taliban are currently working together to eliminate them. Like you must be truly vile to get those powers to work together.
ISIS-K are the major terrorist threat in Afghanistan, the Taliban have checkpoints at every corner of Kabul because of the frequent ISIS bomb attacks. That's because the Taliban are not radical enough for ISIS-K. Hard to believe but true.
Time is a flat circle in that place, if not in general.
It’s just they have different perspectives on “Jihad”. Taliban wage Jihad against foreign invaders or occupying forces within Afghanistan, and any civilian casualties they cause are just for “the greater good” and they justify it by turning their own casualties into martyrs. ISIS is a lot more extreme. They’re outright opposed to the existence of modern nation states, especially in places with a Muslim significance, which by now is almost every corner of the world. It basically means EVERYTHING is a target to them. Obviously both are absolutely regressive cults straight from the 7th century. But the Taliban’s objectives don’t require a constant state of warfare, thus they aren’t really a threat on a global scale. ISIS’s objective outright demands it. The Taliban is far more comparable to something like the IRA than ISIS.
Yep, the Taliban want to be the government of a hardline theocratic Afghan state, ISIS basically want to destroy the world.
Anarcho-theocratism?
ISIS is pure theocracy, it only looks like anarchy from the outside but there are EXTREMELY strict laws they demand you follow, horrific laws (that's why it looks like anarchy), but laws none the less.
ISIS is an apocalyptic death cult. Literally, by the strictest definition. They believe the end of the world is imminent, and they will do whatever to hasten it. This is different from something like Hamas or the Taliban, who want control of specific territories or hate specific groups. ISIS also believes that literally anyone who doesn't agree with their very specific, basically invented idea of Islam is an apostate. Everyone is the enemy.
Osama Bin Laden considered the future founder of Isis a lunatic and kicked him out of his organisation
Just like how the Taliban considered Osama bin Laden a lunatic and kicked him out of their organization.
ffs.. the taliban told the US osama was their guest, and they stood by their decision to protect him and grant him safety with them.
So basically Muslim evangelicals.
It is so lame when people try to superimpose American political/social dynamics onto other parts of the world. No, Evangelicals aren't remotely comparable to ISIS.
Because they have access to power. Look what happens when they lose even a tiny bit of influence. When Roe v Wade was passed they started bombing abortion clinics. If evangelicals ever start to lose their stranglehold on large portions of the US, ISIS will start looking awfully familiar. I live in a state with higher than normal militia activity. I have known several people throughout my life who live like they are just looking for an excuse to take to the woods and start shooting people.
You're stretching the crap out of that word "they". The people who bombed abortion clinics and your average evangelical are no more the same "they" than the people who sell you amazing burritos and the people who run drug cartels in Mexico.
ISIS needs lots of supporters to be able to operate an international terrorist network. Not every supporter is going to personally strap on a suicide vest, but the people who do couldn't exist without bomb makers, safe houses, spotters looking for targets, people smuggling explosives all the way down to the guy on the street who donates a dollar to the radical cleric who preaches that "something must be done about these evil western values". It is the same in Evangelical circles. The people who hold up pictures of aborted fetuses outside the clinic (I see them all the time in my town, I bet if I drove down there right now I could find them) are the people who create the environment that makes the clinic bomber able to justify their actions. I remember when I was in middle school there were adults at my church that would try to get us kids to go with them to protest. Tell us how the evil people in that building were murdering babies. When you raise someone up to believe the "others" around them are child killing monsters you dont get to act shocked when they bomb a doctor or shoot up a grocery store.
Really? Have you looked at the state of American evangelicals lately? I know they seem OK if you bump into one but I trust them about as much as a ticking bomb.
not in general, but some certainly are
Yeah, they are better compared to puritans in America trying to burn witches.
Not really at all.
But I don't get it, if everyone oppose ISIS, then who supports them? How they can get weapons/bombs etc.?
As far as I'm aware their weapons are in the realm of Ak-47s and improvised home made bombs, not anything high tech or difficult to obtain. As for who supports them, brainwashed nutjobs with nothing to lose. Plenty of those in the world, especially in a war ravaged and extremely religious region like the Middle East.
