For examply by increased range: Weapons that shoot down rockets/drones before they hit can protect a city or region.

a war is always more expensive

Call the Kremlin/White House/Zhongnanhai, I think you're onto something there.

"Diplomatic Solution" is only viable if rulers care about pre-war military economics. Authoritarians don't always do that.

just following your metapher, someone trying to break in is already ww3

And hoping that it doesn't happen just because you have some more tanks is just an unproven naive hope.

For examply by increased range: Weapons that shoot down rockets/drones before they hit can protect a city or region.

nothin' shooting down a nuke, just sain'

“Diplomatic Solution” is only viable if rulers care about pre-war military economics. Authoritarians don’t always do that.

so they also don't care about cost increase afterwards

Well, the gas pipeline was built in the early 2000s to get russia on board as a business partner to prevent escalation. As the saying goes: if the goods are not rolling, the tanks are rolling between countries.

Fascism is when people make excuses for sending weapons to support a genocidal Apartheid in the middle of a genocide,

And thinking that "look I'm helpless, please don't kill me" is something else than naive hope?

nope

that's the part where the existential dread sets in: Currently I only see a downwards spiral and absolutly idealessness on everyone how to stop it.

I hear you. You want to focus on the specifics of the military supplies. But it’s important to recognize that Germany’s involvement in providing any military support to Israel is complicit in the larger picture. The claim that the supplies are defensive or not used in Gaza doesn’t fully address the larger strategic implications. Even if the gear isn’t directly deployed in Gaza it strengthens Israel’s overall military posture. This allows Israel to maintain control and continue actions that are widely criticized as genocidal. Germany’s role in enabling this, regardless of the specifics of the arms delivered, cannot be dismissed simply because of the type of equipment supplied.

As for your point on “genocide” and the use of certain terms, I think we can agree that the international community is divided on how to define this, but it’s clear that any form of ongoing violence against mostly women and children, whether using specific types of weapons or not, plays into a larger cycle of harm. Instead of focusing on the specific classification of military equipment, it’s more sincere to consider the broader implications of Germany’s support for Israel’s actions, especially when it's involvement is a key part of sustaining that military capacity.

You want to focus on the specifics of the military supplies.

No, I want people to use their brains again. And leave that bullshit reality behind were everything is about narratives over actual facts and arguments and every conflict is a fucking teamsport with the goal to scream your side's narrative the loudest.

I would love to criticise Israel's genocidal settler policies and their even worse actions in Gaza right now, but without fucking antisemites loudly agreeing how Israel needs to be destroyed while some neonazis (of all possible "allies" of Israel) insult me as a supporter of muslim extremist terrorists.

I would love to criticise Hamas attacks on Israel without being lextured by some mentally unstable leftists about how there was no attack but only an act of self-defense (preferably on stage with well-ducumented antisemites), or criticise the morons cheering and distributing candy on the streets in Germany when those attacks happened without some room-temperature IQ nazi agreeing because that scum should be deported anyway.

I would love to discuss Germany's actual support of Israel and the implications objectively. I would love to talk about dual-use stuff like com equipment of spare parts for motors and how they should not be delivered at all while missile to shoot down drones are a completely different thing... but I won't do so with people screaming about anti-air frigattes (for a country actually actively attacked by neighbours) being support for a Palestinian genocide; neither will I discuss this with people that pretend that this pseudo-fascist club of fanatics in Israel's government is sane...

In short: I would love to in fact not focus on any one aspect, because there are a lot of factors in a complex situation. And most certainly there is no black and white. But at the moment both sides are mostly insane, and even the ones seeming somewhat sane happily stand beside extremist morons if those happen to sing the correct "team song" at that moment. And so I will keep disrupting both side's narratives -that exactly lead nowhere ever- with details that don't fit the story, because we need to leave those stories (and the tribal sentiments) behind.

You say you want nuance, yet your language is anything but. Criticising genocide and state violence isn’t tribalism. It’s recognising power asymmetry. When you deny that asymmetry, you support the oppressor by default.

Dual-use tech and military platforms do enable broader operations, including blockade and control. Acknowledging that isn’t a team sport. It’s responsibility. Claiming you are effectively censored because of other extremists is performative centrism.

And with this I achieved my ultimate bingo being called a genocidal israeli nazi, a jew hating terrorist supporter and a performative centrist in the last 48 hours... all in reaction to arguing the exact same points each time.

Criticising genocide and state violence isn’t tribalism.

Not per se. But if criticising a genocide is seen as invalid if it doesn't also include that the respective other side is blameless and faultless, then it is indeed about the tribalism. If the fact that Palestinians for decades refused a two state-solution just like Israel in combination with slogans like "from the river to the sea" -thus also seeing a genocide as the only satisfying solution- does take away from or in any way diminishes Israel's genocide, you might care more about "your team" than about people dying.

Dual-use tech and military platforms do enable broader operations

Which is exactly the reasons why I already stated that "they should not be delivered" in my comment above. But the thing here is that we won't have that rational discussion about them when people still loudly scream at anti-air frigattes as support for a genocide. Ffs... even the aforementioned helmets ould fit that category better.

At this point, it’s clear this isn’t a good-faith exchange. I’m done engaging, but I stand by everything I’ve said and I trust that readers can distinguish substance from noise.