site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 319347 results for

domain:natesilver.net

idk I'm not the guy above, I just wanted to offer the thought that they don't only retreat

Yeah the Israeli government is acting to its incentives, I get that. Every action has tradeoffs and consequences. This is the action-set that the Israeli people (and by extension their government) have chosen. I don't envy their choice, it's a nightmare.

But the consequences of their choices is permanent conflict around them, and a world (which to an extent they depend on) that is steadily losing sympathy for their plight.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. This conflict is so fucking long and there's so much bad blood, I don't ever see it ending unless someone rips the band-aid off and ends it with a final... solution? But that won't happen so instead it'll just limp along. At this point the Israeli's and the Palestinian's deserve each other.

So their "monomaniac" obsession applies to only one particular spot. It's not settlements in the West Bank which pisses off the Gazans.

Gaza also bans abortion and IIRC limits birth control pretty heavily, in addition to promulgating pro-natal memes, even if they are "eventually outnumber the [redacted]."

I'm not saying Iran isn't an idiot for being in this situation. Their hostility to Israel is a massive, profound, and decades long unforced error. Although hard to blame them about being mad about the Shah. But we've done worse to countries and now we're chill (Vietnam, Germany, Japan) so if they'd suck it up they'd be better off.

I'm talking about the situation at hand though. Iran and Israel have beef, is it stupid? Yes. But it is real, and Iran getting nukes is bad. And clapping on Iran makes them want nukes more, I think that's also bad.

What is an example of a piece of history of the conflict that you think would change people's minds if they were aware of it?

This is what gets me. At a certain point once the conflict spans generations and over 100+ years, "who started it" is the most useless question/discussion topic.

Every time someone tries to dunk with "well X did Y so the current Z situation is their fault" it is just so laughable.

I'm not sure how that would work? Wouldn't their obvious reply be that the Palestinians (and the Israelis) were begging the international community for support and aid?

It's hard to fault Isreal for blowing up its hostile neighbors. They're hostile after all.

But it's also hard to fault Isreal's neighbors for being mad about getting blown up.

Iran is not a neighbor of Israel, and Iran has been attacking Israel through proxies almost since the start of the Islamic Republic. Despite that, Israel supported Iran in the Iran-Iraq war, and destroyed the Iraqi nuclear weapons program then. Iran attacked Israel twice directly last year. It's REALLY easy to fault them for being mad about getting blown up.

Doesn't matter, Hamas would already destroy the US given half a chance.

That said, I also think nuclear weapons are overrated, and while it's likely worthwhile to launch delaying tactics... once Iran has the bomb, what exactly are they going to do with it? Iran already knows that Israel has sufficient nuclear capacity to glass Iran

Israel does NOT have sufficient nuclear capacity to glass Iran. Israel is small and Iran is big, and that counts for a lot in the nuclear game. Certainly Israel could make Iran suffer with their dying breath, but they would still exist afterwards.

I think it's very unlikely the IAEA action was caused by anything Iran did. Normally they bend over backwards not to find any violations. So I suspect pressure was applied to get them to make this declaration in order to provide justification for the desired bombings.

Well the Israeli government tried to do something about it in the 1970s/1980s. But turns out it's mighty unpopular at the ballot box to bulldoze the homes of your own people after you just won a war.

But never their settlements in the West Bank, which do a lot of the heavy lifting in pissing people off.

At a certain point, this market is not going to clear. We have reached that point.

Yeah.

One thing about the sexual marketplace for women. They're both an inelastic good... AND there's a fixed supply.

The supply can't increase very quickly, and heterosexual men will still have high demand for them even as the price creeps up.

Now we've got a large portion of women who have effectively set a 'price floor' for themselves that is above what many men are able to provide, and in many cases what men are willing to provide, given that many of the options on offer are also 'damaged goods.'

Throw in the evolutionary pressure on men to reproduce and there's just huge amounts of underserved demand.

The market is trying to provide substitute goods like porn, prostitutes, AI girlfriends, but I think the problem is that a good woman is a 'package' or 'bundle' of goods in one.

And most women now want to provide only a couple of those goods/services while still demanding the complete package on the other side.

I was met with a question regarding my own stance on the matter.

I find if your goal is just to change the subject, saying that the history of the Mandate means that our input is uniquely unwanted by both sides, and that we should take the hint and butt out, works brilliantly. NPCs on both sides are horrified but have no comeback because you are off-script. It's like playing the Sicilian back in the days when everyone was taught opening theory starting e4 e5.

In the United States, The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) was passed in 1974, and was the bill that allowed women to get credit in their own name without the signature of a husband or male relative.

No, this was the bill that made it a Federal legal requirement that women could get credit in their own name without the signature of a husband or male relative. The idea that the opposite was universally the case before 1974 is a recent fabrication.

I'm aware, now please get in the box.

In your estimation, how many Palestinians have died of malnutrition and preventable illness since this war began?

I for example am leaning towards kicking all the Islamic refugees out of Europe to the extent achievable under the law

That’s only common sense. But what if they refuse to leave, try to stab your women and children every chance they get, and teach their children to stab? At some point, you’ve done enough to preserve their lives, and the subsequent human rights infractions/butchery is not your fault. It’s like mowing down some japanese with sticks who refuse to surrender. That’s not murder.

The Holocaust was obviously worse. It just contrasts extremely poorly when part of the founding mythos of the country is "we need a save haven for our people, who have suffered greatly" and then you look and Gazans are dying of malnutrition and preventable diseases purely because the Isreali's won't let food in.

History doesn't repeat, but it's definitely rhyming.

Random not very related thought, but the exact same logic applies more broadly to the hardcore lefty's, who are also the more irrational pro-palestinians. They all claim they hate the structures of power that perpetuate racism or sexism , but they don't actually dislike the structure, they just want their people at the top of it. Makes it hard to take them seriously.

yet I'm increasingly falling in the delenda est camp just because the Israelis have proven time and time again that they are unwilling to compromise on their monomanic obsession to capture and subjugate

The Israelis withdrew from the Sinai; they withdrew from Gaza as well.

Can't lie. At least part of my animus is from getting stuck behind people buying like 12 scratch-off tickets at a time, and oftentimes trying to claim winnings at the same time.

In my state you don't even have to scratch them off, the cashier has a machine they can scan the ticket on and tell you if you won or not.

At that point, where's any of the fun?

I know these folks would probably just find a way to get their jollies elsewhere, but seeing how gambling has penetrated every aspect of society now, I really do want to put this genie back in its bottle.

That would be a good top-level post, in my opinion, if you ever feel like fleshing it out. I suspect I personally disagree, with some caveats, but it sounds like you have something interesting you could argue for, and which would be well worth seeing the light of day.

Ping me if you do. I’d very much like to read what you have to say.

Oh, I didn’t do anything bad there, I just didn’t have any of the experience I needed to enjoy it. Going back much later and speaking the language well enough to hold a (simple, very patient on the part of my interlocutor) conversation, I’ve had a much, much better time with the country. And in retrospect, I would have liked to explore a less-overrun Kyoto more using those skills.

if you're gonna fight a war , uncoordinated vassal swarm is a bad tactic because the AI will get defeated in detail

Sic semper those-who-invest-in-the-Diplomatic-Ideas-group