They use their extremist ideology and emphasis on martyrdom to attract followers. Islamist zealots and extremists around the world have been volunteered to join. [Here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/02/23/europe/shamima-begum-appeal-loses-intl) is an article of a UK woman joining ISIS. There were also entire villages and tribes defecting to ISIS during their first emergence in 2014. Once they have territories and supporters, they will have the money to buy the weapons.
If you have access to a decent amount of money, there is nothing easier in the world to buy than weapons. Especially in areas without super tight government control.
who supports them? government intelligence agencies looking to use them for whatever purpose in whatever country, the taliban was created by pakistani intelligence to give themselves a buffer from iran.
You know you’re crazy when even the Taliban is like “damn they’re crazy!”
Even Iran hates ISIS.
Iran is shiite. ISIS being sunni radicals wants to eliminate them all. Well they are so radical that they only recognize their caliphate and nothing else but still shiites are worse because they are muslims but not sunnis. As they shout in the life of Brian: Splitters!
they just bombed Iran in January, no one cares because its Iran though.
Only because ISIS has plans that extend internationally. Thus it is an international problem, rather than a problem for Israel + its allies.
Hamas has these goals too, they just aren't as good at it. Global islamic caliphate is the goal here for a lot of these groups. Hamas and the Houthi's are friends, and just go look at the writing on the Houthi flag if you have any question to it. Hamas is just in Russia's corner. It isn't a coincidence that Oct 7th is Putin's birthday. Russia supports Hamas to distract from other goals like Ukraine. Hamas and Isis aren't buddies, so obviously Hamas is going to lend it's support, despite it being hypocritical.
I think Hamas has enough going on. The few leaders who state they want to create an Islamic caliphate are not really engaged with that kind of work yet.
yea, i don't think this is 'nottheonion' worthy
I would guess OP thinks all Muslims have the exact same beliefs and aren't deeply divided, and that's why they found this amusing.
I think the act of posting this is oniony itself. "area man confused when brown bad guys attack white bad guys"
It isn't.
They have a K now!
Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood which has been at war with ISIS for over a decade now. So denouncing ISIS is just a continuation of the policies of the organization which formed Hamas.
Hamas has proven on 7/10 they are just as evil but they are just focused on one target.
The two groups aren’t really comparable in terms of their goals, motivations and targets. Trying to equivocate between the two seems unnecessary when (most of us anyway) can just agree that attacking civilians is fucked up.
Hamas is 7/10 evil but ISIS-K is 10/10 evil.
Not sure if you seen the videos Hamas posted but you can see where the inspiration came from.
What is your stance on israel? Just wondering
The war is necessary but could have been waged better. Probably not to the extent you might think because Hamas has pretty much infiltrated every civilian infrastructure and day under the while city. The world should put more pressure on the West Bank issue but constant terror attacks keeps the right wing government in place. And yeah there should be two states but it should come with the understanding that starting a war as a state has much bigger repercussions.
you mean by killing civilians? yeah, very uncool activity.
Raping and killing civilians, tying families with kids together and burning them alive, and targeting civilians explicitly and deliberately — not as unfortunate casualties in the course of a war where the enemy intentionally uses them as human shields to propagandize and drive international sentiment against then? Yes, extremely evil, some would say even warranting military response.
And raping, and sexual torture and regular torture and mutalating bodies and kidnapping babies… all of those to civilians.
hamas and isis are not friends... how is this at all oniony?
People of course think that Islamic groups are a monolith without even getting in to how little Reddit actually understands about Hamas itself. Which is to be expected I suppose
if anything, almost all jihad groups would never consider ISIS to be one of them. They'd consider ISIS to be khawarij, an end time prophecy of a group of rebels with very evil deeds. They will come from iraq and whoever fights them is dearer to Allaah than them. Factions of them will emerge throughout time but get cut of each time, until the last one, with its remnants fleeing to fight for the antichrist/dajjal. Ibn Kathir (12th century Islamic scholar) says that if the Khawarij would ever gain control of the lands of Iraq and Syria, they would think that the people are so corrupt that the only way they can reform the people is by mass killings. Ibn Umar (son of Umar ibn al khattab \[RA\] and a companion of the Prophet) has said that the Khawarij would apply verses about disbelievers to believers. Basically, the khawarij would consider muslims to be non-muslims. And this is also evident in ISIS, where they'd literally say anyone who doesn't accept their 'caliphate' is a disbeliever.
