hundreth

It's also more complex than that. Those oversimplified percentages don't include Jordan. Jordan was part of the Palestine mandate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Jordan In July, 1922 Britain gave 73% of "Palestine" to the Arabs, most of which today is modern Jordan. Jews had purchased land in parts of this land, and they lost the rights to that land. They later gave them another 4%. 3,240,000 Palestinians today live in Jordan while 1,650,000 live in Israel. More than 2,175,491 registered Palestine refugees live in Jordan, the largest number of Palestine refugees of all UNRWA fields.

Says you. But let's call a spade a spade, you don't really know what was achieved militarily. You read anti Israel articles all day and post them here. You aren't really going to come across news where Hamas' capabilities have been minimized. If by the standard that Hamas is completely eliminated, of course not... but Israel had to go in and squash their short term capabilities. So yes, they are absolutely safer from Hamas' military in the short term and even Pro Palestinian outlets have conceded as much. If you had HIV, you wouldn't reject taking anti viral medications because they don't completely eliminate the virus. You have to take action. It doesn't matter that you were partially responsible by having unprotected sex, etc. You suppress the immediate threat as a first step. As for the long term implications of having a non proportional response, yes I'd agree it's an issue for sure. Israel has one military ally on the entire planet which is completely quid pro quo for the U.S. - but many pretend it's not. In the immediate aftermath of what happened, the narrative was already focused on the dead babies claims to shift the goalposts and minimize the significance of what happened. And today we see basically the same thing. It is a huge deal. Of course we should also understand why what's happening is a huge deal for the Palestinians, including all the wars which came before. I don't believe in minimizing the horrors the Palestinians have suffered. I don't believe we should minimize what happens to any group. That isn't the answer.

There really is no such thing as an overreaction to having your country invaded and >1000 of your people brutally murdered while live streamed and celebrated. Especially given the relative size of Israel compared to other nations. That is an all out act of war and a declaration as such. On 9/11, 3000 people were killed in a nation of over 300 million. It lead to 20 years of war, and is still remembered as a landmark moment in history today. Each year it is actively remembered. To minimize such an event is absurd. Now, that's not to say it warrants any response involving the indiscriminate killing of civilians. But minimizing such an event only shows us that we need to do whatever it takes to care of ourselves, because no one else will.

Even that you have issue with? I think you need some therapy or some help my guy. You have thousands and thousands of posts here and seem to spend an unreasonable amount of time here shitposting. You almost got banned the other day. Take it easy. You can condemn the actions of a group without hate and rage... as I've done. I am for the elimination of Hamas, but I'm not for horrible prisoner conditions, torture, abuses, and the needless harm to civilians and families.

I think we'd all be better off if both sides took from the wisdom of the Gita and conducted themselves without hate and rage.

Compassion and objectivity don't always go hand in hand. If you were being absolutely compassionate, no war would be justifiable regardless of motives. If you were absolutely compassionate, there wouldn't be much you can do without the concern of doing harm. In fact, you'd be paralyzed by the turmoil of feeling the weight of the world. I think that's what he meant by having selective compassion. It's a normal human response to allow us to function. And then comes the question of what is objectivity? They are approximations we share some consensus on at best. I think the most reasonable consensus we can agree on is having valid motives while doing your absolute best to avoid civilian casualties. In that respect, I would agree that Israel has failed. The Bhagavad Gita speaks to this very well:

I saw this on Kyle Kulinski's channel, and he framed it as "Israel murdered 186 thousand Palestinians!" It is an interesting observation regarding the impact of wars, all wars unfortunately.

Perhaps. It's more about the realization that I'm 1 of 300 million people in this nation of absolute morons. And even then, those 300 million have very little agency or power. It's hard to fathom and wrap your head around a number like 300 million, it's such a large number. Regardless, I'm not a political voice and my contribution to this world has not and will not be in this domain. I don't have to emotionally invest myself in a machine I have zero control over. I'd rather take my chances with nature. At least I personally enjoy Costa Rica, and on a very basic level the values there are more grounded and in tune with reality.

I stopped caring. I'm looking for property in Costa Rica now. Pura Vida.

Understood. I think for me, it's less about a leftist candidate, and more about alternate candidates vs. Biden. In another post I mentioned that a normal decent party member who is younger would be ideal. I feel that the bar to do better than Biden is very low. But then, I looked at the polls. https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/only-michelle-obama-bests-trump-alternative-biden-2024 What in the world is happening here?? Michelle Obama?? WHY? Harris?? She's horrendous. I literally just don't understand who these people are who vote in these polls. Yes, we have a corrupt DNC. Yes, we have corporate lobbyists influencing elections. Yes, we have many other issues. However, it seems the greatest problem of all is that our population at large is braindead. The 3 leaders our society has picked out of 300 million citizens are Biden, Trump, and RFK jr. It's hopeless.

They didn't treat Jews well at all. You keep repeating the same rhetoric, and it's never been true. Just because they were better than literal Nazis, doesn't mean anything. That doesn't mean we should hate them, but you need to understand the context of Jews living in Arab nations, they were treated dismally. The one state solution is the most ridiculous of all paths forward. These two peoples don't share a common vision for how things should be. Let's say you had a magic wand and Israel was destroyed over night in favor of this one state. First agenda item, what is the name of the new state? All hell will break loose. The conflict would devolve into a population war where both sides become more religious extremist to have more children and influence the path of the country. Before one side wins said population war, an all out civil war would break out and lead to mass violence. Both people require their own self determination.

