Cyph0n

Not really sure what to say here. Maybe it’s a lack of empathy or imagination because the victims are Palestinians?

Perhaps a good thought experiment would be to swap out Israel and Palestine with some other similar (real or fictional) conflict to help you think through your apparent confusion.

A wonderful quote that demonstrates how Israel applies different standards to itself: even its active duty combatants are painted as helpless innocents!

“Nimrod Cohen was abducted from Tank 3”

https://www.ynetnews.com/article/hjzgyg9txg

> that Israel's conduct warrants scrutiny.

Was this not your choice of words?

> On asymmetry: you've accidentally made the case for holding Israel to a higher standard.

Huh? Are you replying to someone else?

Israel has killed 10s of thousands of civilians, a large portion of which are children. This along with many other factors - in addition to the higher standard expected from a sovereign state fighting an occupied people - is the reason we call it a genocide.

So the best you can say about Israel’s conduct over the course of the past 2.5 years is that it “warrants scrutiny”?

And if you want to play the number of victims game, even pre Oct 7 one side has always had it significantly worse than the other. After all, one side is a sovereign state that has a technologically advanced military, an air force, a navy, and air defense systems.

You make it sound as if Israel merely made a few PR blunders.. They’ve killed 10s of thousands of Palestinian children.

This is not salvageable without justice and accountability.

The activism worked. Polling shows that support for Israel is dwindling especially among the younger population.

To add to this: anyone who still does not see that Israel is by and far the most dangerous rogue state in the region is (at best) blinded by propaganda.

Iran has repeatedly demonstrated restraint and pragmatism throughout these aggressions on their sovereignty, starting with Israel’s strike on their consulate in Damascus.

I agree, but I believe Gaza is the culmination of this reality due to the cross-section of advanced surveillance, drone tech, and AI-based warfare. It is the first time this combination is fully applied to a non-conventional military/guerilla group in a highly concentrated, urban setting.

Also, given that many 2A proponents still believe in it as a legitimate “correction” mechanism, Gaza should be the final wake up call.

Wrong, but feel free to replace genocide with whatever term you deem politically correct and try to understand my wider point.

Or you won’t need RAM because everything will be hosted in the cloud and used via browser or just desktop streaming :)

I get it dude, but my wider point is that we need to question where this line of argumentation leads to.

Are we saying that, because scamming exists and we haven’t proposed an alternative, it means that clamping down on software installation methods is a legitimate solution to the problem?

Obviously I disagree completely. But it is still sad to see this kind of reasoning on HN of all places :(

Right, but this same problem (scamming) exists on PCs.

Would it make sense to then argue that enforcing TPM-backed measured boot and binary signature verification is a legitimate way to address the problem?

I see, thanks for the clarification.

Does your logic extend to PCs? If not, why?

Because I hope you realize that clamping down on “sideloading” (read: installing unsigned software) on PCs is the next logical step. TPMs are already present on a large chunk of consumer PCs - they just need to be used.

Doesn’t editing require a karma threshold?

Don’t they already get to participate in secondary markets to liquidate?

Uh not really? As a comparison, it is almost impossible to naturalize if you decide to work in the two cited examples (China and KSA).

Also, the green card process very much depends on your nationality.

Just to add one more point that makes the US attractive to global talent: citizenship. In particular: 1) citizenship at birth and 2) viable path to citizenship via green card.

Of course, both of these are in the crosshairs for “revision”.

Regarding this comment specifically, if you took the time to read the next sentence, you would have understood that “back” is referring to Jordan.

I have read your other comments. I am not going to engage further, for two reasons:

1. You’re a bit late to the party, and I primarily respond to engage with readers.

2. You’re clearly coming in with a closed mind.

Yes, it is completely ahistorical - if you buy in to the blessed Zionist narrative, that is.

> The British famously backed the Palestinians

No, the British backed the Jordanians, not the Palestinians. Jordan had its own goals as I alluded to elsewhere. I would recommend reading a bit further on the subtleties and limits to that backing, as well as the strategic reasons for said backing. But I wasn’t talking about the war at all here.

They withdrew because they did not know how to balance the two sides. It was a hot potato, so they threw into the lap of the US.

> And I can't even begin to fathom what this means.

How many seats were there at the UNGA at the time? And how many of those seats belonged to countries who could make sovereign decisions without fear of repercussion from the newly emerged world powers? Keep in mind that WWII ended less than two years ago at this point.

> As you noted in an another comment, Plan Dalet was corroborated by Israeli historians. Which is false.

So there was no ethnic cleansing at all? I suppose 700k or so Palestinians just oopsied their way out of their homes and villages.

> And "war starts" is a very nice and PG way to phrase "attempted to genocide Jews".

Oh boy, not this again..

Oh, I was never interested in arguing with you at all given how you decided to start off this conversation.

I was just pointing out that you can always respond and demonstrate your brilliance to readers of the thread.

Nah, cultural erasure.

The best food Israelis could come up without “inspiration” is bamba. You would think all the “brilliance” would result in some original food lol.

Read up on the election here, tired of responding in this thread: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006_Palestinian_legislative_e...

On rocket attacks, Hamas was sticking relatively well to the ceasefire (again, talking about Hamas, not other groups). The blockade was tightened by Israel post-takeover, which then lead to a resumption of rocket attacks.

Feel free to respond where you disagree for the benefit of those reading the thread.

Btw, linking to a wiki page does not reflect any knowledge on your part. By not engaging with your own words, it is fair to default to assuming that you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Wrong. Try again, anon.

What do you mean by “back”? The West Bank was never legitimately part of Jordan - they forcibly annexed it in 1948.

As for the peace treaties:

Jordan simply did not have the ability to fight Israel any longer, or to deal with Palestinian factions operating in its territory.

Egypt wanted its land back after failing to reclaim it in 1973.

That’s not what happened. You (unintentionally I am sure) glossed over the elections being overruled by the US and Israel, the attempted coup by Fatah in Gaza, and the subsequent blockade.

The point is that they were never in danger of being wiped out.

Hmm is this really the best ragebait you could come up with from behind a throwaway?