jerryskids

Well, if we are going to do a squissy-like pedantic argument, I'd argue that strategies fall below charter and objectives in the planning hierarchy: "Foundational" might be a bit much, but it certainly fits into the "strategy" category. But as I type this, I guess I've convinced myself that "foundational" does not fit with strategies in an organization, generally speaking. So congrats I guess.

True

This is a lot of work. I'd propose in future years we go back to some commish cheating errrr... just running a random generator for slots. Not this year tho, since I seem to have the first pick.

They are welcome to overthrow their duly elected government by their forefathers, whose foundational strategy is the destruction of the Palestinian people in fulfillment of their charter to eliminate Israel and kill all Jews worldwide. Or do you think this is Israel's responsibility?

Interesting take on this situation from the Free Press. The author's name looks Jewish, so I imagine the Tims will tell me he's biased, while also telling me that many Israelis hate what is going on. I won't quote the whole thing, click here for the article. https://www.thefp.com/p/haviv-rettig-gur-israels-winning?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email Here is an interesting part though: Tim, your take? How does this fit into your 2/3 assessment?

Are you saying there are no journalists in Gaza? How is Israel preventing this? Is this why there are no videos of the systemic murder of civilians at aid sites? I feel like we are circling around on this, since we've discussed it before.

I didn't say they are at war with civilians. They are at war with Hamas, the duly elected government of the Palestinians. Tell me if you disagree with this. Thanks for confirming you aren't a serious poster.

Also from the link: Hmm... UNRWA wanted to use unapproved roads, and when IDF offered to escort them, they refused. Why do you think that is, either Tim?

From your link: LOL. Shooting warning shots at sand dunes. Or at criminal gangs. Why would this be different if IDF weren't escorting them? Would criminal gangs and large crowds of desperate people stop overwhelming trucks? Gaza's health minustry. Lol to the Lol power. I've got no words. Of course Israel is interested in providing minimal aid. They are at war with them. That's why I didn't put 100% on Hamas; they could provide truckloads of fattened calves. But oh noes, they dropped aid on the tents! It's hard to have an adult conversation who puts only 2/3 of the responsibility on Hamas. Carry on.

The sand dune video was different than the video with the audio you referenced, which seemed to be a single rogue American. I notice that you intentionally conflated that to "IDF/GHF contractors." So, what is your percentage of responsibility for Hamas vs. IDF? 51%, 52% Hamas? Lol.

Makes sense. Regular old criminals, some 50-ish of them, in masks, fatigues, and automatic weapons, stole 4-5 large aid trucks and paraded through a downtown. They probably aren't affiliated with Hamas at all. That's the same as equating shooting sand dunes with shooting people. Thanks for the correction.

Sorry, but there is no credible evidence that they are. TimHauck tried to post a Hamas Harry video of IDF shooting into sand dunes as evidence that they are systemically shooting at people; that stopped once it was pointed out to him. And the doctor you referenced was not speaking as an eyewitness, but was relaying what a 12 yr old Palestinian told her. You "wish" nothing of the sort. You desperately wish to find Netanyahu a criminal, so you leap to believe anything to support that. For instance, why is UNRWA sitting on truckloads of aid? Because Israel insists on escorting it in. Why is that? The obvious answer is that UNRWA is complicit with Hamas, which I've posted and you haven't responded. But your answer is... because UNRWA thinks IDF is going to mow down Palestinians at such drops? Do you even think through these scenarios? I know the answer.

Genocide? Genocide would have been turning Gaza into glass on 10/8, which they could have done. Your sources are getting their "news" from Hamas Harry. You like to say that criticizing Israel does not mean that you hate Israel or Jews, but I gotta say, you seem quite invested in finding Israel to be (almost, maybe 49%) complicit in this.

I appreciate the response. Before I accept your first sentence... what percent of the culpability would you place on Hamas vs. Israel for the starvation of innocent (presumably) Palestinians? I would argue that Hamas is between 90 and 95%. As I've stated numerous times, Hamas does not want aid to go away from UNRWA, since UNRWA is their shill. I posted a link on this recently to you BTW and don't recall a response. But I stop short of making it 100% Hamas because Israel, realizing what I posted, is more interested in providing alternative aid (through the US-driven GHF) to cripple Hamas, than they are through truly altruistic means. So if the aid drops on a tent, or somebody needs to walk 1/2 mile for the aid, they don't really care.

Thoughts from the Hamas apologists here?

Presuming this is true, it is disappointing that such things can occur. While I generally endorse moving control from federal to state level, the ability of a legislation to gerrymander to maintain control (TX), or a governor to override an independent commission (CA), without some checks and balances, seems antithetical to our election process.

Awesome story, thanks! I've got a little chub for Shannon myself.

This seems like an odd subject to be so partisan about. Are we supposed to believe that every Republican in Congress (besides Hawley) wants to grift, and every Democrat wants to stop it? Something else must be going on here.

Interesting, maybe that's why I like them. I was a musician back in the day, and always leaned towards musicality (dare I say, I was a music snob). My friends who introduced me to Maiden also liked groups like Judas Priest, which is meh to me. But I love(d) Maiden. For Metallica, my favorite songs (One, Unforgiven, Nothing Else Matters, maybe a few more) were the more melodic songs as well. Oh well, that's why God made different music.

I'm not saying I agree with him, but I'm wondering... what are the demographics in your residential neighborhood?

The irony is thick in this post. This is exactly why I put your mentions on ignore.

You initially said reflection, not absorption. Looking just at reflection, if we have perfect reflection at both the atmosphere and the earth, that becomes a infinite geometric series: The sum of x = 0 to infinity of 0.7*(0.3^x), the value of which is one. So it's a wash. Of course, the reflection of the earth is far from perfect, so the practical value would be <1, which is to say, less solar power reaches the earth. For instance, if reflection is only 50%, the sum would be 14/17 of that without the gases. Said another way, the initial reflection is never offset by the sum of all subsequent reflections. Perhaps this is why scientists originally predicted global cooling 50 years ago? Anyway, there must be something to the absorption, but I don't feel like figuring out that more complex math. But my instinct is that we'd end up in the same place, with a theoretical maximum of the same, and a practical overall reduction. We need @MTSkiBumto come back and school me. He's a petroleum engineer who has posted analyses showing increased temperature in the past.

Talking about EVs: on my recent vacation to the Yoop of Michigan, my nephew drove his Mustang EV. Very sharp looking, a british racing green. Anyway, when he got there, we searched around the house and found an outlet such that he could park right next to the porch and reach it with his plug. But it was a normal 110V, low amp outlet. Four days later we were out on a boat and for whatever reason he checked an app and announced that his car was almost, but not quite, charged. I'd consider a hybrid or plug-in hybrid, but full EV? Fuggeddaboutit.

I think this is unfair. Most of the people who go into some sort of climate change career truly believe that the earth is in trouble from man-made effects. That, however, significantly impacts the research they do and the results they publish. I do not believe there are a lot of truly objective scientists in the field. It's like a lot of medical fields. Doctors who perform abortions, shockingly, support abortions. Doctors who do trans surgeries, shockingly, support trans surgeries. Some of it is financial, sure, but I think they generally believe in what they do, or else they wouldn't have entered the field. But, wouldn't it also reflect the light as it is first coming in?