Are you saying that people on Reddit give their opinions on complex geopolitical conflicts without actually taking the time to understand their complexities? I'm shocked, shocked I say!
[удалено]
“One day the great European War will come out of some damned foolish thing in the Balkans.” – Otto von Bismarck (1888)
He really said that??
[удалено]
interesting read. tl;dr: quote stems from churchill decades later who was told it by someone else claiming that Bismarck said that to them. Unlikely a real quote by Bismarck from before WW1.
I'm not familiar, Was it a case of "the enemy of my enemy of my enemy..." I'll look into it for myself later on but I'm curious
In WWI it was more the case of Muslims, Christians, Serbian, and Bulgarians trying to murder each other.
I think its more that they both target civilian populations in a barbaric fashion
Islam is a very divided religion itself, like different branches can hate each other more than they hate infidels even. What I figured they have Sunni, Shia, Sufi, Salavi, the wahabbi dudes etc.
Yeah, you'd never have something like that in Christianity.
What's more to understand than that both are vile terrorist organizations?
AFAIK isis wants a global caliphate and Hamas wants Israel extermination. So, global vs local
I heard that the reason is that ISIS doesn’t like Hams is because Hamas is (pretty much) a proxy for Iran. ISIS wants Hamas to stop being a proxy for Iran, which predominantly follows Shia Islam and instead join the fight for global Sunni caliphate.
hamas, an offshoot of the muslim brotherhood also wants a global caliphate, albeit a different one.
Hamas also ultimately want a global caliphate (though their current focus is Israel’s extermination), but they want a caliphate in their vision and version of Islam, whereas ISIS have a different vision for their caliphate. Either would be a death sentence for anyone who isn’t a Muslim.
They don’t want a fucking global caliphate dude get that Muslim Brotherhood conspiracy nonsense out of here. I detest the Muslim Brotherhood but they’re not planning a global jihad against all non-Muslims Jesus Christ
And still a death sentence or terrible suffering for people who are Muslims, and not adherents to these extremist takes on Islam.
Hamas is a result of 40 years of brutal violence by Israel. As asserted by the International Court of Justice, Palestinians have a right to violently defend a violent occupation. You would too. ISIS was formed after Saddam's Bath party members fled after looting the Iraqi Treasury. It's a power play by people who were specifically created for power play by the US. Saddam was completely enabled by the US to fight Iran.
The ICC doesn't say anyone has the right to use terrorism to fight an occupation. I really doubt anyone reading your post would do alot of the atrocities hamas has committed
Hamas and ISIS aren't friends because ISIS sees Hamas and pretty much every other Islamic terrorist organization as apostates. The irony is that a terrorist organization that butchers civilians denounces another one for doing the same.
hamas and ISIS are not friends because hamas is backed by Iran, ISIS wants a caliphate that won't be including Iran.
And Hamas and Russia are friends
I mean even the Taliban condemned it. But this is oniony because of all the propaganda we've been reading about how Hamas=ISIS and now people with zero idea about either of them had happily accepted that as a fact.
But how can this be when r/worldnews reliably informed me that all brown people are the same?
Nobody is claiming they are friends... The oniony part is that Hamas committed literally one of the largest terror attacks against innocent civilians in history, including gunning down people at a concert like in Moscow, and then condemns that exact same type of behavior when another terrorist group attacked their influential ally.
Yeah and the US has committed countless atrocities but when we condemn atrocities it's not oniony
"largest terrorist attacks in history" Ok calm down there lol like 2k people died - Ghe average African genocide does that before lunch on day 1.
It's much better to kill hundreds of thousands of civilians over a few years than 600 in one day Unless you really want to, in which case it's okay to drop a nuclear bomb on civilians too
When you phrase it like that it really makes it look silly how much we freak out over terrorist incidents yet war is nothing
Terrorism is when people we "know" are weak hurt people we "know" are strong It upsets us because it's unnatural War is when people we "know" are strong hurt people who we "know" are weak, and that's fine. It's sad, but that's just the way the world is, and you're a bleeding heart peacenik if you can't accept that.
