domain:alethios.substack.com
“it is impossible to visualize the conduct of hostilities in which one side would be bound by rules of warfare without benefitting from them, and the other side would benefit from rules of warfare without being bound by them"
However, Israel factually is bound by rules of warfare without benefitting from them; while Hamas factually does benefit from rules of warfare without being bound by them ('there is a class of citizen that laws bind but do not protect, and then there is one that is protected by laws that do not bind').
Note that in the West, citizens in the latter class know it, and thus are far more likely to support Palestine- because not doing so is a refutation of their rights to that special protection in their own societies. Queers for Palestine is perfectly coherent through this lens.
The actual solution is to simply withdraw the protection that society has- if they don't want to follow the laws of war, they must lose the protection of those laws. Laws against genocide are there to protect a society that goes to war and loses from being slaughtered to the last; if a society wants to go to war and not fight that way, the law against genocide must then no longer apply. There is no right to the self-determination of a people without first respecting their right to self-destruction.
Seems odd, what’s getting “traded off” for higher IQ? My understanding was mutational load is why higher IQ = better looking, as more mutations generally makes you uglier and dumber
He was Jewish, I'm positive.
What heritage?
I liked National Brotherhood Week.
A police department's job is to protect the civilians of their state. An army's job is not to protect the civilians of other states.
I happened on this performance good decade ago now, and been a fan since. Hard to choose a favorite, maybe Lobachevsky and Smut (love the "For filth (I'm glad to say) is in the mind of the beholder" line). Not surprised at your dad at all, I normally would not be a fan, his heritage and subversive themes, but the songs are too consistently catchy and funny not to override my bias completely.
I think the closest you see to this is a change in clothing trends from when the elf is young to present day. But I don't know how much you'd be able to tell apart clothing from 500AD and 1500AD (I certainly couldn't, aside from 'vaguely stereotypical ancient Greek' to 'vaguely stereotypical fantasy European').
But there is at least a little emphasis on "humans actually do change and grow relatively quickly". At one point the elf notes that it's impractical to get the magical equivalent to a license when the governments and organizations change so often.
- Under 10 miles.
- No idea. Women's fashion shops with custom alterations under 15 miles.
- Nearest I don't know. The one we get our dairy from around 30 miles and same distance for a different one we get fruit from. Vegetables... Probably further away but they have a drop off under 5 miles away.
- Around 5 miles.
- 1 mile, but I preferentially go to the one around 8 miles away.
- Around 5 miles.
Without looking each one up:
- 30 miles?
- I'm not sure. The only person I know who asked about this ordered one from Vietnam.
- 20 miles? Green Chile, probably.
- 30 miles?
- 15 miles?
- 30 miles?
I feel like most of these are just different ways of asking "how far are you from the core of the nearest city?"
If you damaged their property or health, and I was on the jury, I would be much inclined to acquit.
Stills at a rate of one per five minutes is much less of a privacy nightmare. I mean, you probably should not wear them for most jobs, but recording full video with sound is much more likely to catch material which will go viral.
Swearing yes, losing temper and screaming at a junior aide for an hour yes. Snappy profanity laced back and forth repartee, not so much. In my experience at least.
I think that there is a difference. Glassholes pose a different threat to privacy than governments or big corporations.
If I am in a McDonalds, I am probably recorded by security cameras. But it is also highly probable that McDonalds will not decide upload that footage in some viral video about funny incidents at their restaurants.
Likewise, the NSA can read my text messages. But again, I don't have to worry about featuring in "best of captured texts today", at the most some perv NSA employees will have a laugh with some other pervert spooks about it.
Sure, both government and commercial entities can get hacked, so I would prefer for McDonalds to delete their videos after a week or so (and they share that incentive).
By contrast, if I am recorded by some random pervert with a cell phone, the probability that I will land on the internet is much higher. This is why people react much stronger about cell phones pointed at them than about security cameras.
If someone openly records, my instinct is to tolerate it if they are clearly recording something other than me, and just move out of the picture. By contrast, if some asshole covertly records people without any extenuating context, I very much hope they will make "glassholes got their cameras and jaws broken collection, part 563".
The sheer malice of Hamas is pretty much how they convinced me that they should be utterly destroyed.
I agree; Hamas is just not a "normal" actor that can be viewed the way an opposing side usually is. Unfortunately, the same is true of the Gaza-based Palestinians. There's a reason Hamas has been in control the way they have been, and some of their rivals are just as bloodthirsty. There's not much room for compromise under these circumstances, where on average Israel cares more about the lives of Palestinians than Hamas does.
I think that in the missile exchanges with Iran, there was little in the way of trading risk to soldiers vs risk to civilians.
In the missile exchanges with Iran, Israel signed up for accepting that their interceptions would not be perfect and some level of civilian casualties would be suffered. As it turned out, they lost far fewer than they were prepared for (I don't know what the number was that they projected, or that they were willing to accept). Israel was prepared, reportedly, to put boots on the ground to take out nuclear sites if the U.S. did not lend a helping hand. That would have placed some hundreds, if not thousands, of troops in harm's way.
The IAF also did not lose a single manned combat aircraft, which beat their expectations.
Infantry is vastly less deadly to civilians than bombs are
Keep in mind you're comparing "moral infantryman with overmatch in urban warfare" to "precision bombing at scale." Against an opponent with basically the world's best tunnel network.
I do not know enough about how exactly the Israeli military has conducted its operations in Gaza to make a confident judgement. But from my experience in the US Army, the Israelis are clearly trying pretty hard to minimize collateral damage. As hard as the US military does? I'm not sure.
