rat87

And yet we do nothing to punish the actual criminals, the employees who knowingly higher then abuse them. Why don't we deport Trump, Trump tower wouldn't even be around without polish workers who were here illegally

Except neither of the two most prominent people shot were fighting LEA. They were opposing illegal actions of ICE but they were not fighting

Except DOGE had nothing to do with removing corruption and waste. It was about removing anyone opposed to Trump, removing people who might be pro LGBTQ, and removing barriers to Trump's administration and his friends committing massive fraud

That is false. There has been lots of prosecution of fraud in Minnesota including by Somalis. When a random YouTuber started accusing places without much evidence this blew up but didn't do anything to help actual investigations of corruptions. It did help Trump push his racist agenda and claim we need to deport Somalis because of actions of a handful of individuals. Which is nonsense not only when one compares it to the massive corruption from the Trump administration but when one realizes most Somalis Americans already have citizenship and a good deal are born in the US

It's not about money it's about making sure things are accessible. The ADA is one of the reasons America is more accessible then Europe. Lawsuits are the enforcement mechanism

It's not splitting hairs it gets to the point when people falsely accuse them of every single thing in the book. Weapons have always been imprecise but things that don't have any benefit to the war effort and target innocent civilian deaths are war crimes. You may ask how much the difference matters morally(it still does matter a lot intent it rule based vs consequences based morality systems I'd argue for somewhere in between) but yes targeting matters when it comes to usually false claims of crimes

They do care about not killing civilians the question is how much? And is that enough? There will almost never be any operation near cities without civilian casualties.

This particular operation was an extremely Targeted operation that included tricking Hezbollah into selling pagers meant for Hezbollah internal military use and only deploying small explosions minimizing any unnecessary casualties.

It's not a very good piece of rhetoric asking about nukes because Israel actually has nukes. They didn't use them.

They have carried out other heavier strikes on Lebanon that had worse ratios but were justified by military targets such as Hezbollah leader Nasrallah.

Your suggestion also seems to totally not understand how Israelis view Lebanon. Until recently and still Lebanon does not control violence within it's borders. Hezbollah (a militia/terrorist group that takes orders from Iran) was more powerful then the Lebanese army and decided what happened on the ground. Iran which had a countdown clock counting down to the destruction of Israel. Of course they were supposed to be disarmed after the Lebanese but unsurprisingly the UN resolution didn't have any effect so when they attacked and threatened to invade Israel did what they could to take them out. Israel would love to have peace with Lebanon but that's not likely if Iran and Hezbollah have anything to do with it.

The idea that only criminals or terorists have pagers is ridiculous(you mentined doctors). But Israel didnt target pagers in Lebanon. They sold equipment for Hezbollah internal use om their own network (they convinced Hezbollah to pay a front company for the walkies).

That is the opposite of indicrimante.

as for

> white Judeo-Christian variety

Judeo Christian is a silly concept. Either say christian or say Abrahamic. While most casulties were affiliated with Hezbollah and therefore overwhelmingly Shia Muslim enough of the general public of Lebanon is Christian that they would make at least some of civilian bystanders injured. Also Lebanese people aren't any whiter in average skin color then the average Israeli

> did, in effect, target civilians.

That's ridiculous

> If you attack a military target that is surrounded by civilians, and that attack injures or kills those civilians, then those civilians were also targeted.

They are not targeted.

You could say that depending on number of innocent casualties or the likely number the attacked could be reckless and/or disproportionate in attacking in a way that was likely to cause such injuries. In certain cases you could claim they broke the laws of war although the laws of war are practical (they're not meant to prevent all deaths of civilians, the countries who agreed to them didn't intentionally make it impossible to fight including in defense).

And even if something is not a war crime you could still claim it might be immoral but that is a more complex argument.

There's Clickbait and then this awful headline designed to give people heart attacks.

Who care about fonts? Boring. Why not jazz it up by mentioning coups during an administration that previously tried to pull of a coup attempt. Any administration officials names and coup should not be in the same sentence unless they attempt another one(or unless it's talking about the previous one).

You literally do not understand antisemitism or semitic people or genetics or ethnic and national identity.

Israel's goal since the beginning was to exist, to be able to live. Antisemitism has literally never meant hatred against various semitic people such as Ethiopian semites or Assyrians it has always been a term to describe Jew hatred, coined by a German Jew hater. Also semitic is not a genetic thing, its a language thing and various identities tied to various semitic languages largely do not see it as a useful grouping. I have never heard of pan-semitic movement similar to pan Germanic or pan Slavic ones(those were not universally popular when they existed but they did exist and had some popularity). About half of Israeli Jews ancestors didn't recently live in Europe (and most of those had ancestors who lived elsewhere in MENA). Finally when it comes to genetics both Jews and Palestinians have substantial overlapping ancestry to the ancient Levant region as well as ancestry from outside of it, but that doesn't really change people's minds on ethnic identity and nationalism

The idea that it's a war crime is ridiculous. They specifically inserted it into the Hezbollah supply chain specifically Hezbollah internal use. They didn't just sell them at Lebanons markets they specifically sold the entire special order to Hezbollah directly. I think if any one other then Israel pulled it off a lot fewer people would be baselessly claiming it was a war crime

Pagers are used by more then just criminals(see doctors) and targeting random criminals as opposed to millitants wouldn't be justifiable. But these particular pager that were wired up were specifically intended only for Hezbollah internal use and were sold to Hezbollah by Israel through a third party front.