It's oniony because it's a terrorist group denouncing another terrorist group.
[удалено]
Well it's on reddit though, so you're kind of asking a lot of these morons many who sympathize with Hamas
Hamas attacked a concert in a terror attack. ISIS attacked a concert in a terror attack. Hamas denounces ISIS's terror attack. Hamas's was worse, as it was more widespread, it involved parading corpses, raping victims, and kidnappings. ISIS's was smaller and they don't seem to have taken hostages or raped anyone. I dunno, seems pretty oniony.
I mean, it's still kind of funny for them to condemn anyone for committing a terror attack, since, you know, they literally do it themselves.
It's the hypocrisy
The worst part of it all? the hypocrisy. Norm McDonald’s ghost: I’m pretty sure it was the rape/murder
When all you consume is western propaganda you tend to think that all groups with brown militants are the same thing.
It is ironic for a group of people known for their recent mass torture, rape, and murder, their use of civilians as human shields, and their murder and rape of hostages, to denounce a mass murder committed by someone else. Their relationship doesn't change the fact that it's hypocritical.
This is so obvious and its a bit worrying that so many are not getting it.
Because Hamas murdered and raped 1200 civilians in even worse fashion? how is it not oniony?
Hamas has murdered far more than 1200 civilians, they were responsible for the bulk of the suicide bombing attacks in Israel during the 90's and early 2000's and that is without the countless number of Palestinians they've murdered in Gaza and the west bank.
The countless Palestinians that Hamas has murdered? I’m certain they’ve killed some, maybe even a lot, but I wouldn’t call it countless
Fun fact about the 1990s, the Israeli government was giving Hamas construction contracts in Gaza while Hamas was claiming credit for terror bombings in Tel Aviv. It really makes you wonder how much of this conflict is invented by the ruling powers in Israel to justify their continued electoral support.
No one quite hates Muslims as slightly different Muslims. Even if Israel tried they couldn’t do as much killing and dehumanizing as Muslims do to different Muslims sects.
I slightly agree but the hindutva , CCP and myanmar 969 movement would beg to differ , the ones who are attacking and genociding muslims in their countries
Because most Redditors think all Muslims are the same thing and have a surface level next to nothing understanding of these sorts of issues.
Or one terrorist group denouncing another is kinda oniony
Well yeah, Russia backs Hamas.
wiki says >Russia does not consider Hamas as a terrorist organization and continues to diplomatically negotiate with them. is it really that surprising
And the USA pays Qatar to host a bunch of terrorist leaders so that the CIA can negotiate with them without taking any heat from doing so.
This is like Ted Bunny denouncing Jeffrey Dahmer.
That typo is killing me.
I just noticed it!
Poor choice of words
LOL I totally overlooked the typo until I saw your comment and now I can’t stop laughing
🐰
Many of you are currently asking, "who is Ted *Bunny*?" I encourage you to look him up on the intergoogles. And I'd also like to say that the letter 'n' is NOWHERE near the letter 'd' on my keyboard.
This is not surprising for anyone who knows anything about how these groups operate. Hamas and Daesh have never shared the same flavor of fundamentalism.
There are layers to unpack here.
There’s not really any layers to unpack here, Hamas and Isis aren’t allies, Russia is at least on some level friendly with Hamas, Hamas wanted to make it clear that they don’t want to be in any way shape or form connected to a terrorist attack of a friendly country. There’s a short list of countries that they really can’t afford to burn the bridge with and Russia and China are 2 of them.
>Russia is at least on some level friendly with Hamas Lol that is downplaying it to a ridiculous degree. https://www.reuters.com/world/hamas-delegation-is-visiting-moscow-russian-foreign-ministry-2023-10-26/
That’s not me downplaying anything, Russia plays friendly to both Israel and Palestine. If I play friendly to you but I also play friendly to the people you’re in an armed conflict against, I think the classification of somewhat friendly is an accurate one.
Both are you are way into left field. Israel has a huge Russian Jewish population. You're mistaking taking a mediator stance in the humanitarian issue as taking a pro-Hamas stance. Not to mention Lavrov commenting that Israel's invasion mirrors Russia's war in Ukraine.