To roughly paraphrase a sentiment I saw on twitter, every dead Israeli soldier is a blood sacrifice for the Palestinian people.
This whole conflict is immensely frustrating and I don't know how far Israel would have to go before I was forced to reconsider my support for them. But I do think one must keep in mind that Israel had to fight several wars of survival against pretty overwhelming odds, that the Arab countries maintain the identity of Palestinian Arabs (as opposed to Levantine) as a useful weapon, and that making forced deportation of a population (i.e. ethnic cleansing) a crime against humanity kinda makes it impossible to deal with a persistently hostile group in any "legal" way.
What's worse, forcing the migration of a population one is at risk of continual war with, or killing them war by war?
Unfortunately, if your enemy does not give a fuck about civilians, that does not mean that you do not have to give a fuck either. If a police department solved a hostage situation by bombing the building and killing everyone inside, they could claim that actually who was really responsible for the civilian deaths was the hostage taker. Still, it would reflect horribly on them.
As an aside, I don't recall that the IDF has made much of a credible move to get the civilians out of the Gaza war. If they had offered a ICRC run shelter where the IDF kept the peace to every Gazan who did not want to die for Hamas when they started invading, that would have updated me a lot towards "the IDF does their best to keep civilians safe". Instead, they told them "we are fighting here, go there" sometimes, but were generally unwilling to allow them into places where Israel would be responsible for their needs.
What is your advice for getting to know the ins and outs of a local community? We just bought a house and are joining an HOA for the first time.
Umm, abandon all hope ye who enter here? (Kinda sorta but not really) Kidding!
I've had the misfortune pleasure of living in two separate places with different flavors of homeowners organizations. The first community in question was a relatively large community of several hundred houses and the second was a much smaller community of ~50 houses. Both communities provided water and road maintenance for the respective homes. The first had some pretty restrictive covenants, was well run, and expensive AF while the second was almost completely unrestricted, cheap AF, and still trying to live in the close knit community days where everyone knew everyone and households pitched in together to fix community problems, which to me does not seem to work in the 21st century. Regardless, my experience has been tons of dramatically unreal expectations and soul sucking low stakes drama, which greatly inhibits the ability of the HOA to do meaningful things. This was, IME, especially true of the smaller community, which did not have enough of a homeowner base to really afford the type of service and reliability that the homeowners desired and expected. Both communities were big on getting new homeowners involved in the HOA. DO NOT ALLOW YOURSELF TO BE ROPED INTO THIS UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Leave the complainers and the power trippers to each other--your sanity will thank you.
The sheer malice of Hamas is pretty much how they convinced me that they should be utterly destroyed.
I think that in the missile exchanges with Iran, there was little in the way of trading risk to soldiers vs risk to civilians.
I also believe that in the context of Gaza, a significant fraction of civilian deaths are the result of decisions with such trade-offs. Infantry is vastly less deadly to civilians than bombs are, but of infantry is also much more at risk from Hamas than bomber pilots are.
I feel like this scenario is exceedingly unlikely, and if it comes to pass, then the women will also be able to enjoy the unlimited attention of caring and attentive (while dark and brooding) AI Husbandos.
Even if that's not the case, there's probably enough residual demand for Legacy 3D Women that they'll find some men to give them attention. Ugly women manage today, somehow.
Did anyone parent's play Tom Lehrer in the house growing up? I just read that he passed away at 97.
Weirdly, despite my dad being a pretty devout Catholic, he was a big fan of The Vatican Rag. I remember him singing it on more than one occasion.
I think that this hinges a lot on the distinction between soldiers and civilians. An enemy soldier for a side which does not respect the Geneva conventions is owed nothing more than a quick death when captured.
By contrast, non-combatants have a (limited) right not to be injured by war no matter whose side they are nominally on. If a bunch of neolithic tribe members were isekaied to the trenches of WW1, they would be entitled to protection, you can not just say "obviously their tribe is not a signatory to the Geneva conventions, so it is fine to bomb them".
It is hard to fight an enemy on equal footing when you are bound by some moral constraints, but often, either the moral constraints are not all that hampering (allowing advancing Jewish GI's to carry out mass shootings against German civilians in retaliation for what the Nazi's did would have been wrong, but it would also not have given the Allies much of an edge), or the fight is very much not on equal footing.
If a police unit is trying to catch a band of letter bombers, they have a lot of advances over their enemies. Sure, there might occasionally be situations where the best tactical option would be for them to send bombs to the band themselves, but they can still win without that.
I'm on the fifth book of Card's Tales of Alvin Maker and wow, an amazing Fantasy series. It stuck in my mind as a kid because the storytelling is so good, but going back and reading it now is incredibly rewarding. I'd give it a try if American fantasy appeals to you at all.
What is your advice for getting to know the ins and outs of a local community? We just bought a house and are joining an HOA for the first time. There are various things I'm a little frustrated about in the community, but overall it seems like a good place.
We plan to stay here for a while, so I don't want to come out brandishing my frustrations first thing. How would you go about learning more about the community, outside of going to the meetings and social events and such? (which we plan to do)
Also, feel free to use this as a general thread to discuss good or bad HOA experiences! I'm curious...
Nice try New York Times.
I'm going to say about 15 miles for all of these, plus/minus 15 miles.
Not parents, but a friend introduced me to his genius. The Vatican Rag would have been scandalous when it came out but it was also packed with great lyrics and incredible rhymes. But I will always have twin soft spots for Poisoning Pigeons in the Park and Lobachevsky.
More options
Context Copy link