|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 3:17:48 GMT -5
Can we foresee a House of Reps without a speaker for weeks to come?
|
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 6:53:26 GMT -5
Some insight into why Scalise dropped out 🧵⬇️
|
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 7:04:11 GMT -5
He knows a little sumpin-sumpin about forgiveness 🙄
|
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 7:06:14 GMT -5
Yes, PT, some moosic 😉
|
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 7:14:15 GMT -5
Whuut
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 8:10:44 GMT -5
Relocate where?
Can anyone tell me - of all the ones that keep humping the actions of Hamas if any of this is proportional?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 8:19:00 GMT -5
Maybe should have thought about that before you invited the idiot locust to infest your party. Constantly blaming Dems for all the fucking chaos you create yourself.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 8:30:34 GMT -5
Why only condemn terrorists? It should be hard to condemn state sponsored terrorism too. This isn't something that just happened. The roots of the conflict goes back to 1948. If you can't recognize that, it is impossible to understand where we're at. No one excuses Hamas other then the brain dead. But to somehow whitewash Israel is to commit a lie. How many more Palestinians have died?
In this conflict alone it is now more dead Palestinians than Israeli civilians. In fact in almost all conflicts up till this point it is generally a 10 to 1 disproportional disparity in civilians killed. The brunt of the pain and suffering has ALWAYS been on the backs of Palestinians. That is not to excuse the actions of barbarians like Hamas, but the constant excuse of the disgusting behavior of both Israeli settlers and the Israeli government should always be remembered.
After all, the one time in the 90's when there was a real chance of a solution, Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by a Israeli religious fanatic. It should be noted that Bibi was in the opposition party at that time, telling fanatic voters that Rabin should be hung. And when asked to lower the rhetoric, he refused. And Rabin got assassinated. And members of Bibis part wanted the murdered pardoned. What kind of man has no problem fomenting violence against their own countrymen, will somehow show lenience against their perceived enemies.
Bibi and Hamas are butchers. The only thing they know is death and destruction.
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottenlord on Oct 13, 2023 9:05:59 GMT -5
Relocate where? Can anyone tell me - of all the ones that keep humping the actions of Hamas if any of this is proportional? This actually could reasonably be argued as proportional. Hamas did a large scale raid killing over 1000 civilians so it remains proportional to add a ground offensive. Also, proportionality tends to weigh intentional civilian deaths as worse than collateral civilian deaths and surprise attack as worse than forewarned attack. I also don't feel like I have a better option. |
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 9:38:58 GMT -5
Relocate where? Can anyone tell me - of all the ones that keep humping the actions of Hamas if any of this is proportional? This actually could reasonably be argued as proportional. Hamas did a large scale raid killing over 1000 civilians so it remains proportional to add a ground offensive. Also, proportionality tends to weigh intentional civilian deaths as worse than collateral civilian deaths and surprise attack as worse than forewarned attack. I also don't feel like I have a better option. To me, it doesn't matter if it was intentional or proportional - a shot baby is just as dead as a decapitated one. |
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 9:58:53 GMT -5
Any Day of Rage terror attacks in America today, as neocons predicted?
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottenlord on Oct 13, 2023 10:03:23 GMT -5
This actually could reasonably be argued as proportional. Hamas did a large scale raid killing over 1000 civilians so it remains proportional to add a ground offensive. Also, proportionality tends to weigh intentional civilian deaths as worse than collateral civilian deaths and surprise attack as worse than forewarned attack. I also don't feel like I have a better option. To me, it doesn't matter if it was intentional or proportional - a shot baby is just as dead as a decapitated one. I don't disagree. But peace for the sake of peace tends to not result in peace long term. How many died in Pearl Harbor vs the entire war? And what is the reason for Hamas not to enact this brutality in the future? If anything, I think Hamas has baked in both missile and ground invasion as expected responses so to do less than an expected response seems like incentivizing rather than disincentivizing. It doesn't help that we still have no idea what Hamas's objectives are. And then there's just the general emotion of it. I mean, how forgiving would America have been on September 17th or December 13th? Israel's path forward is through blood. It's tragic, but there's not really alternatives I view as viable. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 10:09:03 GMT -5