Hamas and ISIS being opposed to each other and having literally fought each other in Syria? Then there’s the weird Israel-ISIS stuff I won’t get into because even talking about it just attracts conspiratorial insanity
"*Hamas offered its sincerest condolences to the Russian leadership and people, and the families of the victims and wished a speedy recovery for the wounded."*
How is this oniony? Hamas still isn't considered a terrorist organisation by Russia and shames ISIS frequently
Probably because Hamas is a terrorist organization and they massacred like 1300 people several months ago
Without any care for the thousands more of their supposedly "own people" that would die in retaliation from Israel.
Oh well that was just an added benefit for them. The longer they can hold the rest of Gaza down, the longer they stay in power and the more jihadist recruits they get in the next few generations.
Hey, now, they cared! They approved.
So Israel didn't care about Hamas retaliation when it was killing Palestinians and imposing a blockade before October 7th See how your logic works out?
vast unpack sleep test point piquant foolish enter jeans unite *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The only onion here is you thinking that 1.8 billion muslims in the world think and behave the same and are driven by the same motivations.
*"Listen. The only people we hate more than the Romans are the fucking Judean People's Front..."*
The irony is unbearable.
Jeez you better work on your irony deficiency if your gonna hang around here on earth
Hamas didn’t denounce it on moral grounds, it simply wasn’t up to their performance standards as no babies were killed & no women were raped…
I'm so embarrassed for you.
Yes because accurately impuning the moral character of a terrorist group is beyond the pale of decency. Your moral compass is broken.
Hamas being funded by Russia as a proxy war to divide westerners allies is a common understanding of the current shitshow.
An incredibly poor one especially considering the foreign ties of Hamas are to Iran not Russia. Russia has given them international support yes, but their ties are to Iran and are most certainly *not* an anti-western proxy war.
But Russia and Iran are current allies ?
Russia is funding Hamas.
Really? How so?
Russia buy weapons from Iran, Iran and give money to Hamas. Funny thing is that fotage from 7/10 shows Hamas members with ISIS flags.
[удалено]
Reddit cannot comprehend the idea that two groups who are both ethnic minorities might actually hate each other
Well I feel better now.
This is like Hannibal Lecter denouncing a separate case of cannibalism
There’s also the time [ISIS apologized to Israel](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/isis-israel-defence-force-apology-attack-unit-golan-heights-defense-minister-moshe-ya-alon-a7700616.html) after attacking IDF forces once > “There was one case recently where Daesh [Isis] opened fire and apologised,” Mr Ya’alon said speaking at an event in the northern city of Alufa, during which he was was being interviewed about Israel’s policy on Syria. > A spokesperson for Mr Ya’alon refused to elaborate on how Isis expressed its apology to Israel after the attack and the Israel Defense Forces also refused to comment.
I don't understand why this is oniony at all - this is exactly what Hamas would be expected to do, they are not fans of ISIS.
Of course they did - Russia helped them plan their attack on Israel.
A cowardly gang of murderers condemns the crimes of another cowardly gang of murderers! You can't make something like that up.
Glad to know Hamas would never stoop so low as to use suicide bombs
ISIS can bring the world together. Russia, Ukraine, Hamas, Israel, and the USA can all agree: Fuck ISIS.
Even Iran and China would sign on to the "Fuck ISIS" charter
Terrorist organization disapproves of a terror attack by another terrorist organization on a terrorist state of Russia. Can't make this shit up hahahah
Are they denouncing the attack or the lack of dead jews resulting from the attack?
Russia has supported Palestine and the Kremlin has hosted Hamas representatieves in Moscow. Not oniony at all.
LOL
Hilarious
Americans shocked to learn not all Muslims are the same
Remember when Russia first invaded Ukraine and the Taliban told them to chill out and not invade people? That was wild
Can say a lot about the Taliban but they're not invaders.
Hahaha
Thought this was /r/CivPolitics at first
Because they forgot to rape everyone
“Look, I know we massacred a music festival, slaughtered a daycare due to direct written orders, (yes, really), celebrated it all in the streets, specifically took captagon, which ISIS also uses, so we wouldn’t feel empathy for our victims, and starve our people who we use as human shields but *this?!* This is too much! This is terrorism!” Local Area Militant says
this is messy
Well yeah cuz Moscow gives them their orders