cannuck

As I understand it, Palestine refuses to accept the two state model as that would recognize that Israel exists. Similarly, Israel would like Palestine to just go away, so there isn't a lot of traction there either.

Interesting to see what the media brings to this situation. Biggest laugh is suiting up reporters in flack vests and helmets to look the part - when the film crew are all in shorts and T shirts. My wife picked up on another detail yesterday. Looking at pictures on the streets of Gaza everyone seems to have enough nutrition and water to be alive, wearing clean clothes, speaking on their cell phones, chain smoking cigarettes and DRIVING THEIR CARS. How do you do that having no food, fuel, water, electricity, etc. for 3 weeks???

So far, Li Ion battery recycling is in its infancy from what I understand. But the 6L/100km is pure nonsense. VW sold the "3 litre Lupo) decades ago (name is not engine displacement, but 3L/100kms fuel consumption). I can tell you from personal experience the BTE of ICEs is no where near the end of its development/improvement. A lot of really exciting work going on. Worth noting: EVERYTHING so far in this thread is all about devising newer, more expensive, more polluting ways of doing more of the same things that got us into this mess in the first place. Any real effort to protect our sustainability starts with how to do LESS or NONE of the foregoing.

Late to the party, but not exactly outside of this topic. Interesting to want to look at the climate change thing as a component of human/group behaviour as it relates to politics. There certainly IS a problem there that seldom gets addressed. First there has to be some kind of prioritization of things we know are actually "the problem" and things we know might be some kind of "solution". Political processes are one of the worst devices of mankind to deal with such important things. Most of all, one needs to identify what is the driving mechanism of political policy and action. IMHO the top of the list is realizing that politics is 99% about assigning privilege - most of the time for the financial benefit or at least perceived benefit of those in power or those who hold sway over them. The end result is that politics becomes the smokescreen for the truth while the politicos scrap over who gets to benefit from what policies and actions. We know that climate is changing - not a big surprise since it has done so for billions of years. The question is the anthropomorphic contribution. Since politicos are anything but objective scientists, they feed on whatever public opinion evolves or is influenced by circumstance. The so called "green" movement has gained a life of its own based on the profitability and profile of those who benefit from scaring people and government into financing their fear-based programmes with knee-jerk reactions. When you get millions sucked into this distortion of reality the politicos have little choice but to jump on the bandwagon to stay in public favour. Then you get economic activity happening, not because of real market forces, but because of the inrush of cash from people, companies (who have to show a public green face to maintain their perceived position) and the technical base grows from the core of people doing hard science into the mass of bodies recruited to nod their technical heads to the tune of the hysterical initiators and now you have an economically driven massive inertia that sings off of the original song sheet. Politicos have little choice or skills to look any further. All of this serves as a genuine if not conscious mask of the real problems. #1 above all else is our contribution to all environmental damage is directly proportional to population x wealth. Few politicians have either the brains or the balls to go down that road. Nothing going to stop it. #2 is IMHO very close to the magnitude of #1 - damage to the oceans. We really do NOT have a carbon emissions problem, we have a carbon absorption one. We have damaged the biota of the oceans so badly the first genuine crisis will be the collapse of phytoplankton - that is by far the largest component of absorbing CO2 and emitting O2. Diatoms alone account for 42% of all of the oxygen in our atmosphere, but dying off at an alarming rate. Why? We are poisoning the oceans with multiple chemicals, the most significant in this case being plastics (the UV blockers and plasticizers at top of the list). Quick, easy, SIMPLE solution is to stop making and using these things NOW - not to demonize carbon to deviate from solving the real problems. Instead we get politicos throwing hundreds of billions of tax and incentive driven dollars at total BS such as Li Ion battery powered vehicles. In other words: fining more expensive, equally damaging and unsustainable ways of doing more of what is causing the problems in the first place. All at the cost of destroying the existing economic infrastructure to do more virtue signaling instead of addressing and fixing the actual underlying problems.

