paintbucketholder @ paintbucketholder @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

202

Joined

2 yr. ago

Having ten apartments on one floor requires less toilets and plumbing than having 100 people working on one floor.

Installing a bathroom is easy. Installing ten bathrooms is easy.

These buildings aren't being converted because it's impossible to do or because living conditions would be harsh if they were converted - these buildings aren't being converted because people calling the shots don't want to miss out on those fat profits they're still hoping to make.

Google Chat is essentially Google's take on Slack: group collaboration with chat and app/platform integrations.

A jury if his peers still found that Trump was a rapist. The judge in that trial clarified that the jury finding meant that Trump was a rapist.

This was after the Trump camp claimed, after losing the defamation suit, that none of this meant that Trump was a rapist.

So the judge explicitly clarified that the jury had found that Trump had committed rape.

Roman concrete structures still exist after 2000 years. If you want to "hide" the CO2 somehow, then concrete doesn't seem like a bad idea.

I'd argue that is ProPublica, so generally very far from the kind of media outlet that would publish feel good stories, and that the story itself isn't even a feel good story: even the rich, powerful attorney with the powerful lawyer friend and the powerful doctor friend had to pay for the treatment out of his own pocket, and the story ends with the insurance company, after losing the car, still only paying a fraction of that after having dragged out the entire case for years and years.

More like "Celebrity" Lawyer Dershowitz. As in: everybody knows his name, he's a celebrity - for defending the most deplorable people who have ever faced trial.

Neither the Catholics, nor the Baptists, nor the Episcopalians, nor the Presbyterians, nor the Orthodox, nor any of the other "Christian" denominations/jurisdictions have ever put out an official position statement on behalf of their churches condemning this Christofascist Nationalism shit.

That sounds a lot like the voices who, after 9/11, were demanding that Muslims should issue public statements condemning al Qaeda, because "silence means agreement."

Yeah. Wanting a Tesla 5 years ago is very different from still wanting a Tesla today, in 2023, after Elon has told everyone, in public, exactly who he was.

Since you seem to know a lot about Tesla: when people pay those $12,000 for the "Full Self-Driving package," does Tesla tell them they can't use it when it gets cold outside?

Republicans: "This would never happen, even if Roe v. Wade got overturned!!!!"

Republicans: overturn Roe v. Wade, pass laws that prohibit abortion in case of rape

Republicans: "Well, nobody wants that, but it's the law of the land, and we just have to abide by it!!!"

I'll tell you exactly how I'd feel about that, I'd feel that you shouldn't kill innocent people from the countries that the terrorists hail from in response, because I'm not a shitty human being.

"I think this shouldn't be done" is a non-answer.

You have avoided the main topic to try and make a point that is still unrelated to the topic at hand. We are not talking about helping Palestinians. I don't know how you still don't get it. You're intentionally ignoring it and it is really starting to piss me off.

You're the one who has made exactly zero suggestions about how to stop Hamas.

Have you lost even one single word about Hamas mass murdering civilians? Have you lost one single word about Hamas torturing people, beheading people, burning people alive?

No?

Why not?

Is that just acceptable to you? Are you just a shitty human being?

Or is that, to you, just something terrorists do, so we should ask, collectively, just shrug it off?

If you genuinely think this, you're insane.

So your tangible answers are:

• Doing a better job at controlling their borders.
• Partner with the dozens of countries you are allied with.

That's your answer of how a nation should respond to a terrorist attack that killed 1,400 civilians, where the attached committed the most inhumane, vile atrocities?

Put yourself in the Israeli civilians' shoes, say 1,400 of your fellow citizen - men, women, children, babies - have just been murdered by a terrorist organization that rules an adjacent territory in the most gruesome way: decapitated, shot, bludgeoned, burned to death. How would you feel about that?

And how would you feel about it if then somebody told you "well, why don't you just control the borders a little bit better and partner with your allies?'

You are asking a question that is totally unrelated to the topic.

Because you wrote a post that was totally unrelated to my question, and totally unrelated to the entire conversation before it.

The entire premise of the conversation was that Hamas might not even exist today if Israel had only chosen to help the Palestinians.

If your entire reply to that topic can be summed up as "well, too late for that," then I agree with you.

I fail to see the point in trying to help them if you are actively blowing them up to stop a terrorist organization, you should do that before you do anything else, it's literally a prerequisite.

How do you feel that Israel should have reacted to the 10/7 attacks?

These are basically small concrete boxes sunk into the ground. They're only meant to stick out a bushfire for a few hours.

You could probably just keep a few bottles of oxygen or a carbon dioxide scrubber stashed in there, just in case. If you can spend $10,000 on one of these bunkers, spending a few hundred more isn't going to make a difference.

Anything longer than a few hours would get dicey anyway without room to move around, without room to stash water or food, without a toilet or beds.

And the cause for the blockade before 2012 was that Hamas seized power in the Gaza strip, murdered its political opponents, and instituted a reign of terror where elections were suspended indefinitely, dissent was impossible, and Palestinian "collaborators" were abducted, tortured, and murdered.

And the reason for the end of the ceasefire in 2014 was that Hamas abducted the teenagers, followed by Israel imprisoning 350 Palestinian militants, followed by Hamas launching rocket attacks against Israeli civilians from Gaza.

That's the problem, isn't it - whatever any side does in this conflict, it's easy to find justification for it if you only go back fast enough in history. There are more than 2000 years of history there, full of conflict between the various ethnic groups. If anyone wants to find justification for current atrocities, it's always easy to point to atrocities previously committed by the other side.

That said: do you really believe that Hamas wild simply cease its terrorism, its atrocities, its rocket attacks, kidnappings, torture, murder and simply decide to live in peace with Israel if the blockade were to be lifted tomorrow?

You wrote a lot of things, but I still don't see an answer to the question there.

Is that because you don't have an answer?

Not blockade the Gaza strip, for one.

How would that make Hamas go away?

Egypt and Israel are blockading the Gaza strip because it's under the control of a terrorist organization.

If the question is "how could Israel help the Palestinians in a way that would make the threat if Hamas disappear," how are you envisioning that this would happen if Israel ended the blockade?

See, that's the problem, though: you're already presuming that people who don't simply go along cheering facile, generic solutions like "why don't the Israelis just help the Palestinians" - as if things were that easy and as if that thought just had never occurred to a single person in the past 70 years of murderous conflict - must be insincere.

So for the record: no, I'm being sincere. Bombing innocent civilians in Gaza is very obviously objectionable, and indiscriminate bombing is a war crime.

At the same time, I can acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization which just committed the largest terrorist attack in the history of Israel, committing unspeakable atrocities and murdering hundreds and hundreds of civilians in Israel.

So with that premise established: what would be some realistic ways for Israel to help Palestinians in a way that would make Hamas go away and end that particular threat for Israel. Because that's the proposition: that the terrorist threat from Hamas could be ended if Israel only helped the Palestinians instead of bombing them, correct?

Yeah, some of the MAGAt Nazis have already announced that they will keep laying down a wreath every year on the new statue that is being cast, no matter what.

It would be hilarious if they held their solemn loser ceremony around a giant dildo every year!

So you're assuming that asking for a qualified answer about what should be done to "help the Palestinians" is the equivalent of "cheering on the Nazis?"