anti_dan
10mo ago
This seems like it would increase the cost of goods significantly compared to the current system. Places like Amazon already face significant last step of delivery costs. Doing so for every supplier to a grocery store? That will make Biden's inflation look like childs play.
anti_dan
11mo ago
That is not what I get from the article at all (despite its author's obvious bias). What we have here is a military equivalent of comstat + incorporation of tracking of specific individuals. The very act of doing this is the opposite of casual disregard for human life, because by making targets, they are necessarily excluding targets, which in this sort of conflict is a demonstration of judiciousness. There is a good case for, instead, simply engaging in creeping artillery fire and leveling every building that is a possible Hamas fortification. And that is simply a military case. Far before you would be engaged in intentional targeting of civilians.
anti_dan
13d ago
But DNA can't solve that factual question. The jury already answered that question without DNA, which can only further implicate him. He can only go from 100% guilty to 100% guilty.
anti_dan
2mo ago
Will it be “post-modern corrosion” or will it be time? Genghis Khan Is believed to (1) have caused the deaths of enough people to slightly alter climate, and (2) have been the most-prolific rapist of which we are aware. And, currently, there are a couple of restaurant chains named after him here in America.
I am not aware of any of these three things being true.
anti_dan
2mo ago
I mean, why else besides being one of those or married being the reason for a name change strikes me as silly
anti_dan
2mo ago
Adams defended John Hancock in court after the latter's smuggling business was caught out. The big deal in smuggling back then was just getting wine and tea without paying taxes on them, but that was enough that it helped fund and train colonists for and prompt the American Revolution.
So an arm of the revolutionary government and its precursors. State.
Jefferson fought the first of the Barbary Wars, against foes who were nominally Ottoman protectorates but really independent warlords funded by human trafficking, extortion, and piracy.
Yes. And we took basically zero POWs. We just sank pirates until their state sponsor agreed to some terms.
I'm not sure that works as a metaphor here, though. That "avoid becoming a legible government" trick in the modern case is a sneaky one. If we can't stop Tren de Aragua from operating here in the US under our noses, why be surprised or angry with Venezuela about the fact that they also can't stop it there? But if we can, then from our point of view the problem is solved here, no need to go nation-building to try to solve it elsewhere.
Yes its a problem of will here, not means. While its more of a question of means/will (aka intentional by Venezuela). I think there is a lot of intentional burying the head in the sand on this question. 3rd party groups is how modern war by inferior powers is conducted. People acting like Venezuela should be treated like a real nation state that is going to conduct proper military operations are delusional.
anti_dan
3mo ago
Live betting is also a space where the books are behind the advanced modelers.
anti_dan
4mo ago
today the civil service is much more of a career
Such is the problem with the federal civil service. Other than the Patent Office, there is little footing for most of such career positions.
anti_dan
4mo ago
Adams was already bought, pre-Trump. Trump is trading him back a little bit of his soul for something both of them actually want, but Adams cant say he wants loudly.
anti_dan
5mo ago
But a ceasefire on these terms is Hamas winning...
We've known this pattern for over 2 decades now. If you don't understand that is on you.
anti_dan
5mo ago
My theory is in my above posts. The entryism starts because the legal environment is hostile to a non-DEI company. Its either coming from the funds, who already had been entered, or the law firms advising the startup, who also have been entered. Why do those continue on? Because legacy profits at most of our larger firms in the US are significant and there is also the issue of the entire education-industrial complex being a captured institution that is slowly burning its legacy reputation in service of DEI.
anti_dan
6mo ago
Affirmative action plus the fact that the average of a certain subpopulation is different is more than enough.
Most men who went to college will, statistically, never have met a black woman who is attractive and on their level.
anti_dan
7mo ago
Even a public defender trying his middle in the system described (finances aside) would not agree to the system proposed. On call PDs dont currently exist. Their job is, on average, super easy, but from time to time they can actually do good and get an innocent person acquitted, and that takes a lot of time. Maybe some woman's wife is dead and he hated her, but establishing the alibi takes months. This is uncommon, but exists.
anti_dan
7mo ago
The Constitution itself is quite brief. The hundreds of cases of binding precedent about it, not so much.
One simple example is that the right to a speedy trial is held by the defendant, not the state.
Another is that the defendant is entitled to all relevant information the state has (this is called Brady generally) and adequate time to review it. In most cases, adequate time is determined by defense counsel (rare exceptions are made such as in the Trump NY case, and when defense appears to be delaying intentionally).
In the state I reside, the process you describe wherein everything is taking 1 or 2 days is a condensed version of what currently takes somewhere between 2 and 30 days. No defense lawyer would ever agree to this mini-jury approving an actual guilty, so you are actually complicating the processes known as information (mini pre-trial before a judge) and indictment (mini pre-trial before a grand jury).
Defense is always going to want the full discovery and ability for a full trial. They want to strike jurors who have been robbed in a robbery case (another constitutional case ruling), racists who hate all , etc.
Most defendants are guilty. The Constitution has a presumption of innocence. The interplay of these two is deeply ingrained in the system and would require more than laws to change.
Well if its an armed resistance then they are POWs and not hostages. You are trying to have it both ways. In one part of your frame this is a legitimate war, so the Gazans are entitled to violence. Yet, in the other part of your frame Israel is not entitled to carry out its war in an effective manner, which, given normal rules of engagement + Hamas's tactics would ordinarily entitle Israel to a genocide. Which you would, obviously, again object to.
So a genocide of Israel is necessary? The people of Gaza have spoken and they prefer death to coexistence.
More options
Context Copy link