Yeah - while Temple was my first exposure, but Ice Station is the best place to start, and up there with his best work. Later stuff goes from silly fun to just… lost.

I’ll ask again because you dodged the important question - Does Palestine have the right to defend itself like Israel and what would that look like to you?

Which specific 2 state solutions are you referring to? I assume it’s the ~1994 deal that collapsed because Israel couldn’t stop their terrorism and assassinations throughout the negotiations, and the Partition Plan that violated the UN charter with respect to national self-determination and carved out the majority of the territory to the minority Israeli population.

To defend the genocide of Palestine as a necessary lesson reveals a let’s say… interesting moral framework - particularly as Israel escalates aggression against Iran and Lebanon. Putting aside the obvious genocidal intent, rhetoric, and action, how does an exterminated population learn any lesson?

Your argument is the best possible case one could make for the genocide of Israel - they are the regional threat and aggressor - they are the ones that (by your sickening logic) need to be exterminated to teach them a lesspn. The outcomes of the actions you’re defending have civilisation-ending consequences one way or another, and zero benefit - why do you hold these positions?

Should have happened after he started fucking with Starlink in Ukraine to aid a hostile state actor. Insanity.

Cancel culture strikes again… From the right as usual.

Palestinians killed in Gaza aren’t terrorists - they’re the victims of a genocide.

Since October 7th, 44,000 Palestinians have been killed compared to 1,706 Israelis. The stats over the past few decades don’t deviate much from this ratio. Israel is killing many times more Palestinians, and a higher ratio of children, they’re seizing land, holding many times more hostages, and committing and proudly documenting countless warcrimes.

Does Palestine have the right to defend itself like Israel? What would that look like to you? I ask mostly because you’re actively supporting an ongoing genocide while blaming the victims of that genocide while applying inconsistent, nonsensical standards across the two groups.

Righting the policy wrongs is the first step, the easier step and the one they’re faltering on - you can’t begin to fix the damage the bad policies have done if you don’t deal with the bad policies doing the damage first.

If you think they’re done kind of complex dance, I’m comfortable saying that’s a you issue, my dude.

I’m glad you seem to agree with what I’ve been saying from the outset, but have been too caught up in linguistic revisionism to notice - scroll up.

Standard Democrat fare - they’ll perpetuate the worst of the GOP nonsense, fix some of it, and generally be less terrible. Also see: Gitmo.

…but as long as the alternative is the GOP, who will make everything far worse far faster (to the point that they’re likely to end the moribund US democracy next term), you need to get out and vote for them up and down the ballot.

Yeah - OK, you’re operating under your own definition of creation that happens to align with whatever is convenient for your narrative. I’ll stick with the dictionary, thanks.

From the outset, my primary concern has been the legislation and EOs that do the damage - our “representatives” enact them, and they do the damage. You need to start with the rollbacks of the things doing the damage before you fix the damage. This isn’t complex.

I’m opposed to genocide - I sure as hell hope you agree with that - I’m also vote blue no matter who as long as the alternative is spewing openly Nazi rhetoric like a unified Reich and immigrants polluting the blood of the nation.

Gotcha - that’s an understandable, relative position I think I can agree with based on my memory of both characters and portrayals.

…Absent this clarification, it was looking as though you might belong in the same bucket as them.

I think it’s safe to say that this is a pretty incomprehensible standard for most. Could you explain what would make him evil? Viewing people as people, for example?

Yes - it’s harder to reunite kids with their parents than it is to separate them - I’m not arguing that - I’m saying that not every bad thing the GOP does is an act of destruction - like the creation of the executive orders Biden destroyed, like the creation of the policies that led to the separation of those children from their parents. Destroying bad policy or bad EOs isn’t inherently harder than creating them - repairing the damage they do is the hard part, but you don’t get to do that until you fix the bad policy/EO. This is the part where the Democrats have made some progress, are world better than the GOP, but remain a disappointment.