Relocate where? Can anyone tell me - of all the ones that keep humping the actions of Hamas if any of this is proportional? This actually could reasonably be argued as proportional. Hamas did a large scale raid killing over 1000 civilians so it remains proportional to add a ground offensive. Also, proportionality tends to weigh intentional civilian deaths as worse than collateral civilian deaths and surprise attack as worse than forewarned attack. I also don't feel like I have a better option. It cannot be reasonably be argued as proportional. Just because there is an emotional response attached to the idea of ACCEPTING 'collateral' civilians deaths because of the barbaric actions of someone, doesn't meant that the EMOTIONAL response can declare proportionality. This is an excuse. Giving someone a 24 hour forewarning to EVACUATE over a million people, to go somewhere they can't, isn't somehow a benign act of proportional response. Back in 1944 when the allied units were rolling back the Axis troops, the idea was often to excuse the atrocities committed by allied soldiers, given that the Axis soldiers had brutalized their countries. Or as Stalin said Or Thousands of French and German women were raped by American soldiers. There was a French Moroccan unit in Italy that raped, killed and brutalized Italian women, to such a degree that while France more or less tried to ignore it, the complaints from other commanders got so bad that France finally had to remove the unit and some 120 or so of the 11000 soldiers, received prison sentences or were executed. I don't say this as a measure of equivalence. Bomber Harris for example was well known for his terror bombing campaigns against German cities that didn't at all shorten the war, or had any other purpose then to destroy civilian housing under the misguided and stupid idea that it would demoralize the Germans so they would try to end the war quicker. It didn't. It just murdered millions of civilians. Which felt like 'proportional' to the German indiscriminate brutalization in occupied territories or the bombing campaign against Great Britain. What Israel is doing is what Israel has been doing for over 40 years. It doesn't matter if 1 civilian got killed or none. Where those assaults and attacks proportional in those cases? And there are no options? There are always options. To repeat the only shit they've known for decades isn't an option. It is just perpetuating the cycle of violence. BTW, did you know, that just as with USA and the Talibans, the Israelis support the Hamas in order to undercut the dominant Fatah movement? Yeah, just as with USA, Israel created the Hamas movement in a misguided attempt to deal with Fatah. This was in the 80's. Did you know that 80 percent of Israelis blame the government for what happened? That not only was Bibi warned by Egypt that something was going to happen, but even his own Military warned him of moving the Military to aid the illegal Settlers stealing land from Palestinians on the West Bank, leaving the occupation of the Gaza strip vulnerable - and that Bibis response was to replace competent people with partisan yes men? Bibi is doing what he does best. He is trying to hide his own incompetence by exacting the type of emotional response people understand when they're under attack. But there is a difference here. Hamas and the Palestinians are not the Axis being rolled back after brutalizing France and Eastern Europe. Gaza is the Warsaw Uprising. Or the occupied Yugoslavian territories, or Greece. Where the partisans eventually brutalized their captives after years of barbaric occupation. Where civilians got killed. Where soldiers were strung up and tortured. And 'sympathizers' that did nothing wrong other then trying to live with an occupier, got threated as Pariah once liberated. Like in Ukraine. Like when imprisoned Russian female soldiers were liberated from German camps, were gang raped and brutalized for not only being captured by Germans, but not dying in the process. That is why the emotional idea of collateral damage is as vacuous and silly as the idea of no options. Because it betrays that after this brutal act of reprisal with guaranteed 10 fold more dead 'collateral' civilians on the Palestinian side, not one single politician will argue for a solution that addresses the problem. And the next time it happens, be it 1 person or 10, it'll just excuse another round of 'collateral' proportional dead. Do I have a solution? Did you know that over 70 percent of the Palestinian youth are unemployed? Did you know that Israel only let some 16000 out of 2 million work in Israel? Did you know that Gaza depends on water, power and food from Israel? How about giving everyone a fucking shovel? How about providing people with a way to feed themselves, work for themselves and to rebuild themselves? Power in Gaza. Food in Gaza. More work visas. Less dependence. Not to make them dependent on the 'charity' of Hamas, but rather their own hard work. To give the average aged 18 year old a reason to live. Sounds unrealistic? All other options sure sounds like fantasies' to me. Anyways, it is what it is, but I will always argue against the reasonability of collateral damage. It is lazy and cannot under any circumstances be argued as proportional. In that case words has no meaning. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 10:11:39 GMT -5
Any Day of Rage terror attacks in America today, as neocons predicted? I can think of a few of those white supremacy militias doing something. Hamas and Talibans are local regional groups. The idea that all terrorism is created equal is as moronic as the idea that Vietnam would lead to communism spreading all over the world. Lazy arguments are lazy. But why try harder when the idiot right only argue with bumper stickers? |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 10:25:49 GMT -5
“Who the f‑‑‑ are you?” Van Orden reportedly asked, to which a person responded that they were Senate pages. “I don’t give a f‑‑‑ who you are, get out.”
It would be nice if our Media could ask Van Orden about the many things Biden has already done - such as replenishing munitions and request more aid for Israel. Which happened right away. That he is indeed doing something. Or why Tuberville is still holding our Military and Diplomatic resources hostage, which is impeding our options in Israel. Not that I lay all responsibility on Media, but it would be nice if people would learn that GOP isn't actually doing anything to help and are only seeing this as an opportunity to score political points.