I have my issues with Breaking Points, they can have very biased coverage at times. That said, they're really only pointing out what's already happening. They don't have enough influence to sway much.

Blow. Out.

When I brought it up I specifically mentioned March of return / right of return and from the river to the sea. Both of which have double meanings, half violent in nature. In many ways they are veiled calls for violence because they inevitably lead to war and present visions which are irreconcilable among both sides. Is that a reason to shoot them in a vacuum? Of course not. That said, I would not say this is really a great example of a non violent movement. I think if Palestinians were acting in good faith and had slogans that revolved more around their sovereignty and own independent state alongside Israel you would see a different reaction.

I don't believe we necessarily need to bring in the wokes, but there are other left-center candidates out there we can push forward. I remember around 2007 / 2008 when Barack campaigned almost no one had ever heard of him. He was fresh, he was well spoken, and he won. We don't need a known quantity or a radical extremist - just someone younger, normal and decent. I also find it amusing that before last week it was all about Trump & Biden. Now suddenly we're all hearing about project 2025, the supreme court ruling, it's justices and all that. We're going to hide Biden behind these fears. The fears are valid, but may not be enough to counteract the fears around Biden himself. Is he even capable of running the country this very minute? Who the fuck is in charge right now?? It's a rudderless ship. What happens when he dies midway through his next term? This creates a lot of uncertainty and doubt, arguably as bad or worse than the fears around Trump and the supreme court justices.

It is more or less a technicality. His ideas most closely align with the Democratic party, most of his allies are in the Democratic party, and he's running as a Democrat. The only thing he doesn't do is pay the exorbitant fees of some bullshit. If it was actually about electability, which is what they were talking about, they should let the people decide and may the best man win. That they shoot themselves in the foot and derail their own kind shows how little input we have as a population.

- Please apply this reasoning universally. It is at best inflammatory in nature. We've heard how the peace talks were doomed because Israel was still building settlements. One isn't directly connected to the other, but it is inflammatory and symbolic. When Ariel Sharon visited the temple mount, it triggered an intifadah. Symbolics matter. By naming your movement and slogans in inflammatory ways, they aren't inspiring peace. - Who is "they" that don't want peace? There are different administrations, leaders, groups, movements. We've seen Israel make strong gestures towards peace depending on circumstance. - I will look into this list and educate myself. - I never said Hamas wasn't violent as well. I don't know what the ceasefires have to do with what we're talking about. Israel directly funded Hamas before the PLO declared non violence in 1993. Not after. Since then, they've allowed funds to flow through Qatar during times of ceasefire.

- We know what right of return entails, a population war that ends Israel. If you're objective is peace with your neighbor, you don't have a movement with the destruction of your neighbor in it's name. That would be like Russia having a "Ukraine belongs to Russia" non violent movement. - Agree, Israel needs to work closer with moderate actors. Two things can be true at once. - Which peaceful figureheads did they assassinate? Sincere question, I'm not aware. The whole funding Hamas thing is another red herring. Israel funded Hamas when the PLO was a violent movement to undermine them. Now, Hamas is the violent movement. In some way it makes sense, but it is a bad strategy which backfired. That doesn't mean Israel would prefer violent movements.

You can stop quoting me btw, I don't respond to your nonsense.

Not to go back and forth about the march of return, as it becomes a bit of a rabbit hole... But I noticed some use the march of return as a blanket get out of jail card to say "look the Palestinians tried non violent and look what happened!" - therefore there is no other way. One thing about the march of return is that the destruction of Israel is implied in it's very name. Right of return = no Israel. It's also like this insistence to use "river to the sea" as some kind of "peace" call. It doesn't make sense, and doesn't inspire peace. There are many non violent movements the Palestinians can choose from. And even if you take this idea that Israel squashed a non violent movement at face value, that STILL doesn't mean you drop the entire idea and double down on violence.

You're both kind of talking past each other at this point, but I generally agree with @Raze that alternative candidates can and could have had a better chance in a general election. The part that is missing is that the DNC railroads their own candidates in favor of the establishment ones. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/us/politics/dnc-emails-sanders-clinton.html

It is not an overstretch at all. You can see how they did it, they live streamed it. Consider Israel's size and population and you can see how traumatic that is. Any nation would have a serious reaction to such an event.

I don't understand the logic. https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/polls/president-general/2020/national/ Biden had an 8-9 point lead heading into the 2020 election and he barely won. Hilary had a 4 point lead heading into the election and she lost. You need at least a 7-8 pt lead in polling to beat Trump. He always outperforms the polls. The elections are close because Trump outperforms. If Trump is already ahead, then you're looking at a blowout. Yes, Biden is going to be blown out.

Why do you believe this? In 2020, Biden won the debates and was way ahead in the polling. Trump vastly outperformed the polls. The election was very close and came down to the wire. Now, Biden was already behind. That's why they took this hail mary debate initiative. It backfired tremendously. Now, he's even way further behind. He has no chance.

https://www.insidetracker.com/a/articles/dr-william-evanswhy-muscle-mass-is-a-marker-of-longevity#:~:text=If you think about it,mass is not at all." There's a lot more... but if you're being absolutely scientifically honest you can't dispute the massive importance of resistance training for the well being of the body. This isn't about becoming a gym bro and looking jacked. Most of us in our 30s have to try very hard already to retain the drive, willpower and energy to achieve those body types anyways. You shouldn't be pushing your body to extremes no matter what you do, but a moderate level of resistance training and cardio is very healthy. Diet is very important too. Obesity is the greatest predictor of illness. Michael Pollan's quote sums it up well: