Well the cops might be taking pics of a dead body the next day. So then they could say “yeah we probably should’ve responded to that one last night, but we just couldn’t risk that it might’ve been one of the 0.01% of these calls where it turns out it’s an internet swatting thing.”
So you’re encouraging people to commit violence based solely on some shit they’ve seen on the internet?
What makes you any different than any other nutjob that does some crazy shit because “they did their own research” on the internet?
You aren’t going to have an impact on the violence that’s happening on the other side of the world by doing violence in your own country. Get some perspective. You’re saying that people should bring an end to violence by using violence. How does that make any damn sense?
Buy 'em out, boys!
Dude’s gotta feed the monkey. You could donate some money to him on patreon then he wouldn’t need to have an amazon affiliate link.
What do estimate the percentage of these calls are some internet loser swatting someone rather than it being a legitimate report of domestic violence? You may be underestimating the number of actual domestic violence situations where the police need to intervene be a few orders of magnitude.
Someone calls an emergency number and says “My husband has a knife and he’s threatening to kill me!”
Should the operator say “nothing we can do until you provide provide me with some evidence, ma’am” ?
You know Canada is always lobbying Congress for trade deals, right? Every country does these kinds of things with every country they have relations with. The term we usually use for it is “diplomacy”.
But yeah if you think that we were blameless on 9/11 disregards the history of US foreign politicy.
This is where “But yeah if you think those countries weren’t entirely blameless disregards these country’s support of terrorism”
I won’t though, because unlike you I don’t think there’s any valid rationalization for deliberately targeting civilians. That would just be me lowering myself to the level you lowered yourself to by rationalizing the targeting of civilians.
But you don’t really have any kind of argument against killing civilians because you’ve already suggested that it’s acceptable to do so.
Many many times more. An eye for an eye leaves the world blind.
Why don’t you apply this to 9/11 and October 7? What al Qaeda and Hamas did are an “eye for an eye” mentality aren’t they? Why not just do the sensible thing and denounce these “eye for an eye” actions as inexcusable?
And what’s the point of bringing up that some of them may have done compulsory service at some point in their life under a story about Hamas killing six hostages?
There is a context to this, and there is a narrative being promoted that justifies Hamas taking hostages (which is a war crime) and justifies the killing of these unarmed hastages (which is also war crime) because they were at one time IDF (aeven if that were the case, it would also be a war crime to summary execution prisoners of war).
It’s all about building a permission structure to make the war crimes of Hamas acceptable by attempting to classify the hostages as IDF.
Twitter did have an office in Brazil (with legal representation) but after refusing to implement court ordered bans, the court fined them. Elon Musk threw a temper tantrum and shut down the Brazil office and eliminated his legal representation in Brazil.
Note that Musk will implement bans when requested by authoritarians, just for some reason he draws the line when it’s a court order in a democratic country.
Anyway the situation where Twitter doesn’t have legal representation is a situation Elon Musk created. Basically “I fired my lawyers so there’s nothing you can do against me now! Checkmate!” So Brazil says “fine, I guess we’re banning Twitter then…”
So Space Karen thinks the the law doesn’t apply to him and it’s going to cost him a lot of money. Again.
To be more fair, Brazil is a sovereign country, Starlink is not.
I see you there making an effort to dehumanize the hostages. Shame on you.
Good on you.
I think people are trying to reduce the most complicated problems in global politics into a simple good guy vs. bad guy narrative and that leads people down to all kinds of crazy thoughts.
To me the real enemy is hatred. Hatred of Palestinians have resulted in Israel having the corrupt and incompetent leadership of Netanyahu. Hatred of Israelis has led Palestinian to corrupt and incompetent leadership of Fatah on the West Bank and the corrupt and genocidal leadership of Hamas in Gaza. Those promoting hatred of either side are just pushing for the conflict to continue and like all conflicts in densely populated areas, there will be a lot of civilian casualties. The claim to be very upset by the loss of life but their actions indicate they want it to continue until “their side” kills the other.
Also how do you get flags on your username? I think I’ll put both an Israeli and Palestinian flag on mine. If people that hate the people of either place want to hate, then I’m fine with them hating me too.
Whatever the US may have done does not justify the killing of thousands of civilians. If that was the way the world worked than any civilian deaths the US inflicted after 9/11 are also justified by the same logic.
Rationalizations of terrorist acts is really insane. There’s no moral high ground you can gain from this, the best you can accomplish is to say “both sides are bad” which accomplishes nothing.
Far better to denounce terrorism and work to make a distinction between the terrorists and people that have harmed who are not terrorists.
“I have a hard time believing it. Could it have happened? Sure. Did it? Since the IDF says it did, it’s much more likely that it didn’t.”
You’re saying you have a hard time believing that a terrorist organization that murdered 1200 people in a day in the most brutal ways imaginable would kill hostages.
I think you have your default mode set to “blame Israel for everything”. You might want to turn that dial back a little, you’re getting a bit disconnected from reality.
Yeah it’s a weird thing about parasocial relationships. You like someone based on things you’ve seen about them on TV and then you start feeling like you know them. But really, nope you don’t.
I think it’s fine to like famous people, but just understand that you don’t really know them. If you later find out they’re a horrible person well then don’t like them anymore and it’s no big deal. You only like the things you know about the person, but if you avoid going down the road of feeling like you really know them, it’s fine.
Nah, there’s been enough spamming Israel hatred on this Ukraine thread. Please express your hatred towards Israel and it’s people to your daily Israeli hate threads so we don’t spam this thread about Ukraine with it any more than it already has been. Gaza might be the only thing your brain can have in it, but other people have other things they want to discuss.
I don’t own a Tesla? I don’t even own a car at all.
But I do have some experience with software engineering and know there’s pros and cons to everything. Standards are great but there are times when there’s a reason you need to make something for a specific purpose. I don’t know the specifics (and I’m guess you don’t either) of how a space suit interfaces with a space craft, but I can see how the requirement to have a spacesuit interface with multiple types spacecraft could result in an increased complexity. 99% of the time every spacecraft will have the same number of spacesuits as astronauts, and it’s only on a rescue mission like this that the number will differ. But on a rescue mission there will also need to be the same number of empty seats as the number of astronauts being rescued meaning there will always be enough room to carry the number of necessary spacesuits.
The time to have a standard spacesuit standard would’ve been before either the Dragon or the Starliner launched. As it is creating a standard would mean components in both the spacesuits and spacecraft components in one or both of the programs will need to be redesigned. Which opens up the potential for a problem similar to pissing on a Tesla dashboard (weird analogy). You should mitigate that by not imposing an unnecessary re-design of space suit and space craft components.
Sure they may want to have a standard, but it’s best they wait for a future re-design of the space craft is happening for other reasons to require it. Let the engineers make that engineering decision, not impose it because of some extremely minor inconvenience caused by a single failed mission.
Just someone that thinks anyone that disagrees on anything with them must support genocide. It’s become typical in with the self-righteous in the pro-Palestine crowd. And then they wonder why most of society is starting to ignore them.
You’re not offering any alternatives.