@thor I am pretty well off with money and even for me when I go healthy the price is so high I notice it.
@thor I dunno aggrculture can be pretty healthy.. i mean think of all the leafy greens we harvest, plants that cant even grow in the wild anymore.
The issue isnt that aggriculture is unhealthy, its that maximizing caloric density is unhealthy, and that only comes from overpopulation. With healthy populations farms dont need to hyperfocus on carbs as much since there are more resources (land) for fewer people.
@thor ironically thats a preatty healthy diet for anyone... the fact that healthy diets are generally quite expensive is in and of itself an issue. Double so if its more life threatening than usual as is the case with diabeties.
Well thats fair. I do often pick my words carefully and expect people to read my words carefully. Most people dont. But i give people the benefit of the doubt that they can ask or i can clarify and then they will interprit me more how I intend.
So while I do understand the distinction getting lost at first once I was explicit about the distinction then its on you to recognize the mis communication and moving foward be more aware of the distinction I am trying to convey.
#1 im not sure if russia directly encourages them. More likely it would have been indirect through Iran, a mutual ally.
If someone wont care about a distinction that they should care about, and intentionally misunderstand me or misinterprit then thats on them, I care very little.
The fact is these two are hugely different things to anyone being honest with themselves. So if you treat them as the same then thats your problem, not mine.
As for 911, no we didnt bring it on ourselves. But we did make it a point to ensure we responded exactly the way the terrorists wanted and literally fell in line and immediately let the terrorists win.
**They** may not be, but their country surely was. Their decision was for their country and that would (or at least should) have been their consideration.
The line is pretty damn thick the two arent even remotely related.
If i jump in the water with weights on im going to drown thats to be expected... no one in their right mind would think because I said that it is "close" to saying "people who swim with weights on deserve to die".
More so when i explain clearly and repeatidly the distinction.
No worry this isnt a misinterpretation i can give a pass on when it is belligerent.
> Dear Dr. Freemo: Israel has the legitimate right to defend it's homeland against Hamas
If they had a homeland sure, they dont... all they have is someone elses homeland they invaded and squated on.. They do **not** have a right to defend someone elses homeland as their own that they stole.
> , Israel has the right to counter attack Hamas for war crimes committed against the Jewish People there is no disagreement
No not when those jewish people are invaders in someone elses land they dont.
> The National Government of Israel is committing atrocities against the Palestinian People.
As an illegitimate government, but yea, they are.
> Palestinians already live in overcrowded conditions at best,
Not before the invasion they werent. It was only after israel invaded they took 2/3 of the land murdered most of the people and moved the rest into perminant 80 year long concentration camps with walls. They even continually and intentionally turned off their water and power during times of peace as punishment.
Calling an open-air concentration camp that the israelis created as simply "overcrowded" is an under statement.
> Palestinians are being caught in the cross fire between the aggressors Hamas and victims the Jewish People.
You cant call a group of people who literally invaded palestinian home land, people who have **no** claim of any kind to the land, as not being the aggressor. PAlestine attacked israeli aggressor on **their** land, land stolen from them. Calling it israels land is dishonest to what happened.
> Everyone knows that in modern times militaries during war campaigns are supposed to try to protect innocent civilians where humanly possible from being injured and killed.
Agreed
> IDF knows that Hamas has deliberately blocked Palestinians from escaping and fleeing from war torn areas
No we dont, all sources on this have come from ISrael or its allys. Unless something changed I tried really hard to confirm this just a few weeks ago in a puiblic discussion from any neutral source and every source we found at the time explicitly stated they could not confirm this.
Even if it is true, as I've said I dont deny the Hamas has commited war crimes, and they are wrong. But I have pointed out for every war crime hamas has commited there is one we can show ISrael commited. Worse yet when israel commits a war crime the death toll is usually 10x higher.
You say they blocked civilians, even if we take that at face value, Israel has cut off water and electricity in peace time to mass-murder entire palestinian populations, and was even called to international court on it for war crimes and refused to show.