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottenlord on Oct 13, 2023 10:27:32 GMT -5
This actually could reasonably be argued as proportional. Hamas did a large scale raid killing over 1000 civilians so it remains proportional to add a ground offensive. Also, proportionality tends to weigh intentional civilian deaths as worse than collateral civilian deaths and surprise attack as worse than forewarned attack. I also don't feel like I have a better option. It cannot be reasonably be argued as proportional. Just because there is an emotional response attached to the idea of ACCEPTING 'collateral' civilians deaths because of the barbaric actions of someone, doesn't meant that the EMOTIONAL response can declare proportionality. This is an excuse. Giving someone a 24 hour forewarning to EVACUATE over a million people, to go somewhere they can't, isn't somehow a benign act of proportional response. Back in 1944 when the allied units were rolling back the Axis troops, the idea was often to excuse the atrocities committed by allied soldiers, given that the Axis soldiers had brutalized their countries. Or as Stalin said Or Thousands of French and German women were raped by American soldiers. There was a French Moroccan unit in Italy that raped, killed and brutalized Italian women, to such a degree that while France more or less tried to ignore it, the complaints from other commanders got so bad that France finally had to remove the unit and some 120 or so of the 11000 soldiers, received prison sentences or were executed. I don't say this as a measure of equivalence. Bomber Harris for example was well known for his terror bombing campaigns against German cities that didn't at all shorten the war, or had any other purpose then to destroy civilian housing under the misguided and stupid idea that it would demoralize the Germans so they would try to end the war quicker. It didn't. It just murdered millions of civilians. Which felt like 'proportional' to the German indiscriminate brutalization in occupied territories or the bombing campaign against Great Britain. What Israel is doing is what Israel has been doing for over 40 years. It doesn't matter if 1 civilian got killed or none. Where those assaults and attacks proportional in those cases? And there are no options? There are always options. To repeat the only shit they've known for decades isn't an option. It is just perpetuating the cycle of violence. BTW, did you know, that just as with USA and the Talibans, the Israelis support the Hamas in order to undercut the dominant Fatah movement? Yeah, just as with USA, Israel created the Hamas movement in a misguided attempt to deal with Fatah. This was in the 80's. Did you know that 80 percent of Israelis blame the government for what happened? That not only was Bibi warned by Egypt that something was going to happen, but even his own Military warned him of moving the Military to aid the illegal Settlers stealing land from Palestinians on the West Bank, leaving the occupation of the Gaza strip vulnerable - and that Bibis response was to replace competent people with partisan yes men? Bibi is doing what he does best. He is trying to hide his own incompetence by exacting the type of emotional response people understand when they're under attack. But there is a difference here. Hamas and the Palestinians are not the Axis being rolled back after brutalizing France and Eastern Europe. Gaza is the Warsaw Uprising. Or the occupied Yugoslavian territories, or Greece. Where the partisans eventually brutalized their captives after years of barbaric occupation. Where civilians got killed. Where soldiers were strung up and tortured. And 'sympathizers' that did nothing wrong other then trying to live with an occupier, got threated as Pariah once liberated. Like in Ukraine. Like when imprisoned Russian female soldiers were liberated from German camps, were gang raped and brutalized for not only being captured by Germans, but not dying in the process. That is why the emotional idea of collateral damage is as vacuous and silly as the idea of no options. Because it betrays that after this brutal act of reprisal with guaranteed 10 fold more dead 'collateral' civilians on the Palestinian side, not one single politician will argue for a solution that addresses the problem. And the next time it happens, be it 1 person or 10, it'll just excuse another round of 'collateral' proportional dead. Do I have a solution? Did you know that over 70 percent of the Palestinian youth are unemployed? Did you know that Israel only let some 16000 out of 2 million work in Israel? Did you know that Gaza depends on water, power and food from Israel? How about giving everyone a fucking shovel? How about providing people with a way to feed themselves, work for themselves and to rebuild themselves? Power in Gaza. Food in Gaza. More work visas. Less dependence. Not to make them dependent on the 'charity' of Hamas, but rather their own hard work. To give the average aged 18 year old a reason to live. Sounds unrealistic? All other options sure sounds like fantasies' to me. Anyways, it is what it is, but I will always argue against the reasonability of collateral damage. It is lazy and cannot under any circumstances be argued as proportional. In that case words has no meaning. Oh fuck off. You cannot build a society in 24hrs. You cannot just magically wave your hand and give these people jobs. Hamas was created over decades of Israeli brutality and it will take decades of Israeli empathy to dissolve it. The Marshall Plan was not a condition of Germany's surrender, it was something they came up with 3 years later. (Also, the Marshall Plan wasn't about empathy but about the Soviets because no government ever helps another government for any reason but self-interest but I digress) Yes, everything that is about to happen is going to be brutal and bloody and horrific, but that's what war is and Israel suing for peace now makes as much sense as Ukraine. I don't support Israel, but I also do not see another path. |
|
|
|
Post by foggyisback on Oct 13, 2023 10:42:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 10:57:50 GMT -5
It cannot be reasonably be argued as proportional. Just because there is an emotional response attached to the idea of ACCEPTING 'collateral' civilians deaths because of the barbaric actions of someone, doesn't meant that the EMOTIONAL response can declare proportionality. This is an excuse. Giving someone a 24 hour forewarning to EVACUATE over a million people, to go somewhere they can't, isn't somehow a benign act of proportional response. Back in 1944 when the allied units were rolling back the Axis troops, the idea was often to excuse the atrocities committed by allied soldiers, given that the Axis soldiers had brutalized their countries. Or as Stalin said Or Thousands of French and German women were raped by American soldiers. There was a French Moroccan unit in Italy that raped, killed and brutalized Italian women, to such a degree that while France more or less tried to ignore it, the complaints from other commanders got so bad that France finally had to remove the unit and some 120 or so of the 11000 soldiers, received prison sentences or were executed. I don't say this as a measure of