fukhueson @ fukhueson @lemmy.world

Posts

268

Comments

485

Joined

2 yr. ago

That's... A weird response. I fail to find any examples of bloodlust in my comment, and more so compassion for both sides (not Hamas, just Palestinians). It's like there can't be anything but extreme and binary responses in your world, and I'm not meeting your qualification of whatever "side" you're taking.

My responses to both sides have been well represented, while your responses to one side have been trite (yes, shitty isn't it) while then directing back to something Israel is doing. That, you're very eloquent about. Almost like you don't want to discuss what I'm talking about.

Then you cast me as obtuse because I wasn't polarized enough. This is a terrible war, fuck Hamas, fuck netanyahu, 2-state solution with a reformed PA, hostages need to come home. That's my stance. If Hamas wants to make that more painful because they know netanyahu will roll in guns blazing, who are they getting back at? Because so far it's just the Palestinians who are suffering.

I hear there's this intricate network of tunnels they hide in.

Some might say you're whatabouting my initial question. Something shitty Hamas performs does not have to be met with something shitty Israel does. This is the inversion of the "but do you condemn Hamas" schtick.

As I pointed out, those 274 people involved combatants. If there weren't combatants or if they were held in a different location than a refugee camp, I would think this operation would have gone very differently.

https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-hamas-war-news-06-09-2024-61eb1be9a9d0cf2dbf250cd4a8ed4dbf

The Israeli military said it had attacked “threats to our forces in the area,” and that a special forces officer was killed in the operation.

Israel’s military spokesman, Rear Adm. Daniel Hagari, said Saturday the hostages were held in two apartments about 200 meters (219 yards) apart. He said the forces moved in simultaneously on both. Rescuers came under heavy fire as they moved out, including from gunmen firing rocket-propelled grenades, he added, and the military responded with heavy force, including from aircraft.

To address your whataboutism, I think netanyahu has a tolerance for collateral damage that most of the world has a problem with, and we will see what the repercussions are. If I were a family member who's loved one was taken, I would think this was a success while mourning the great cost this is coming at. I think it's grotesque to try to simply weigh lives versus lives in a hostage rescue mission in which one side insists on involving their own civilians in the cross fire.

My thoughts on whether this was worth it really are insignificant, I'd defer to the hostages' families and the Palestinians. If I were putting myself in the hostage families shoes, I'd give anything to have them back. If I were a Palestinian, I'd wonder why both sides are willing to treat us so poorly and resent my aggressors (both sides). This isn't a black and white issue no matter how much you want to reduce it to such.

And you're not "both siding" anything, you're riding the previous comment trying to equate the two by saying Hamas is just as shitty as Israel somehow. And I'm saying that only one side is hiding military objectives and themselves in civilian areas here, which is greatly exacerbating the outcomes.

I think it's appalling that the de facto governing body in that area would not find a way to separate their civilian population from known military objectives, instead of distributing them throughout a refugee camp and hiding there themselves (of those 274, there were combatants). I think Palestinians deserve better.

And that Hamas keeps military hostages in civilian refugee campus.

Why were they holding military hostages in a refugee camp?

Again, it's not been shown to be a significant factor in the drop in crime in the 20th century. There's more explanation needed than just lead.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166046222000667?via%3Dihub

The lead-crime hypothesis: A meta-analysis

Does lead pollution increase crime? We perform the first meta-analysis of the effect of lead on crime, pooling 542 estimates from 24 studies. The effect of lead is overstated in the literature due to publication bias. Our main estimates of the mean effect sizes are a partial correlation of 0.16, and an elasticity of 0.09. Our estimates suggest the abatement of lead pollution may be responsible for 7–28% of the fall in homicide in the US. Given the historically higher urban lead levels, reduced lead pollution accounted for 6–20% of the convergence in US urban and rural crime rates. Lead increases crime, but does not explain the majority of the fall in crime observed in some countries in the 20th century. Additional explanations are needed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead%E2%80%93crime_hypothesis#%3A%7E%3Atext%3DA_2007_report_published_by%2C%25_decline_in_violent_crime%22.?wprov=sfla1

Systematic reviews / meta-analysis

The first meta-analysis of the lead-crime hypothesis was published in 2022. "The Lead-Crime Hypothesis: A Meta-Analysis", authored by Anthony Higney, Nick Hanley, and Mirko Moro consolidates findings of 24 studies on the subject. It found that there is substantial evidence linking lead exposure to a heightened risk of criminal behavior, particularly violent crimes. This aligns with earlier research suggesting lead exposure may foster impulsive and aggressive tendencies, potential precursors to violent offenses. The study concluded that, while a correlation between declining lead pollution and declining criminality is supported by research, it is likely not a significant factor in reduced crime rates, and that the link is generally overstated in lead-crime literature.