You’re boiling down everything that the GOP does to destruction, and that simply isn’t the case as I’ve already demonstrated. As long as you insist on ramming those square pegs into such an over-simplistic round hole view of the world, discarding any clear, but inconvenient fact, you’ll fail to understand the world, and any conclusions you draw will continue to be utterly worthless.

Now I’ll stand aside and make room for you to stupidly/dishonestly pretend that destroying bad EOs (which is exactly as easy as creating them) is “bull crap”, and that I’ve said the GOP creating bad things is somehow good because you imagine creating things is inherently good, and only something the Democrats do.

Fuck me - I’m honestly ashamed to share a political tent with such a moron, but better you than the Nazis, I suppose.

A list of Trump’s executive orders that Biden rolled back is a weirdo list of random things?

That seems like a transparently stupid thing to say - I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, stand back and let you explain that one.

It can’t be that you think that because some things are easy to undo, all things are, and that because my examples don’t fit that narrative, you dismiss them in a fog of cognitive dissonance.

You’re using the vaguest possible language and imagining you’re profound, then dismissing the example I gave because it disagrees with your narrative by point to burning villages as though that means anything?

I gave the more specific example of destroying Republican legislation, and either you’re too dishonest to acknowledge that, or too stupid to understand. Why be like this?

I’ll be more specific and point to 4 executive orders from Trump that Biden destroyed, and ask you to explain precisely what the fuck you think you’re talking about?

• Preventing Online Censorship

• Protecting American Monuments, Memorials, and Statues and Combating Recent Criminal Violence

• Building and Rebuilding Monuments to American Heroes

• Rebranding United States Foreign Assistance to Advance American Influence’

Try to refrain from smugly gesturing at vagueries - you look silly enough as is.

You mean like destroying the GOP’s atrocious policies, right? No? Then you might need to explain yourself, friend.

Based on the downvotes, it seems we’re indifferent about the principles underpinning the constitution and the entire legal system, the right to a speedy trial and freedom from cruel and unusual punishment.

Most of this wasn’t tested in those legal cases - to my knowledge, they didn’t even meaningfully challenge the fact that these detainees were being held by the US on foreign soil to transparently and dishonestly skirt those protections.

The irony.

Would you mind giving a quick explanation of your understanding the rule of law and its relevance to the constitution and US legal system?

Bonus points for extending this explanation to the 5th-8th amendment (particularly 6 and 8).

I’d say the shining city on the hill should have made restoring the rule of law a higher priority, but that’s just my opinion.

It seems the GOP can make things plenty worse in a hell of a hurry, but when it comes to righting the wrongs, it’s all too hard. The Democrat inclination toward civility politics and the status quo over basics like protecting the rule of law and the democracy will be the death of us.

That’s easy - it’s because these companies have no interest in delivering anything of value - they’re solely concerned with shareholder returns. The subsidies they’re able to collect along the way don’t tend to help things because of the way they’re structured, and a lack of consumer protections mean these companies can act with impunity.

🌈Capitalism

He rolled back changes to the endangered species protections earlier this year for one.

You’re also neglecting to mention that they’re FAR less prone than the GOP to implement horrific, anti-democratic, regressive, fascistic policies than the GOP. While the Democrats are bad, the GOP is horrific - and when there’s only 2 available options and this much of a spread between them, you need to vote to slow the decline.

Oh - I see how it works.

Are you the kind of weasely, hypocritical liar that fails to understand commonly used words and basic causality while suggesting people are saying the opposite of very clear statements people have made with nothing that could possibly be interpreted as a contradiction, as you insist that obviously leading questions can’t be interpreted as accusations?

That was easy - let’s see how far this takes us…

Are you some kind of kiddy fiddler? An unrepentant moron? An obvious liar?

I’m just asking honest questions, you see. No implied accusations or anything. Don’t get all upset - who would see that as an accusation?

Fuck me, this is asinine - your nonsense is laid bare at this point - I’m out.