equivalence. Bomber Harris for example was well known for his terror bombing campaigns against German cities that didn't at all shorten the war, or had any other purpose then to destroy civilian housing under the misguided and stupid idea that it would demoralize the Germans so they would try to end the war quicker. It didn't. It just murdered millions of civilians. Which felt like 'proportional' to the German indiscriminate brutalization in occupied territories or the bombing campaign against Great Britain. What Israel is doing is what Israel has been doing for over 40 years. It doesn't matter if 1 civilian got killed or none. Where those assaults and attacks proportional in those cases? And there are no options? There are always options. To repeat the only shit they've known for decades isn't an option. It is just perpetuating the cycle of violence. BTW, did you know, that just as with USA and the Talibans, the Israelis support the Hamas in order to undercut the dominant Fatah movement? Yeah, just as with USA, Israel created the Hamas movement in a misguided attempt to deal with Fatah. This was in the 80's. Did you know that 80 percent of Israelis blame the government for what happened? That not only was Bibi warned by Egypt that something was going to happen, but even his own Military warned him of moving the Military to aid the illegal Settlers stealing land from Palestinians on the West Bank, leaving the occupation of the Gaza strip vulnerable - and that Bibis response was to replace competent people with partisan yes men? Bibi is doing what he does best. He is trying to hide his own incompetence by exacting the type of emotional response people understand when they're under attack. But there is a difference here. Hamas and the Palestinians are not the Axis being rolled back after brutalizing France and Eastern Europe. Gaza is the Warsaw Uprising. Or the occupied Yugoslavian territories, or Greece. Where the partisans eventually brutalized their captives after years of barbaric occupation. Where civilians got killed. Where soldiers were strung up and tortured. And 'sympathizers' that did nothing wrong other then trying to live with an occupier, got threated as Pariah once liberated. Like in Ukraine. Like when imprisoned Russian female soldiers were liberated from German camps, were gang raped and brutalized for not only being captured by Germans, but not dying in the process. That is why the emotional idea of collateral damage is as vacuous and silly as the idea of no options. Because it betrays that after this brutal act of reprisal with guaranteed 10 fold more dead 'collateral' civilians on the Palestinian side, not one single politician will argue for a solution that addresses the problem. And the next time it happens, be it 1 person or 10, it'll just excuse another round of 'collateral' proportional dead. Do I have a solution? Did you know that over 70 percent of the Palestinian youth are unemployed? Did you know that Israel only let some 16000 out of 2 million work in Israel? Did you know that Gaza depends on water, power and food from Israel? How about giving everyone a fucking shovel? How about providing people with a way to feed themselves, work for themselves and to rebuild themselves? Power in Gaza. Food in Gaza. More work visas. Less dependence. Not to make them dependent on the 'charity' of Hamas, but rather their own hard work. To give the average aged 18 year old a reason to live. Sounds unrealistic? All other options sure sounds like fantasies' to me. Anyways, it is what it is, but I will always argue against the reasonability of collateral damage. It is lazy and cannot under any circumstances be argued as proportional. In that case words has no meaning. Oh fuck off. You cannot build a society in 24hrs. You cannot just magically wave your hand and give these people jobs. Hamas was created over decades of Israeli brutality and it will take decades of Israeli empathy to dissolve it. The Marshall Plan was not a condition of Germany's surrender, it was something they came up with 3 years later. (Also, the Marshall Plan wasn't about empathy but about the Soviets because no government ever helps another government for any reason but self-interest but I digress) Yes, everything that is about to happen is going to be brutal and bloody and horrific, but that's what war is and Israel suing for peace now makes as much sense as Ukraine. I don't support Israel, but I also do not see another path. Oh fuck off? Excellent argument. I don't think I ever made that argument. I think the argument were about options. I think we can both resign to the fact that whatever is transpiring now with undoubtedly be a brutal, bloody reprisal. Not collateral damage because of the unfortunate actions of IDF, but exacting revenge as a means of hitting back. That is the emotional response to Hamas brutal acts. That is a ridiculous argument and something I was not making at all. Obviously it'll take time, but it is certainly not something anyone have tried throughout this occupation. Israel have instead munched up the best bits of the occupied territories for decades and then enforced it with IDF. That is true, but it was an argument Wilson did prior to the end of WW1; instead of punitive actions against all Germans, Wilson argued that harsh treatment of Germany would only lead to another war. And as we see, it did. And it wasn't just the question of growing Communism in Europe. There was also a question of declining trade, limited foreign exchange due to food consumption and the overall trade deficit in dollar. The food shortages and economic suffering in Europe was on Marshalls mind when they started working on the plan. It wasn't that Communism was growing in a vacuum, but just as with Nazism, it grew out of desperation. The plan wasn't just to address the threat of Communism, but rather the economic revitalization of Europe as a means to stop Communism. Which is the argument I am making. You solve one problem by providing economic opportunities; one is the result of the other. If USA wanted to fight communism alone, they'd do what Israel do. Go in with blunt instruments in every single opportunity. In that regard the Marshall plan addressed a lot of the issues that lead to the European malaise, while Israel failed utterly and has continued to take the wrong lesson from every single conflict. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 11:00:49 GMT -5
The only problem Media has found, is that Biden is old. But he has had a remarkable ability to do a lot of right things despite being old. I would also argue that Biden is not taking enough victory laps over all the great things he is doing. While that sounds corny, since our Media refuse to report on the actual achievements, Biden might have to truly step up to get the word out. That is just the way shit is. Every gaff and stumble will be reported as Biden being old, while not enough is said about his support of labor and the continued economic record that is blowing the previous president out of the water. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 11:13:04 GMT -5
Apparently Santos vows to get revenge on GOP colleagues, for their lack of support, by spilling their secrets. That worked out so well for Cawthorn.