So at best you can say they both commit war crimes and as such that isnt an argument for either side.
So this accusation may or may not be true.
> The Israel - Hamas War is truly a humanitarian crisis of epic proportions. 2 Million Palestinians with no escape from relentless attacks from opposing military armed forces. If this is not an active case of genocide what is?
Literally cutting off large parts of entire countries from water, food, and electricity during peace time... and doing so over an 80 year period.. id say thats far far more of a genocide than a road that was blockaided **maybe** for nebulous reasons.
It isnt the same logic and it isnt a justification and I have repeated this several times now.
Saying something is **Expected** is not the same as saying it is **justified**. The world is unfair, you should expect LOTS of unjustified things to happy, and many times you can predict (expect) what they are.
The palestinians were largely nomadic people and did not seem to have much interest in establishing governments. They wanted to live on the land and be free, and ffrankly it worked great for them for quite a while.
The palestinian government only needed to organize much later in history once they were already under attack.
Its also irrelevant, what matters is who has citizenship over the land and a say in how its run (people born there).. whether they choose to organize into a government to do so or not means very little.
It justifies nothing, but it does make it an expected response... there is a huge difference between these two you two seem to be missing.
The world is unfair, when a cop pulls me over I kiss his ass because while morally I should be able to say "fuck you" in practice I expect that will make my life harder. Sure the cop is in the wrong, but doesnt change the fact im spending the night in jail. When i make my choices I must do so being aware of what is likely to happen, not what is justified in happening.
Same here. you murder a population you should **expect** them to try to murder you. It is wrong, and in an ideal world they wont. But in all reality we know how the world works and we know they will.
As with all law, if something is signed under threat of violence it is invalidated.
So yes if you can show there was a jewish owner to the land first, can prove that owner was forced to transfer the deed, and a person can show a direct chain of inheritance right from that jewish owner, then in that circumstance they would have a right to claim the plot.
Oh wonderful now you can mind read what palestinian officials really thought.. I am impressed.
Saying their irresponsible for invading a country and murdering is justification for invading a country and murdering..... lol yea ok.
There is no israel, only an occupied palestine.. they cant run into israel they can only shoot invaders on their land.
They had a government long before that. The fact that they were killed off invaded, and abused and the USA made sure to rig the fight by supporting the underdog.. .means they were forced into an accord that has no moral legitimacy.
Great, then if we agree on that then palestine should be reformed not Israel. They are the ones being invaded, they were there, they get precedence if you have to pick one.
No but their parents did, and those parents were very irrespoinsible for invading a country, murdering tons of people and then having a 4 year old child they bring into a war zone **they** created... IT does **not** justify the hamas taking those kids, but it absolutely is a consequence of their parents choices that they were well aware of when they made it.
Jeffrey Phillips Freeman
Innovator & Entrepreneur in Machine Learning, Evolutionary Computing & Big Data. Avid SCUBA diver, Open-source developer, HAM radio operator, astrophotographer, and anything nerdy.
Born and raised in Philadelphia, PA, USA, currently living in Utrecht, Netherlands, USA, and Thailand. Was also living in Israel, but left.
Pronouns: Sir / Mister
(Above pronouns are not intended to mock, i will respect any persons pronouns and only wish pronouns to show respect be used with me as well. These are called neopronouns, see an example of the word "frog" used as a neopronoun here: http://tinyurl.com/44hhej89 )
A proud member of the Penobscot Native American tribe, as well as a Mayflower passenger descendant. I sometimes post about my genealogical history.
My stance on various issues:
Education: Free to PhD, tax paid
Abortion: Protected, tax paid, limited time-frame
Welfare: Yes, no one should starve
UBI: No, use welfare
Racism: is real
Guns: Shall not be infringed
LGBT+/minorities: Support
Pronouns: Will respect
Trump: Moron, evil
Biden: Senile, racist
Police: ACAB
Drugs: Fully legal, no prescriptions needed
GPG/PGP Fingerprint: 8B23 64CD 2403 6DCB 7531 01D0 052D DA8E 0506 CBCE