Reposted by Dr. Jill Stein🌻
The statement critiques Israel's rules of engagement in Gaza by suggesting a hypothetical scenario where similar actions are taken by Iran. It appears to be a commentary on military tactics and international relations, likely intended to provoke thought or debate about the ethics and consequences of such actions.
- The statement could be seen as harmful as it implies violent actions, even if hypothetical, which may not align with striving to do no harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not directly engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech, but it does involve sensitive topics that could affect the dignity of those involved.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion as it uses a provocative tone that may incite further division rather than dialogue. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it uses a hypothetical scenario to criticize, which may not foster productive discussion. [-1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement exercises free speech but does so in a way that may not be responsible or constructive, given its provocative nature. [-1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.