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottenlord on Oct 13, 2023 11:18:33 GMT -5
Oh fuck off. You cannot build a society in 24hrs. You cannot just magically wave your hand and give these people jobs. Hamas was created over decades of Israeli brutality and it will take decades of Israeli empathy to dissolve it. The Marshall Plan was not a condition of Germany's surrender, it was something they came up with 3 years later. (Also, the Marshall Plan wasn't about empathy but about the Soviets because no government ever helps another government for any reason but self-interest but I digress) Yes, everything that is about to happen is going to be brutal and bloody and horrific, but that's what war is and Israel suing for peace now makes as much sense as Ukraine. I don't support Israel, but I also do not see another path. Oh fuck off? Excellent argument. I don't think I ever made that argument. I think the argument were about options. I think we can both resign to the fact that whatever is transpiring now with undoubtedly be a brutal, bloody reprisal. Not collateral damage because of the unfortunate actions of IDF, but exacting revenge as a means of hitting back. That is the emotional response to Hamas brutal acts. That is a ridiculous argument and something I was not making at all. Obviously it'll take time, but it is certainly not something anyone have tried throughout this occupation. Israel have instead munched up the best bits of the occupied territories for decades and then enforced it with IDF. That is true, but it was an argument Wilson did prior to the end of WW1; instead of punitive actions against all Germans, Wilson argued that harsh treatment of Germany would only lead to another war. And as we see, it did. And it wasn't just the question of growing Communism in Europe. There was also a question of declining trade, limited foreign exchange due to food consumption and the overall trade deficit in dollar. The food shortages and economic suffering in Europe was on Marshalls mind when they started working on the plan. It wasn't that Communism was growing in a vacuum, but just as with Nazism, it grew out of desperation. The plan wasn't just to address the threat of Communism, but rather the economic revitalization of Europe as a means to stop Communism. Which is the argument I am making. You solve one problem by providing economic opportunities; one is the result of the other. If USA wanted to fight communism alone, they'd do what Israel do. Go in with blunt instruments in every single opportunity. In that regard the Marshall plan addressed a lot of the issues that lead to the European malaise, while Israel failed utterly and has continued to take the wrong lesson from every single conflict. I don't understand. You're lecturing about the history of brutality in war and then saying "hey, what if they actually gave Palestinians opportunities" and then suggesting that you weren't suggesting that as an actual solution? What argument are you making? What argument do you think I'm making? Do you think I believe that an apartheid state is a viable long term reality? Obviously, we agree that Israel are horrific non-innocent actors. Obviously we agree that war is ugly and gross. But why the fucking lecture when you don't have a viable answer for what can be done about the next week or two? |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 11:54:19 GMT -5
Oh fuck off? Excellent argument. I don't think I ever made that argument. I think the argument were about options. I think we can both resign to the fact that whatever is transpiring now with undoubtedly be a brutal, bloody reprisal. Not collateral damage because of the unfortunate actions of IDF, but exacting revenge as a means of hitting back. That is the emotional response to Hamas brutal acts. That is a ridiculous argument and something I was not making at all. Obviously it'll take time, but it is certainly not something anyone have tried throughout this occupation. Israel have instead munched up the best bits of the occupied territories for decades and then enforced it with IDF. That is true, but it was an argument Wilson did prior to the end of WW1; instead of punitive actions against all Germans, Wilson argued that harsh treatment of Germany would only lead to another war. And as we see, it did. And it wasn't just the question of growing Communism in Europe. There was also a question of declining trade, limited foreign exchange due to food consumption and the overall trade deficit in dollar. The food shortages and economic suffering in Europe was on Marshalls mind when they started working on the plan. It wasn't that Communism was growing in a vacuum, but just as with Nazism, it grew out of desperation. The plan wasn't just to address the threat of Communism, but rather the economic revitalization of Europe as a means to stop Communism. Which is the argument I am making. You solve one problem by providing economic opportunities; one is the result of the other. If USA wanted to fight communism alone, they'd do what Israel do. Go in with blunt instruments in every single opportunity. In that regard the Marshall plan addressed a lot of the issues that lead to the European malaise, while Israel failed utterly and has continued to take the wrong lesson from every single conflict. I don't understand. You're lecturing about the history of brutality in war and then saying "hey, what if they actually gave Palestinians opportunities" and then suggesting that you weren't suggesting that as an actual solution? What argument are you making? What argument do you think I'm making? Do you think I believe that an apartheid state is a viable long term reality? Obviously, we agree that Israel are horrific non-innocent actors. Obviously we agree that war is ugly and gross. But why the fucking lecture when you don't have a viable answer for what can be done about the next week or two? My argument was only to your silly statement about '24 hours'. Of course you cannot change the economic reality for Palestinians in 24 hours or in an arbitrarily short period of time. That's a red herring. My argument is that the economic opportunity, such as with the Marshall plan that you brought up that lasted for several years, is the only way to combat radicalism. And that will take time. Time Israels government haven't spent 1 single minute on trying to achieve. As far as solutions