Implanting Bill Gates's Micro-chips In Brains For Over 20 Years!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Could you imagine Israelis entering Gaza and raping and murdering people, gleefully, in a celebratory fashion?

Something has gone haywire in the mind of people who do things like that. It's the reason we have a thing called war crimes. Soldiers just being soldiers does not explain My Lai, or Rwanda, or the massacre of Muslims in Bosnia.

Hamas knew there was a line between what they'd been and ISIS. They knowingly stepped over it. They wanted to shock and horrify. They wanted to be extreme.

Our decision to torture people after 9/11 is a good analogy. We'd blown a lot of goodwill attacking Iraq, an innocent nation. But we still had some shreds of respect in the international community. Then the torture stuff came out, and every foreign nation (save those hosting our black sites) said, "Nope. That's a step too far. No bueno. Not acceptable."

I have no doubt that there are Israelis who have committed war crimes, but completely agree that what Hamas did was different from individual acts crossing the line. As I said, and you agreed, what Hamas was rational in its way. Depraved, also. And Hank says they're bad, so we all seem to be in agreement about that.

I'm just not clear what you think you're establishing. Movements that resort to terrorism do so because they can't fight by conventional means. Ideologies that justify terrorism take root among populations that don't see alternatives.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

It's really irritating to say to, again and again, very explicitly, that I'm not equating Hamas and Israel, or what each has done, and for you to keep saying this bullshit again. Are you being obtuse or passive aggressive? Passive aggressive isn't your style, but I thought you had better reading comprehension.

I'm not saying you're equating them. I'm saying you are, bizarrely, refusing to recognize that Hamas did something way more grievous than almost any group, even any terrorist organization, would ever do.

Forget Israelis. Imagine the IRA, during the Troubles (possibly one of the most bloodthirsty terrorist organizations in modern history) stomping into Northern Ireland and raping and murdering Protestants in the streets. It's near impossible to do so.

When Hank draws a distinction between taking someone's land by abusive legal proceedings and raping/killing, and you say "Thanks for letting me know Hamas is bad," you're ducking. You know damn well that Hamas took things to the proverbial "next level" X10.

You're not conceding any of your other points - well made and true - regarding the history on both sides, to acknowledge the unique perversity of Hamas' recent attack, and how and why its not like all the rest, from both sides, that preceded it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I have no doubt that there are Israelis who have committed war crimes, but completely agree that what Hamas did was different from individual acts crossing the line. As I said, and you agreed, what Hamas was rational in its way. Depraved, also. And Hank says they're bad, so we all seem to be in agreement about that.

I'm just not clear what you think you're establishing. Movements that resort to terrorism do so because they can't fight by conventional means. Ideologies that justify terrorism take root among populations that don't see alternatives.

Disregard my post that crossed with this one. Your post here moots it.

Your second point gets to mine. I think that even in terrorism, there are lines. The murder of Israelis at the '72 Olympics was horrific. But even there, it was due to blundering. And it was just shooting.

When I saw the Berg beheading video from Iraq, I recall thinking it was gratuitous. A hostage has value. And yet instead of trading him, they butchered him, in something like a medieval sacrifice.

There is little rational thinking involved in killing a person one can trade for something one wants. It makes no sense. It is the behavior not of a terrorist but of a zealot who wants nothing but to satisfy a blood lust.

Hamas' wretched recent behavior indicates a desire for total war and self-annihilation just as ISIS's beheadings had. Of course, you can say they've been at total war with Israel from the start, which indeed their charter states. But it's been cold, warm, cold, and not terribly dramatic. Bombs here and there. This new thing is a step beyond... an action they know will not end Israel, but all but assuredly will end them (at least in their current incarnation). And they clearly don't care.

"Blow it all up!" I guess if you've no hope and would rather die than live as you are, well, there's a logic in doing what they're doing. But it's an awfully twisted one.

(Kinda like MAGA dead enders here.)

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

And Hank says they're bad, so we all seem to be in agreement about that.

I'm not sure if you are a trolling sock, a twit or if your education included something experimental where they taught you different meanings for common English words. But you said "Hamas comes back over the fence and massacres the settlers. You say, this is uniquely awful! Uh, no it is isn't." To the common folk like me that is equating the two actors as being equally bad. I'm done on this because I like you and I really am bothered by what you post on the topic, year after year.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

There is little rational thinking involved in killing a person one can trade for something one wants. It makes no sense. It is the behavior not of a terrorist but of a zealot who wants nothing but to satisfy a blood lust.