The study's implications point towards the potential benefits of reducing lead exposure to decrease crime rates. Such reductions could be achieved through initiatives like removing lead from products like gasoline and paint, water pipes and enhancing lead abatement measures in schools and residences.

In the original announcement, it was stated as temporary.

https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3702062/pentagon-press-secretary-air-force-maj-gen-pat-ryder-holds-a-press-briefing/

In addition to U.S. military humanitarian airdrops and the U.S. government's efforts to continue sustaining and expanding assistance going in by land, as President Biden announce last evening, the Department of Defense will undertake an emergency mission to establish a temporary pier in Gaza, working alongside like-minded countries and partners. And I'll provide an overview of the concept, and then will be happy to take your questions.

I appreciate the apology. I'm as well sometimes guilty of presuming tone where there isn't.

Additionally, I can understand that sometimes the things I throw can be caught harshly, and don't mean it as sharply as it could be taken.

Ok buddy, I'll take a page from your book and be more clear about my aggression next time. To be clear, I wasn't being passive aggressive with you.

Enjoy your grass.

No need to get worked up here. I was asking a question too, in case you had been reading articles that I haven't. I get you're simply curious and didn't know if that kind of figure is typically included in this kind of reporting. I'm responding by asking if you'd seen different and stating that from what I've seen that percentage breakdowns are not frequently included, which is not surprising to me.

That ok with you?

Are percentage breakdowns frequently included in reporting on humanitarian aid delivery? I haven't seen this to be the norm, and wasn't wondering why it wasn't included.

https://www.cnn.com/2024/05/23/politics/aid-gaza-us-pier/index.html

Aid groups have begun distributing the humanitarian assistance offloaded at the US pier in Gaza to Palestinians, after encountering significant obstacles on distribution routes including Hamas drones and looting that delayed the deliveries.

More than 500 metric tons of food and other humanitarian aid offloaded at the pier has now been handed off to humanitarian partners, and two-thirds of that aid has distributed to or is in the process of reaching those in need, a top US Agency for International Development (USAID) official told reporters on a call Thursday.

The distribution comes several days after the US military’s pier operation launched and got off to a rocky start.

Aid deliveries from the pier to warehouses inside Gaza were initially hindered by a Hamas drone attack on the IDF “several miles away” from the pier that led to a freeze on convoy movements, and some trucks were looted along one of the distribution paths earlier this week, Vice Admiral Brad Cooper, the deputy commander of United States Central Command, said in a call with reporters on Thursday.

As a result, the US military had to help USAID come up with alternative, safer routes for trucks leaving the marshaling area on the beach near the pier and traveling to the warehouses.

Despite the valiant effort, I think the user you're responding to is adamant to not understand the premise of the article or what you're trying get across.

Agree, while we're not there, progress is being made.

https://www.epi.org/publication/bidens-nlrb-restoring-rights/

Summary: The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) during the Biden administration has supported workers’ rights to form unions and engage in collective bargaining, standing in stark contrast to the Trump administration’s anti-worker record.

Key findings

President Biden has nominated experienced worker advocates and increased funding to the NLRB—the independent agency responsible for protecting private-sector workers’ organizing and bargaining rights. The Trump administration, however, appointed corporate lawyers to leadership positions and hollowed out the agency by not filling vacancies.

President Biden’s appointees have advanced the NLRB’s mission by addressing issues such as employee status under the law, the scope of concerted activity protected by the law, the representation process, and remedies for violations of the law.

The Biden NLRB has made significant progress in undoing the damage inflicted by the Trump administration’s appointees and in restoring workers’ rights, but more remains to be done.

Structural weaknesses in the law continue to be an obstacle to workers seeking to organize unions and engage in collective bargaining.

That might not be wrong though?

Was Obama president 5 years ago?

https://blueviewfootwear.com/

Same people, they've been making biodegradable footwear for a bit now.

For the other user, could you please cite in the article a statement that supports "without consequence"?

Edit: I can only assume you found the relevant section (I can't), otherwise the claim the other user is making (they're a Washington think tank) is pretty... Unimpactful.

Citation needed

Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisoning_the_well