in the short term? Destroying Gaza for millions of Palestinians is not. Can you combat Hamas? Yes - both militarily and economically. The only thing Israel will do is create more resistance. What will turning off Food, medicine and water do? Nothing. Hamas will have resources like every fucking terrorist org. They make sure they're fed on the backs of Civilians. Not shutting off water, food, electricity and medicine isn't going prolong the conflict. Hamas has NOTHING that can stop a well organized assault that goes house to house and root them out. The tanks Israel use are DESIGNED for urban warfare in mind. Lets assume that Hamas will take some of the medicine and food themselves. Okay, how long will a Hamas soldier last when fed, fought by another fed soldier? Just about the same. Because as we see from other resistance movements, the only time the resistance movement fail - is when they run out of ammo and soldiers. See Warsaw. See Leningrad, see Stalingrad (to a lesser extent). See Lebanon. Not food, not electricity, not water or medicine. You or anyone else cannot mention one single modern siege that was won by denying people food. Maybe back in the 1400s when sieges could last years. But as we see in all modern conflicts, civilians will die before the resistance is gone. Displacing millions and murdering thousands of civilians will not end the conflict. The conflict will end when IDF goes in and clears them out. Meanwhile civilians will die from starvation, lack of water and medicine. And Hamas will continue to resist until they're cleared out. Solutions? Not a single one that Israel is doing will change that until IDF goes in. So all the collateral shit is entirely meaningless in the scope and the end of the conflict. There is not a second that I have ever thought that you are making an argument for the continued apartheid by Israel. I am strictly arguing against the points you are making. Not the points you are not making, which seems to be something you're doing. I don't read your mind of course, but to assume you are siding with Israel because you think collateral damage is proportionate is not the same thing. I assume you are simply confusing pragmatism (in your mind about the reality of warfare) with the emotional response to warfare. Which is what a lot of people do. Seldom to we see arguments that address the reality of war with the honest evaluation of how idiotic the excuse of collateral damage is. Partly because people do not look at the overall solutions as anything but hammers. How do you solve a conflict. With hammers. At least we tell ourselves that in the short term. Meanwhile Russia managed to help defeat Germany by trapping a large German army in the Courland pocket and the Allied in several cities among the western European coast without going in and rooting them out. They defeated an enemy by ensuring it could not aid in the rest of the war. Russia learned it the hard way as they kept trying and lost a shit ton of units until someone brilliantly made the decision to stop attacking; the army was trapped there in a highly defensible position and just waiting them out as the overall German army was defeated was way smarter. Sometimes conflicts ends when you focus on the right problem. People die, sure, but Bomber Harris didn't end the war by slaughtering civilians in thousands airplane air raids. They won because they hit the production of oil and synthetic fuel, rendering the German army more or less immobile and by out producing them 100 to 1. None of the millions of dead civilians ended the war anymore then Axis terror campaign in Eastern Europe helped them. To me, the natural response to what Hamas did is the brutal reprisal of Gaza. Emotionally. To me the best response to it, and probably politically impossible. Is to surround Gaza and surgically kill anyone with a gun. Then take the time to go house by house. Telling civilians to leave, clear it out, make sure there are no guns, and move them back in. I am saying impossible because it is a pipedream to think anyone would survive politically doing such an unthinkable humane way of rooting out the enemy. And you would risk having someone pretend being a civilian and try to stab you in the back. So yes, this is not 'realistic' by any modern urban warfare standard, but maybe not brutalizing Palestinians would be a start to defuse the situation that is without any current solution other then future conflicts. So when I read that you see no solutions; I could think of several - realistic or otherwise. And that is the kind of political leadership we need hear from. Because 80 years of occupation has yet to yield any results. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 12:01:19 GMT -5
It should be noted that IDFs leadership and diplomats are all arguing that Hamas and Palestinians are all the same, human scum. Their arguments are not to build a divide between Hamas and Palestinian civilian's, their arguments are that they are the same, so therefor their actions are just.
I have not heard USA make that argument when they occupied Iraq. And I'm not saying it was tremendously different since it resulted in many civilian deaths, but the argument was as far as I can tell, misguided or not, that there was a difference between people who resisted and regular civilians. It is always a hard distinction of course and the failure in Afghanistan and in Iraq has to do with misguided political solution, where the economic aid was disproportionally wasted on bribes and corporations, rather then domestic jobs and employment. But at least the principle actions was not militarily to try to galvanize resistance by leveling civilian housing.
Maybe what I'm saying is that we will never learn. And when we try things goes to shit anyways. So why try?
Maybe because it is the right thing to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 12:11:44 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 12:35:00 GMT -5
Enough depressing shit about the conflict. It is what it is, as sad as that sound.
I do believe SAG-AFTRA joined with the writers guild as part of the ongoing issue with streaming services. Given that the Writers Guild have their deal, would it be inconceivable that they join SAG in protest to put pressure on the negotiations?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 12:46:05 GMT -5
So it is not a threat anymore. It is extorsion.
