reddozen

> The way Camp David is described also does not match reality. They failed to agree on several points and therefore there was never an offer that could be rejected.

You mean Arafat's refusal for to even define infinite "right of return" or participate in any way with the Summit? While every historian (including his Arafat's wife he told to hide in Paris) said he was preparing for the second intifada?

Also its widely known that the Summit was the closest they have ever gotten outside Taba. Its a hilarious statement to think there was no "offer".

> First let's acknowledge that at least 50% of those killed are civilians and many were also injured.

To be clear, this argument is more flawed. You don't know the total dead. Do you really think a militant terrorist organization in a non democratic country would immediately and/or accurately report how devastated their combat capacity is?

Sure you can hold that opinion but Volume II, Chapter 1, Section F of Customary International Humanitarian Law[1] strictly disagrees with you.

[1] https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/customary-ihl/v1/rule1

If you want to come up with a different word sure, I would just call whatever you defined there as traditional a corporation.

But worker cooperatives is known as "one worker, one vote" and anarcho syndicalists like Richard Wolff wouldn't consider that a worker cooperative anymore.

Mondragon is not a worker cooperative. They have a three-tiered worked system[0] with clear hierarchical structures and differences in voting power. The temporary worker tier (largest) having no voting power whatsoever.

[0] https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290978631_The_Mondr...