they should as a matter of course. but I guess "papers" you entrust to someone else are a gray area. I personally think that it goes against the separation of police state and democracy, but I'm a nobody, so it doesn't matter I suppose.
Seems kind of like a no brainer given what we know about skin cancer, but I'm kind of surprised if you control for that if it had any other great "opportunity" to increase your lifespan when you control for obvious ones like exercise, diet, and controlling stress. I'm not a big outside lover, but I do take a daily walk to hopefully get bit of vitamin D from it. I mostly exercise indoors and my hobbies are almost all indoors.
this could definitely open me back up to android. I got tired of my device becoming hacker friendly and went over to iphone after my perfectly useful android device was outside of feature/security updates. I didn't want to install another OS android or root my device, I just want to use it and stick it back in my pocket. I will definitely look at samsung again with my next mobile "era" when my iphone dies/is too slow.
yeah anything to get them to start being an engineering company again instead of a "let's squeeze all we can out of this profit center and not listen to our engineers"
This is incorrect. Israel is at war with Hamas and they aren't holding back, and there is a large difference between what is going on and genocide. If Israel wanted to commit genocide then the entirety of Gaza would be leveled and 99% of the people dead indiscriminately. There are different levels of warfare.
I like this take because it helps me contextualize the conflict in terms of other conflicts.
Specifically, it has a very similar structure to "the US could have won in Vietnam if they'd just used nuclear weapons".
It's less often applied to the US destruction of Korea because the US did, in fact, run out of things to bomb. However, there were elements in the US military who were very upset that they couldn't use nukes there.
In retrospect, the wholesale slaughter of, say, the peasantry of south Vietnam is a horrific crime, and the fact that more folks weren't murdered doesn't do much to make me feel like it was a moral thing to do. From a US perspective, that take has been pretty persuasive, but even a cursory look at what the US did to the people of that country is chilling. The fact that they could have simply immolated everyone in the country doesn't make it one bit less of a crime.
The fact that Nazi Germany "only" killed 13M civilians in camps
(and didn't just, say, summarily execute them on the street, but instead simply legally deported an excess non-citizen population, until they had no place to put any more "surplus" non-citizens)
doesn't make me feel any better about what they did in order to ensure a "German" majority in their nation.
I can say for sure, as I drove between the Ute and Dine "reservations" to my parent's home near a Mescalero reservation, that the fact that there are still remnants of those folks living here doesn't do a lot to make me feel better about their treatment in the past. I suppose that the US could have done even more horrific things, but I'm thoroughly mystified how that would make any of this horror less terrible.
All those actions still feel like horrifying crimes against humanity, and the fact that the people who did them could have been even more destructive and cruel doesn't do much to change my opinions on any of them.
I'd bet that the justification will probably sound just as convincing to the IDF and related folks when they run out of folks to murder. The idea that we could have done worse is often a fantastic consolation for guilty people.
And the ethnic cleansing on the ground matches the genocidal rhetoric by politicians. Rhetoric Israel is obliged under the convention against Genocide to prohibit and prosecute, not engage in.