|
|
|
|
Post by forgottenlord on Oct 13, 2023 12:51:18 GMT -5
I don't understand. You're lecturing about the history of brutality in war and then saying "hey, what if they actually gave Palestinians opportunities" and then suggesting that you weren't suggesting that as an actual solution? What argument are you making? What argument do you think I'm making? Do you think I believe that an apartheid state is a viable long term reality? Obviously, we agree that Israel are horrific non-innocent actors. Obviously we agree that war is ugly and gross. But why the fucking lecture when you don't have a viable answer for what can be done about the next week or two? My argument was only to your silly statement about '24 hours'. Of course you cannot change the economic reality for Palestinians in 24 hours or in an arbitrarily short period of time. That's a red herring. My argument is that the economic opportunity, such as with the Marshall plan that you brought up that lasted for several years, is the only way to combat radicalism. And that will take time. Time Israels government haven't spent 1 single minute on trying to achieve. As far as solutions in the short term? Destroying Gaza for millions of Palestinians is not. Can you combat Hamas? Yes - both militarily and economically. The only thing Israel will do is create more resistance. What will turning off Food, medicine and water do? Nothing. Hamas will have resources like every fucking terrorist org. They make sure they're fed on the backs of Civilians. Not shutting off water, food, electricity and medicine isn't going prolong the conflict. Hamas has NOTHING that can stop a well organized assault that goes house to house and root them out. The tanks Israel use are DESIGNED for urban warfare in mind. Lets assume that Hamas will take some of the medicine and food themselves. Okay, how long will a Hamas soldier last when fed, fought by another fed soldier? Just about the same. Because as we see from other resistance movements, the only time the resistance movement fail - is when they run out of ammo and soldiers. See Warsaw. See Leningrad, see Stalingrad (to a lesser extent). See Lebanon. Not food, not electricity, not water or medicine. You or anyone else cannot mention one single modern siege that was won by denying people food. Maybe back in the 1400s when sieges could last years. But as we see in all modern conflicts, civilians will die before the resistance is gone. Displacing millions and murdering thousands of civilians will not end the conflict. The conflict will end when IDF goes in and clears them out. Meanwhile civilians will die from starvation, lack of water and medicine. And Hamas will continue to resist until they're cleared out. Solutions? Not a single one that Israel is doing will change that until IDF goes in. So all the collateral shit is entirely meaningless in the scope and the end of the conflict. There is not a second that I have ever thought that you are making an argument for the continued apartheid by Israel. I am strictly arguing against the points you are making. Not the points you are not making, which seems to be something you're doing. I don't read your mind of course, but to assume you are siding with Israel because you think collateral damage is proportionate is not the same thing. I assume you are simply confusing pragmatism (in your mind about the reality of warfare) with the emotional response to warfare. Which is what a lot of people do. Seldom to we see arguments that address the reality of war with the honest evaluation of how idiotic the excuse of collateral damage is. Partly because people do not look at the overall solutions as anything but hammers. How do you solve a conflict. With hammers. At least we tell ourselves that in the short term. Meanwhile Russia managed to help defeat Germany by trapping a large German army in the Courland pocket and the Allied in several cities among the western European coast without going in and rooting them out. They defeated an enemy by ensuring it could not aid in the rest of the war. Russia learned it the hard way as they kept trying and lost a shit ton of units until someone brilliantly made the decision to stop attacking; the army was trapped there in a highly defensible position and just waiting them out as the overall German army was defeated was way smarter. Sometimes conflicts ends when you focus on the right problem. People die, sure, but Bomber Harris didn't end the war by slaughtering civilians in thousands airplane air raids. They won because they hit the production of oil and synthetic fuel, rendering the German army more or less immobile and by out producing them 100 to 1. None of the millions of dead civilians ended the war anymore then Axis terror campaign in Eastern Europe helped them. To me, the natural response to what Hamas did is the brutal reprisal of Gaza. Emotionally. To me the best response to it, and probably politically impossible. Is to surround Gaza and surgically kill anyone with a gun. Then take the time to go house by house. Telling civilians to leave, clear it out, make sure there are no guns, and move them back in. I am saying impossible because it is a pipedream to think anyone would survive politically doing such an unthinkable humane way of rooting out the enemy. And you would risk having someone pretend being a civilian and try to stab you in the back. So yes, this is not 'realistic' by any modern urban warfare standard, but maybe not brutalizing Palestinians would be a start to defuse the situation that is without any current solution other then future conflicts. So when I read that you see no solutions; I could think of several - realistic or otherwise. And that is the kind of political leadership we need hear from. Because 80 years of occupation has yet to yield any results. Wait.... what? That's exactly what Israel is saying they plan to do. They gave the 24hr notice because tomorrow they plan to roll the tanks and shoot everyone they identify as a potential enemy. Our entire discussion started because you criticized them telling civilians to evacuate the area before they roll the tanks. At no point was I talking about starving Hamas out. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 12:51:46 GMT -5
BTW, this is just more stalling tactics from Cannon. The actually hearing is called Garcia hearings - that is the 'citing of supporting cases'. The point is through discovery and presentation of evidence to ascertain if it has merit as a Garcia hearing. Cannon blew up the shit to stall, by claiming that prosecution need to DECIDE first what they want out of it BEFORE presenting anything. I know that she's a fucking incompetent hyper partisan boob, but she knows at least that much and this is just to delay, delay and delay so that prosecution cannot appeal.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 13:07:19 GMT -5
