The statement was that Jewish people would not be safe anywhere without Israel

There are Jewish people living safely in many parts of the world, and those people are protected and loved by the communities they live as a part of.

The irony is that the statement was made to Jewish people in such a community outside of Israel. The other bit of irony is that statements like this are further divisions. Divisions that make life unsafe for everyone

I’m not American and not the commentor, I’m observing from far away.

I agree, people should vote for the best possible candidate. Even single issue voters. The alternative is worse for this single issue. If I was American, I’d vote strategically like people on this thread are saying.

However

There are Americans that had friends, family members, and colleagues killed in this conflict, and they can’t stomach going to the polls and voting for Biden after how he’s acted throughout this conflict. I won’t hold it against those people for not voting.

I can’t even imagine what it would be like to have that happen and be told “go vote for him anyways”. As true as it might be, it’s not my place.

Which parts of it?

I don’t think Netanyahu orchestrated it if that matters. Same idea as Bush

We should investigate when leadership benefits from a tragedy. We should investigate the decisions that allowed a tragedy to take place. That’s how we prevent future tragedies

Sorry, I will highlight the important bit

Removed from power through legal means, by the people they state they represent. Removing either group with violence will beget more violence. A new entity with the same ideology will fill the gap.

Hamas as an organization has its own problems, and they share a lot of the same issues as Likud. They both hold on to power through violence and fear.

Even if it wasn’t intentional

• he directly stated in a speech that he approved funding transfer to Hamas to help them grow in power to keep the people divided

• they moved soldiers away from the border to the west bank to help with settlements

• as this article suggests, they had a lot of warnings

Those 3 points alone should be enough to send him and his party away, and until that happens (and until Hamas is also removed from power), that region won’t see peace.

We need to let the legal system do its job, and for both Likud & Hamas to be removed from power through LEGAL MEANS by the people they say they represent.

The “funding” was confirmed by him from a past speech. Funding is in quotes because it wasn’t all direct funding, and that particular speech was about him signing off on a transfer of funds from someone else to Hamas. But the underlying motivation is still accurate because… that’s what he said the reason was. He said he wanted Hamas to have more funding so they would rise in power and keep the people divided.

The rest of it is stuff that can never be proved in favor or against unless you can read minds. However, it seems more than likely if you take into account the wider history of him, his party, and the region.

On the other side of this you have years of massive protests within Israel by Israeli citizens, and ongoing criminal and corruption charges against him and his associates within Israel.

A violent war would help him, and that’s not a conspiracy

That’s the thing

Hamas is awful for putting military installations near civilian infrastructure, and the Israeli military is awful for bombing indiscriminately despite their advanced military tech and resources.

We don’t need to pick one or the other

I agree with unpinning entirely, it’s an odd fit

I’m not sure if slack has a new meaning, but it might be one of those misspellings where the person really means “flack”

“To give flack” fits the context here

That’s a good tip

Could we get a new pinned comment for this. Some of this is our of date now and it would be nice to discuss.

Apps, interfaces, browser extensions, scripts

atheists give you slack for being agnostic

I find that to be really odd behavior tbh. One of the issues with organized religion is when a group shuns or hates on someone for their religious/ spiritual views. That’s also something that can happen with atheism, even if it’s not really seen as a “religion”.

Just be accepting of other people

Yea that would have been a dealbreaker for me. I’ve used offline maps while traveling fairly often. That’s one of the main advantages of GPS, not needing to send any signals to determine your position. The device calculates it locally based the timing of info that arrives from GPS satellites

Not too experienced with it but my understanding is:

1. RD caches files. You aren’t torrenting directly, but rather you ask for the file associated with a link, and then download it directly

2. Pretty sure you can travel all you want. It’s only a problem if two locations are using it at the same time?

3. that should be fine, but check their site for a list of approved VPNs

These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by appealing to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information but may require further investigation. See all Right-Center sources. Overall, we rate Reason Magazine Right-Center biased based on story selection that favors Libertarian positions and High for factual reporting due to mostly proper sourcing and a clean fact-check record.

Huh, good to know while reading the article. Would be nice to have a better source though

Her defence team argued the deaths and collapses were the result of “serial failures in care” in the unit and she was the victim of a “system that wanted to apportion blame when it failed”.

What

I agree people should have the right to burn it.

What’s important I think is that burning ANYTHING that people like / consider culturally important is going to make them upset, regardless of what the contents actually are. People absolutely shouldn’t get violent over that, but I don’t like how some comments (not yours) on these threads are fanning the flames to the conflicts. Hoping for things to escalate just to prove a point is… a bad look.

This next bit is opinion on the burnings: I don’t think the burnings are that productive and they don’t get much of a meaningful dialogue. Instead they just escalate tensions, deepen divisions / resentment, and when it happens it undermines the goals of the entire thing.

That’s not the point of the recent discussions, which are around if it should be legal. I guess I’m trying to say “it’s legal, but the act still harms everyone involved”

related example: Burning the Canadian flag is a valid form of protest, and it’s legal to do / should stay legal. However, it’s usually not productive

do you think it’ll be enough evidence to convince

No, nothing ever will

You cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into