"Bring down buildings!! Bomb without distinction!! Stop with this impotence. You have ability. There is worldwide legitimacy! Flatten Gaza." -- Revital Gottlieb, Member of the Israeli Knesset (Likud), 07/10/2023
"I have ordered a complete siege on the Gaza Strip. There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel, everything is closed,” “We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly" -- Yoav Gallant, Minister of Defense, 09/10/2023
"Those are animals, they have no right to exist. I am not debating they way it will happen, but they need to be exterminated" -- Yoav Kisch, Minister of Education, 09/10/2023
"This [attack] is not enough, there should be more, there should be no limits to the response, I said it a million times, until we see hundreds of thousands fleeing Gaza, we, the IDF has not achieved its mission, this is a phase that should happen, I am saying this cause these are instructions that were said to the IDF" -- Yoav Kisch, Minister of Education, 09/10/2023
"I don't care about Gaza. I literally don't care at all. They can go out and swim in the sea. I want to see dead bodies of terrorists around gaza." -- May Golan, Minister for the Advancement of the Status of Women in Israel, 13/10/2023
"There are no innocent civilians in Gaza" -- Isaac Herzog, President, 13/10/2023
“There is no humanitarian crisis.” [..] "the humanitarian crisis at the moment is in Israel." -- Tzipi Hotovely, Israeli Ambassador to the UK, 16/10/2023
"Without hunger and thirst among the Gazan population, we will not succeed in recruiting collaborators, we will not succeed in recruiting intelligence, [or]... in bribing people with food, drink, medicine, in order to obtain intelligence." -- Revital Gotliev, Member of the Israeli Knesset (Likud), 23/10/2023
"We are the people of the light, they are the people of darkness... we shall realize the prophecy of Isaiah." -- Binyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister, 25/10/2023
"One of the options is to drop an atomic bomb on Gaza. I pray & hope for their [hostages] return, but there is also a price in war." -- Amichai Eliyahu, Minister of Heritage, 05/11/2023
"We’re facing monsters, monsters who murdered children in front of their parents... This is a battle not only of Israel against these barbarians, it’s a battle of civilization against barbarism" -- Binyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister, 24/12/2023
When you combine that with the gleeful cruelty IDF soliders are displaying in the videos they are making of themselves, the fact that over 30000 people have already been killed, thousands of children, half a million set to starve or die of disease in the next year, the targeting of refugee camps and journalists, the videos of snipers shooting at people out of nowhere, gunning down a woman fleeing with her child, gunning down youth just standing around in the West Bank, etc. etc. etc. the picture becomes clear and "it's not genocide because it could be worse" rings very very hollow.
Palestinians are declared as non-persons and just hunted, starved, bombed. And the attempt to do this before the eyes of the world and to sanctify it is the worst attack on Western civilization, enlightenment and human rights since Hitler was on the cover of Time magazine.
The two operative words in the UN Convention are "intent" and "destroy".
To effectively accuse a party of attempting a genocide according to the Convention, you have to prove:
(1) that whatever horrible things they are doing have the effect of destroying a group; note that destruction doesn't necessarily involve killing --- for instance, Russia's kidnapping and "re-parenting" of Ukrainian children is widely viewed as a genocidal act. But either way, the outcome involved has to be the elimination of the group; displacement doesn't necessarily qualify.
(2) that the horrible things were done with the intent of destroying a group; the Convention leaves no wiggle room here, as you might find in US criminal law, for recklessness or negligence. It's genocide if you did it deliberately in order to destroy the group.
What you're going to find in these discussions is that many people acknowledge the Netanyahu war cabinet as deeply reckless, inhumane, savage, murderous, choose-your-own words --- but that at the same time what they're doing simply doesn't fit the Convention's definition.
These long lists of quotes aren't especially persuasive as rhetoric (and they're too easy to skim, and, not for nothing, and this has nothing to do with you personally, but they are also a hallmark of crank HN comments --- I'm not calling you a crank, just giving you something to avoid pattern matching with). That said:
Netanyahu's "We’re facing monsters, monsters who murdered children in front of their parents... This is a battle not only of Israel against these barbarians, it’s a battle of civilization against barbarism" isn't genocidal on its face. You can battle things without destroying them. Churchill's "Fight them on the beaches" speech didn't promise a genocide of Germans. You could argue that it's dehumanizing. If you read it charitably as applying only to Hamas, and not to the broader population of people you could accuse of supporting Hamas, it might not even be that; you have to be human to be dehumanized, etc.
On the other hand:
"One of the options is to drop an atomic bomb on Gaza. I pray & hope for their [hostages] return, but there is also a price in war." This is a straightforward appeal to genocide! Of course, the flip side of it is (a) Eliyahu has absolutely no power over what the IDF does, and (b) nobody seriously believes the IDF will deploy nuclear weapons against Gaza (in fact, the emerging consensus seems to be that they're going to back off on airstrikes). But, like, if you had Netanyahu or Gallant or Gantz saying this, you'd have a stronger argument.
I do not expect you to agree with any of this. There are non-legalistic conceptions of genocide that reasonable people use. If you believe someone is engaged in a genocide, it is vanishingly unlikely that an HN comment, even the greatest HN comment ever written, is going to change your mind. I only hope to illustrate one flavor of good-faith opposition you're going to find to your argument.