My argument was only to your silly statement about '24 hours'. Of course you cannot change the economic reality for Palestinians in 24 hours or in an arbitrarily short period of time. That's a red herring. My argument is that the economic opportunity, such as with the Marshall plan that you brought up that lasted for several years, is the only way to combat radicalism. And that will take time. Time Israels government haven't spent 1 single minute on trying to achieve. As far as solutions in the short term? Destroying Gaza for millions of Palestinians is not. Can you combat Hamas? Yes - both militarily and economically. The only thing Israel will do is create more resistance. What will turning off Food, medicine and water do? Nothing. Hamas will have resources like every fucking terrorist org. They make sure they're fed on the backs of Civilians. Not shutting off water, food, electricity and medicine isn't going prolong the conflict. Hamas has NOTHING that can stop a well organized assault that goes house to house and root them out. The tanks Israel use are DESIGNED for urban warfare in mind. Lets assume that Hamas will take some of the medicine and food themselves. Okay, how long will a Hamas soldier last when fed, fought by another fed soldier? Just about the same. Because as we see from other resistance movements, the only time the resistance movement fail - is when they run out of ammo and soldiers. See Warsaw. See Leningrad, see Stalingrad (to a lesser extent). See Lebanon. Not food, not electricity, not water or medicine. You or anyone else cannot mention one single modern siege that was won by denying people food. Maybe back in the 1400s when sieges could last years. But as we see in all modern conflicts, civilians will die before the resistance is gone. Displacing millions and murdering thousands of civilians will not end the conflict. The conflict will end when IDF goes in and clears them out. Meanwhile civilians will die from starvation, lack of water and medicine. And Hamas will continue to resist until they're cleared out. Solutions? Not a single one that Israel is doing will change that until IDF goes in. So all the collateral shit is entirely meaningless in the scope and the end of the conflict. There is not a second that I have ever thought that you are making an argument for the continued apartheid by Israel. I am strictly arguing against the points you are making. Not the points you are not making, which seems to be something you're doing. I don't read your mind of course, but to assume you are siding with Israel because you think collateral damage is proportionate is not the same thing. I assume you are simply confusing pragmatism (in your mind about the reality of warfare) with the emotional response to warfare. Which is what a lot of people do. Seldom to we see arguments that address the reality of war with the honest evaluation of how idiotic the excuse of collateral damage is. Partly because people do not look at the overall solutions as anything but hammers. How do you solve a conflict. With hammers. At least we tell ourselves that in the short term. Meanwhile Russia managed to help defeat Germany by trapping a large German army in the Courland pocket and the Allied in several cities among the western European coast without going in and rooting them out. They defeated an enemy by ensuring it could not aid in the rest of the war. Russia learned it the hard way as they kept trying and lost a shit ton of units until someone brilliantly made the decision to stop attacking; the army was trapped there in a highly defensible position and just waiting them out as the overall German army was defeated was way smarter. Sometimes conflicts ends when you focus on the right problem. People die, sure, but Bomber Harris didn't end the war by slaughtering civilians in thousands airplane air raids. They won because they hit the production of oil and synthetic fuel, rendering the German army more or less immobile and by out producing them 100 to 1. None of the millions of dead civilians ended the war anymore then Axis terror campaign in Eastern Europe helped them. To me, the natural response to what Hamas did is the brutal reprisal of Gaza. Emotionally. To me the best response to it, and probably politically impossible. Is to surround Gaza and surgically kill anyone with a gun. Then take the time to go house by house. Telling civilians to leave, clear it out, make sure there are no guns, and move them back in. I am saying impossible because it is a pipedream to think anyone would survive politically doing such an unthinkable humane way of rooting out the enemy. And you would risk having someone pretend being a civilian and try to stab you in the back. So yes, this is not 'realistic' by any modern urban warfare standard, but maybe not brutalizing Palestinians would be a start to defuse the situation that is without any current solution other then future conflicts. So when I read that you see no solutions; I could think of several - realistic or otherwise. And that is the kind of political leadership we need hear from. Because 80 years of occupation has yet to yield any results. Wait.... what? That's exactly what Israel is saying they plan to do. They gave the 24hr notice because tomorrow they plan to roll the tanks and shoot everyone they identify as a potential enemy. Our entire discussion started because you criticized them telling civilians to evacuate the area before they roll the tanks. At no point was I talking about starving Hamas out. That is what they plan to do? First, they bomb the fuck out of Gaza then give an arbitrarily short deadline for UN to pull out their resources. Come on man... At no point did I claim that you did. I am claiming that the Israeli solution of starving out Gaza is the excuse, but it is nothing more than more reprisals. I am presenting the whole picture of the problem vis a vis a solution, as suppose to one liners that lack argumentative complexity. At no point did I state that this is what you think. I can't read your mind. I thought I made that clear. Lets bone this out. Your claim is that there is no other solution then what Israel is doing isn't an endorsement that what they are doing is the right thing to do. Maybe pragmatically you think that is the only thing left on the table because of whatever, but that's not relevant. I am saying that the only thing Israel is offering as a solution is cruel, indifference and doesn't meet the definition of proportional response. Your argument. But I am not claiming that you are endorsing or supporting what Israel is doing; only see it as the only solution left. Not as a long term solution, but as the reality of our modern understanding of conflicts. I AM saying that the Israeli excuse for what they're doing is not proportional at all. With the examples of shutting off food, medicine, electricity and water. It is cruel and does nothing to shorten the conflict. It is just to retaliate against civilians. I don't know what is in your head, but my experience of your prior arguments have never made me believe that you have a Machiavellian callous streak. I am simply pointing out the context less 'proportional' argument with how it does not support anything Israel is doing; other then indifferent revenge for the civilians that were killed. And the whole evacuate the north in arbitrary short period of time, after leveling entire blocks is not a surgical strike, thought out with the Civilians best in mind. It is the veneer of reason given by an indifferent IDF that is about to go Rambo on Gaza with the atta boy by cowardly politicians in Europe and USA that keep their blinders on to the disproportionate reaction to what Hamas did. Our lizard brains tells us that an eye for an eye is the modus operandi for thousands years of human history, ingrained in every fiber of our humanity; and I'm just stating the obvious. It serves no proportional purpose other then blood for the blood god. |
|
|
|
Post by mrobvious on Oct 13, 2023 13:20:41 GMT -5
The video of Bernie Sanders walking into a stupid Tik Tok dance and looking like he want to go scorched earth on the scourge is so amusing to me. I think his face as he tried to go around these two morons blocking the walkway, speaks for all of us.
|
|