If they just killed people in such ways, that would be one thing. They are killing people in such ways, and publicizing it. The depravity and willingness to go beyond the pale is part of a communications strategy. It's all about the message.

(Kinda like MAGA dead enders here.)

At the risk of overstating the similarities, MAGA dead-enders and Hamas each understand they are minority movements that losing their larger struggle, and each signal a scary commitment and a willingness to break norms. They know that if they play by the rules, they'll lose.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

I'm not sure if you are a trolling sock, a twit or if your education included something experimental where they taught you different meanings for common English words. But you said "Hamas comes back over the fence and massacres the settlers. You say, this is uniquely awful! Uh, no it is isn't." To the common folk like me that is equating the two actors as being equally bad. I'm done on this because I like you and I really am bothered by what you post on the topic, year after year.

Buy a dictionary and learn the English language. Unlike you, many common folk can read what I wrote and understand that I'm not equating the two. Many common folk would read the times I've said I'm not equating the two to understand that I'm not equating the two, but not you.

If you're done on this topic, fine, because you're not really responding to me at all. You don't have the same problems with reading comprehension on other topics. Did you read anything that I wrote in that post after "no it isn't" where I explained what I meant? Obviously not.

eta:

When I said that wasn't uniquely awful, did you think I meant

a) What Hamas did wasn't awful
b) What Hamas did was awful, but not uniquely so
c) What Hamas did is no better or worse than other things Israel has done

Based on, you know, reading what I actually wrote, common folk understand that the right answer is not a) and not c). But you're a smart guy, what did you think?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

If they just killed people in such ways, that would be one thing. They are killing people in such ways, and publicizing it. The depravity and willingness to go beyond the pale is part of a communications strategy. It's all about the message.

Got it. I do get the message.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Buy a dictionary and learn the English language. Unlike you, many common folk can read what I wrote and understand that I'm not equating the two. Many common folk would read the times I've said I'm not equating the two to understand that I'm not equating the two, but not you.

If you're done on this topic, fine, because you're not really responding to me at all. You don't have the same problems with reading comprehension on other topics. Did you read anything that I wrote in that post after "no it isn't" where I explained what I meant? Obviously not.

eta:

When I said that wasn't uniquely awful, did you think I meant

a) What Hamas did wasn't awful
b) What Hamas did was awful, but not uniquely so
c) What Hamas did is no better or worse than other things Israel has done

Based on, you know, reading what I actually wrote, common folk understand that the right answer is not a) and not c). But you're a smart guy, what did you think?

C. Anyone reading it has to think C.

And maybe it's just me, but when I hear someone say "I have black friends. But RACIST THING." I weigh one of those sentences higher than the other.

you might consider taking a step back. But I am now done.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

If they just killed people in such ways, that would be one thing. They are killing people in such ways, and publicizing it. The depravity and willingness to go beyond the pale is part of a communications strategy. It's all about the message.

That's a good point. I'm inclined to view that as counterproductive, as it can only galvanize disgust at them. But then I go back to my earlier point. They don't care. They want total war. And publicizing it as they have puts them across the Rubicon.

At the risk of overstating the similarities, MAGA dead-enders and Hamas each understand they are minority movements that losing their larger struggle, and each signal a scary commitment and a willingness to break norms. They know that if they play by the rules, they'll lose.

It's refusal to deal with reality. Reality dictates that one must compromise. The US cannot be run or controlled by MAGA policies. It is not possible. There must be compromise. Hamas cannot push Israel into the sea. It has just signed its own death warrant in attempting to do so.

And yet, here it appears Trump will nevertheless be the candidate, or the third party spoiler with 30 million votes of hardcore dead enders in his pocket. And Hamas will be all but obliterated.

The lack of compromise in Israel/Palestine accrues largely from geography, which cannot be reconciled, and goes back a long way. But the refusal to deal with others that is appearing here and in right wing movements in Europe is part of a global trend. People write it off as a passing fad of nationalism. But it seems more than that. There's an "I want my reality and I'll have it, actual reality be damned" attitude that persists. It's like a large chunk of humanity has decided its their way or the highway, and being reasonable and horse trading to have functional societies is anathema. Everything's a zero sum game.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That's a good point. I'm inclined to view that as counterproductive, as it can only galvanize disgust at them. But then I go back to my earlier point. They don't care. They want total war. And publicizing it as they have puts them across the Rubicon.

What they want isn't exactly total "war," because they're not a state actor. It's asymmetric conflict. They do things like taking hostages (including everyone in Gaza, among whom they are hiding). They understand that they are going to provoke a massive response from Israel -- you have to see that as part of their plan, a feature not a bug from their perspective.

If the current status quo is stacked against you, one strategy is to totally disrupt the status quo. And now people are worried about a much wider conflict across the region.

It's refusal to deal with reality. Reality dictates that one must compromise. The US cannot be run or controlled by MAGA policies. It is not possible. There must be compromise. Hamas cannot push Israel into the sea. It has just signed its own death warrant in attempting to do so.

And yet, here it appears Trump will nevertheless be the candidate, or the third party spoiler with 30 million votes of hardcore dead enders in his pocket. And Hamas will be all but obliterated.

The lack of compromise in Israel/Palestine accrues largely from geography, which cannot be reconciled, and goes back a long way. But the refusal to deal with others that is appearing here and in right wing movements in Europe is part of a global trend. People write it off as a passing fad of nationalism. But it seems more than that. There's an "I want my reality and I'll have it, actual reality be damned" attitude that persists. It's like a large chunk of humanity has decided its their way or the highway, and being reasonable and horse trading to have functional societies is anathema.

Look, I agree with you, but a huge part of the US population likes the idea that although they are a minority, they do not need to compromise, and can do things like gerrymander, strike people from the voter rolls, subvert elections, and otherwise maintain disproportionate power. If you think it doesn't work, take another look at the Wisconsin legislature, the redistricting plan that North Carolina passed this week, the composition of the US Senate, the election-denying background of the man just elected Speaker of the House, and so on. Again, I agree with you about how problematic this is, but the task of the majority, politically, is to make the minority pay for these tactics, and I wish Democrats were more successful at that. Part of the problem is so-called centrists who will bemoan fringe Republicans without supporting the alternative to them, not that I am pointing any fingers.

Everything's a zero sum game.

No, the point you're making is that it doesn't need to be a zero-sum game. When people cooperate through politics, they can make deals that make everyone better off. When there is trust in the political system, it's not just a zero-sum game. (There are many places in the world where the political system doesn't work that way -- e.g., oil-rich countries where the leadership keeps the gains from resource-extraction. But Western democracies have mostly escaped that trap.) When MAGA conservatives try to maintain their own power at the expense of others and the system itself, they turn it into a zero-sum game, or worse.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

But you said "Hamas comes back over the fence and massacres the settlers. You say, this is uniquely awful! Uh, no it is isn't." To the common folk like me that is equating the two actors as being equally bad. I'm done on this because I like you and I really am bothered by what you post on the topic, year after year.

You do common folk a discredit. He said what Hamas did was not uniquely awful. That is undeniably true.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

You do common folk a discredit. He said what Hamas did was not uniquely awful. That is undeniably true.

Mongolian horde?

Conf to Less: I be damned if I prove Godwin's law.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Was 9-11 an understandable response in your mind?

I can understand it but that doesn't mean it was the right response.

A couple of the lessons I take from the last twenty plus years of wars in the Middle East:

1. You eliminate terrorists through police action, special forces operations, and good diplomatic relations with countries that might otherwise be hosts for them (or that are hosts for them, like Pakistan)

2. You create more terrorists through ground wars with a lot of collateral damage - it's pretty clear that the Iraq war played a big role in the emergence of Daesh.

3. Active civ ops can play a huge role in minimizing support for terrorists.

It would be nice to see these lessons applied today.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Hamas knew there was a line between what they'd been and ISIS.

I'm confused about what you thought Hamas was before Oct. 7.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I can understand it but that doesn't mean it was the right response.

A couple of the lessons I take from the last twenty plus years of wars in the Middle East:

1. You eliminate terrorists through police action, special forces operations, and good diplomatic relations with countries that might otherwise be hosts for them (or that are hosts for them, like Pakistan)

2. You create more terrorists through ground wars with a lot of collateral damage - it's pretty clear that the Iraq war played a big role in the emergence of Daesh.

3. Active civ ops can play a huge role in minimizing support for terrorists.

It would be nice to see these lessons applied today.

Right. The brutality required to eliminate insurgency through force is not palatable to the modern world, even as a reaction to the grossest atrocity.