Most sides in most wars aren't expected to classify every person they killed. Identifying certain people as Hamas(and they could be wrong about some of them) doesn't mean that every single other person is not a member of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, or other millitant

I don't see how. It was intended to paralyze and undermine a militia which it did. A lot of war actions create terror that doesn't make most war terrorism

Corbyn failed because he was a bad politician with extreme views. It was Corbyn not the media who covered him that chose to defend every antisemite they could find. If anything the media was too nice to him(the media is often too worried about false balance you get similar things with Trump). It's entirely unsurprising that he lost what would have been a labor victory without him

They don't have majority political support. Even many Trump voters are against it. Also Trump has repeatedly violated immigration law, hell Trump tower wouldn't exist without the work of unauthorized Polish workers

We are not on track for famines due to lack of food production. It's been solved.

There is more trade then ever people are richer then ever and therefore less likely to have kids. 1 child per family law was a gross violation of human rights that likely did not significantly change the birth rate compared to other countries

The idea that he was off on the timing is wrong. He was wrong and continued to be wrong even as he insisted his predictions would come any day now

Why would we ever want to revisit people like Erlich and the Club of wrong who were famously extremely off in their predictions? And when some of the writings contributed to forced

The claims that theyll be proven right /on track any day now decades after their predictions failed is hard to take seriously.

It's not the business as usual people who made sure that their predictions fail its people working to either improve the world or sometimes to make money that actually changed things. In fact it was the people who pushed neo malthusian thinking that assumed things would continue as usual and therefore get worse

Why Italic as opposed to Romantic/Latin? I don't think there are any surviving not Latin branches of the Italic family are there?

Since people are saying this software doesn't have enough time/known contributors for trust who would people recommend for remote control of say a parents laptop for remote IT support. Preferably $0 and open source but others as well

We can? I'm pretty sure companies have spent billions trying to achieve this and failed. The best they can do is maybe sort of sometime hire people that are good enough

I don't think that's a good summary of what happened. From your wiki link

> In 2013, the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS), under the Obama administration, revealed that it had selected political groups applying for tax-exempt status for intensive scrutiny based on their names or political themes. This led to wide condemnation of the agency and triggered several investigations, including a Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) criminal probe ordered by United States Attorney General Eric Holder. Conservatives claimed that they were specifically targeted by the IRS, but an exhaustive report released by the Treasury Department's Inspector General in 2017 found that from 2004 to 2013, the IRS used both conservative and liberal keywords to choose targets for further scrutiny.

> The Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration's audit found (page 14): "For the 296 potential political cases we reviewed, as of December 17, 2012, 108 applications had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the applicant, none had been denied, and 160 cases were open from 206 to 1,138 calendar days (some crossing two election cycles)."[11] Bloomberg News reported on May 14, 2013, "None of the Republican groups have said their applications were rejected."

The IRS took some stupid shortcuts by trying to look at keywords (including those linked to liberal causes) for more scrutiny of if they met the criteria of a non profit. There's no evidence this was done based on partisanship and it did not cause any groups to be rejected

its an economic move but it would be good not bad if it were a political move coal is bad and we should be moving away from it faster

The idea behind DOGE was to

1. fire people who don't automatically support Trump regardless of the law/constitution/good of the nation 2. Fire people who Trump or maga dislike for some reason (LGBTQ, minorities, people who have ever criticized Trump) 3. Destroy government in general (from people on the ideological right who are willing to set aside any principles to work for Trump)

Reducing waste or making government efficient was never one of the goals. Otherwise they wouldn't have gotten rid of people doing actual oversight work for the government. They also wouldn't have fired so many people on whims (that they had to take back in many cases)

I run desktop Linux. It's pretty hard to switch a billion desktops to Linux even if you do it one at a time. Not to mention a ton of problems with compatibility and corporate and government IT

> Maybe this administration blowing up the government is good, actually.

Of course it's not. Imagine how difficult it will be to rebuild things to function half as well after all the corruption and disruption with less money

It's fairly absolute. There are exceptions but they are usually narrower then most people think. Proving defamation especially against a public figure is difficult on purpose.

As for spreading misinformation if that was illegal the whole Trump administration and fox would be in deep trouble

What truce? Sometimes cancelation is good, sometimes it's not. It depends on the why. Also Republican principles these days are just to blindly follow whatever Trump wants including complaining about cancelation and renaming bases to confederate generals and blackmailing companies into firing people

They have not in any sense taken any high ground

The right has consistently tried to cancel people, has tried to censor people, has complained/played the refs about moderation saying their rights to say racist stuff was being infringed even when it was a moderation decision by a private company not the government

And then under Trump it's only gotten worse/more divorced from any principles