By picking apart pro-Palestinian rhetoric here, I'm going to come off as supportive of Israel. I'd caution you against drawing those kinds of conclusions. My personal belief is that all these discussions on HN are cursed, and that as soon as anyone openly declares for "a side" here, conversational potential basically ends. I'll go as far as saying that I believe Palestinians exist as a distinct people and deserve self-determination. I try to pick apart pro-Israel stuff here too; be aware, though, that pro-Israel seems at times to be a minority position on HN, so there are fewer examples of it.
As for the last paragraph, don't worry, when I read your reply I thought it's like you're giving me free pentesting for arguing a highly volatile issue. Thanks.
I know it's repetitive, but I don't think of it as being pro-Israel or being pro-Palestine. Especially since this right-wing messianic stuff paints Israel into a very, very dark corner. Blind support of it is helping Netanyahu and some very cruel and ultimately sad people, maybe some arms manufacturers, but not really anyone else, not even in Israel.
> displacement doesn't necessarily qualify
Not necessarily, but possibly. E.g. from Wikipedia on genocide:
> The term Bosnian genocide is used to refer either to the killings committed by Serb forces in Srebrenica in 1995, or to ethnic cleansing that took place elsewhere during the 1992–1995 Bosnian War.
Just scattering people in the world to never return, to settle their land, is destroying them as a national group in my books. But we'll see.
The bulk of the quotes I saw can basically be summarized as "we don't care, ethnic cleansing is fine, genocide is fine too, as long as Israel controls the land afterwards", and if anything beyond that is said, everything is blamed on Hamas, case closed.
That is bad enough, but that messianic stuff goes a farther than that IMO. When Netanyahu invoked Amalek, which he and others did more than once, that implies wiping out everyone, children and even animals, showing no mercy, blotting out their memory. And his reference to "fulfilling the prophecy of Isaiah"..
> "Destruction has been decreed, overwhelming and righteous. The Lord, the Lord Almighty, will carry out the destruction decreed upon the whole land."
I can't tell you what exactly Netanyahu means by that, but you'd have to squint harder than I am able to to not be pretty sure it's not within international law.
> "When there is absolute evil, one must not look back, one must not express empathy. The actions of the oppressors on Black Sabbath [meaning October 7th] are tens of times worse than the actions of Sodom and Gomorrah. The war is not about territory or Economy but a war for the loss of evil from the world and the perpetuation of the absolute good." -- Avishai Levy, Lieutenant Colonel and Rabbi of the Northern command, 03/11/2023
I do think we have tacit approval of genocidal statements, combined with the atrocities we know about, which in turn are probably just the tip of the iceberg. If the stuff people proudly post on social media is so sickening, singing "Gaza is a cemetery" and all that, obviously not fearing for their military careers at all, what are people doing that they don't film? We know enough to know it needs to be stopped and investigated, of that I'm confident.
In some cases (some spark plugs are what I can think of) explicitly tell you NOT to grease them, as that will let you over-torque them and potentially damage threads (aluminum heads, steel plugs). So using grease is not always the recommended procedure.
Every bolt you could see was checked before every flight yes. Every important bolt you couldn’t see during inspection was torqued, witnessed by QA, secured via safety wire or cotter pin, and secondary torque holding was then inspected by QA.
This thing is obviously not just an interior part, look at the meat in those castings, and it’s obviously safety critical, look at the cotter pins on other bolts. Sounds like it was going to be installed behind interior paneling and not inspected every day. For something like that, every important bolt should be secured by secondary methods, torqued and witnessed installed correctly. This looks like a failure in engineering (not having wire on this bolts), then a profound failure in assembly with multiple people not doing their jobs (not torquing, not witnessing, faking logs), risking the lives of passengers.
If this happened at cruising altitude and speed, people would have died. I can’t find the flight number but I believe 9 people died when a jet lost cabin pressure and a piece of the plane while decompressing during cruising altitude over water.
Being a fat guy, I disregard that during flight other than takeoff, landing, and turbulence. I drive to work on most days, and the chance that I die that way is FAR, FAR higher than the few flights I take each year. I'll live with the odds. Yes, I wear my seat belt in my car, it's actually comfortable