Almost right. It actually started in 1917 when Lord Balfour wrote to Lord Rothschild (a Zionist) telling him England should give Jews a homeland in Palestine - all because England couldn't get enough acetone (almost all made in Germany at that time) to make enough gunpowder - but a prominent Zionist scientist could extract from IIRC walnuts. When the San Remo conference of 1920 was divying up the spoils and territories captured by the allied forces they gave admin of Palestine to UK and declared the Balfour letter to be policy. This was then re-iterated by the League of Nations and then the new United Nations after WWII. If blame needs to be spread around: it really goes back to Rome in 135/6 who threw the Jews out of their homeland.

Being familiar with MENA I concede that "elections" are more of a show than reality - mostly because one the Ayatollah or their front group runs for office opposing them is likely to cost your life. I think I was quite clear that I do NOT condone the tactics of either side in this conflict, but pointing out the harsh reality that once you start a war you really need to be ready for the response coming from your declared enemy. What is a shame is that the problems with Palestine go back to the mess left by Rome in 136, England in 1917/47, the Ottoman empire before, UN in 1948, and so on. All of these things imposed upon Palestinians (including the Jews) by outside occupying forces. Sticking a mouse in a cage with a cat pretty much determines how things will end.

Shooting your own troops is not what an army in good shape is going to be doing. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-67234144 I think Moonbox has a pretty realistic grasp of conditions in Russia today. I have a very good friend from Russia (PhD in nuclear physics) and another American (PhD in cultural anthropology) who was in Moscow from the start of Gorbachev into early Yeltsin and I can tell you there are a lot of very smart people there, but the results of a communist system followed by what has devolved into an oligarchy and then a simply corrupt dictatorship are an anathema to the will and well being of the people and the country.

I am not condoning either side's actions, but have to observe that you misspoke about "defenseless people". Palestinians elected Hamas, Hamas is a military organization and their ELECTED political leaders - who therefore are responsible to defend Gaza. Instead they are hiding behind the skirts of women and nurseries of children and continuing to attack Israel rather than defend Gaza. If they had any balls they would be standing along the border. The sole, simple and very sad fact is that if you are going to start (or escalate) a war, you had better be prepared to finish it.

Uh.....sorry to have to correct that. Our neighbour to the North was for decades "on the other side" as they are once again due to Ukraine. They violate our sovereignty in the Arctic regularly. Our neighbour to the South was once at war with and invaded. Only Iceland (i.e. Greenland) has never offended our state.

As I have clearly stated, but some readers don't seem to comprehend: I can not and will not choose "sides" in this matter. There is enough bad blood to go around for both parties. Israel and Pakistan were created by the same mechanism, but not for the same reasons. While Israel exists legally, so does Palestine, but the "settlers" are a clear violation of that sovereignty. What it comes down to, once again as I have clearly stated is how far back occupancy confers "rights" to territory somewhere down the road. If it is in the 2k year range, Israel is "right" morally and ethically. That then begs the question of how much further back one can go and that applies to the rest of the world.

You would have to ask a bunch of Arab states who would rank where on that list when it comes to absorbing Palestinians. Irrelevant as they already HAVE their own territory.

That is a good question, but with the UN declaration of a Palestinian state long established, they really are not supposed to be displaced. If anyone country is closer in culture it would be Lebanon, but with their current basket case economy and government there is simply no way they could do that. IMHO one of the greatest problems many MENA countries face it is the size of families. The 500k or so Arabs in Palestine has grown to 5 million over last 75 years - even with millions having emigrated to other parts of the world (see size of demonstrations in other countries for a bit of an idea). If someone said I had to come up with a workable solution it would probably be to shut down Gaza, send its population to the West Bank and take the 700k "settlers" out of West Bank and give them the blown to smitherenes Gaza strip. Would still only be a stop gap solution as the Arabs would continue to grow their ranks but with no real productive economy to pay their way. As it is, I believe most of the real income in Palestine comes from working in Israel (Paleo mostly services, gov't and private dwarfing it manufacturing and ag production).

