TheLastHero

I think we need to consider that the SS might just be terrible shots lol

humans make humans, and humans speak human. Do we kill humans? The AI could also communicate just to dunk on us or attain some strategic advantage, you can't assume any motivation really because an AGI would not have the same biological motives as an animal.

milliaries shouldn't try to be funny, its creepy. Put down the guns before you try to make jokes.

Ukrainian occupiers could have wielded the threat of releasing radiation as leverage over Putin’s demands in any negotiations.

these people want to kill us all

don't insult your kidneys or your liver they got your back when no one else does

Don't try to half cope, everyone will smell the desperation. Gotta embrace it and stay all the way bald. Other men seem to notice and care more about it than women honestly.

The change, made under emergency rulemaking in June...

really makes clear what the state's priorities are

it's fun to play with. my ADHD brain likes the texture

a capitalist society without growth is a failed society that will quickly be overthrown. It absolutely depends on growth, what incentive is there to invest capital otherwise?

how does any of that make them "bourgeoisie" or the "privileged elite"? Nations have different political systems, you shouldn't expect them all to be organized like the corrupt American system unless you are an imperialist. And it's particularly offensive to want to impose American political values on Cuba, a former American colony who righteously broke free of those chains.

wrong. a cast vote for candidate 3 is not a lost vote for candidate B. Furthermore variable b decreasing doesn't increase the total of variable t so no you can't "rewrite" it like that with magic math. This is how it works, it's actually very simple:

candidate T gets t votes

candidate B gets b votes

candidate X gets x votes

I wrote longer response but then I lost it, so I'm just going to quickly simplify it.

The two state solution is what we have now, and it means Palestine is forced to live in a permanently degraded state of sovereignty. Sovereignty is the key cornerstone of international relations, as is deterrence (live and let live, as you call it). This is not a holy war, this is a colonial war over the autonomy and self-determination of a people, the Palestinian people.

Thus, if you truly believe in equal rights for the Palestinians in a two state solution, you need to ask yourself this:

Would you allow the Palestinians to form their own army? Import weapons from Iran? Build their own air force with bombers? Many of their officers would undoubtedly be Hamas veterans, you wouldn't get to exclude them from serving their new country either, could you accept that?

You say you don't want forced resettlement, a laudable ideal to be sure, but you can't have no forced resettlements and a hard border because of the Zionist settlements. Go look at a map, there is no border line to be drawn between them, they are scattered around the whole of Palestinian territory. Those settlements are their for the express purpose of denying the Palestinians their freedom of movement and critical resources and infrastructure, so they would have to go.

Would you let the Palestinian army evict those settlers if they refused? Would you let them defend their new borders, with lethal force if necessary? And how about the people who have already been forcibly resettled, the Palestinian refugees? They're still alive, waiting to come back, what about their homes? Even if somehow a general peace treaty was signed to settle all these messy issues at once, would you really expect either side to just take eachother's word for it?

You don't have to like these things, but you would have to accept them, because they are the rights afforded to every sovereign nation.

I can tell you now the Zionists would never accept these conditions, it would be a total admission of failure of their colonial project. Maybe under extreme international pressure and isolation, but then you have the lingering tension between the two states that lasts for who knows how long. A two state solution is impossible, the Zionists made it impossible over decades. So in my opinion alright then, you made this bed, you fucking lay in it now: a single state is the only way forward now. A single state from the river to the sea, so that all of the people victimized by this colonial project may move towards a brighter, more peaceful future. I will never apologize for saying that, despite the recriminations of the zionists and the propaganda of their collaborators. There would in fact be less chance of war and genocide than with two states. However, you couldn't call it a Jewish (ethno)state anymore. But the Jews living there would still get to stay there, what's more important?