I now understand how isolated from reality you are crouched at your keyboard in your Mother's basement. Over the years, there have been a significant number of Palestinians who dared to offer their support to Israel in rooting out Hamas. They were severely dealt with in the same uncaring and viscious ways by Hamas and wonder of wonder, nobody in Gaza any longer seems willing to help Israel deal with Hamas/ISIL. Anybody who bothers to learn a bit about the Middle East seems to know this, but you seem gleefully happy to ignore the facts and reality. Just for reference: I have spent a fair bit of time in MENA and have very good friends within the Arab world. Also my ancestors include a Morgenstern branch of the family.

You wildly oversimplify an extremely complicated issue. Is was not Palestine attacking Israel, it was Hamas = ISIL = Iran along with Taliban. You know, the ones who sent the West packing in Afghanistan and Syria. So, who's the big guy here? The "cool story" that you think nobody cares about and doesn't matter is the entire reason this situation exists now and has for 1900 years. It is also fundamental to land claims around the world. As someone else has already replied: the million plus children in Gaza neither voted for Hamas nor did anything to provoke or attack Israel. Thousands of them paid with their lives for the Israeli response. You are 100% correct that Hamas knew exactly that this is what would happen, but the Ayatollahs of Iran could give a damn about the children of Gaza. The correct response IMHO was for Mossad to take them out as they hid in their homes. It was all about the Saudis making nice peacefully with Israel - that would have cut Iran out of a great deal of their influence in the Arab world. That being said: Israel had NO OTHER option but to fire upon the rocket launching sites of Hamas. Any civilized and decent military force would NOT have launched from within a civilian population. THAT is 100% guaranteed to kill a lot of civilians. But, Hamas/ISIL are about as far away from decent human beings as you can get.

All of these things you are saying about Palestinians could also be said of Israelis. This all started when the Slimey Limeys needed the technical support of a prominent Zionist chemist in WWI and Lord Balfour of UK wrote a letter to Lord Rothschild recognizing the biblical rights of Jews to Israel as their homeland. It had nothing to do with the 1800 year exile of Jews from their homeland, he just wanted the skills of a guy who could make gunpowder from sources not in Germany. What was so cheekey about Balfour was that the place he suggested could become the Jewish homeland (Palestine) was not an actual state but part of the Ottoman empire - that he certainly did not speak for! Day 1, IMHO was the San Remo Conference in 1920. That was when and where the victors of WWI divied up the spoils and defined what was to become the 22 Arab League states and formerly declared the UK as in control of the region and giving Palestine over as the homeland of the Jewish people. This was recognized (if not ratified) by the League of Nations. Worth noting that NOBODY from the Arab world was "at the table" in San Remo...and IMHO THAT defines the point at which Arabs were justifiably pissed off with pretty much anyone that was supporting the displacement of Palestinians from what had been their homeland for 1800 years. By the time of UN resolution 181 in 1947 declared the division of territory into a Palestinian state and a Jewish state, the Arabs who had NEVER agreed to any of this crap being imposed upon them by foreign powers were at war with their Jewish counterparts, so I guess you are right that the Palestinians have been violently opposed for some time. When Israel declared statehood that intensified and by the time it settled down Israel had taken land that was FORMALLY by UN part of the Palestinian state. I don't think very many Palestinians were negotiated and purchased out of their homes (some actually were but from what I understand not very many) but were displaced violently from their homes. Also many Arabs were now stranded in Israel. Not exactly something they were going to diplomatically resolve with Israel. Then there are the "settlements" where Israel has illegally been putting down stakes inside of what is officially NOT their territory. Not saying any of this can justify the actions of Hamas, but I hope you can see why Palestinian Arabs don't feel all that cozy with Jews and foreigners who have stepped in and in their view stolen their homeland. So: I get back to my original question - how far back are times of occupancy reason to lay claims to jurisdiction and ownership of territory today? This has many other times and places that need to know the answer.

wrong buttons,

As you might be able to tell, if someone dropped me down with a weapon at the front lines of this dispute, I can not say which way I would point my rifle. As I mentioned in my earlier post: it is all about who has legitimate rights to the land? The Palestineans did not invite the Jews to come in and take their homes and homeland and I doubt there is a single one of them that isn't very aware of that. On the other hand: they VOTED for Hamas to be their leadership - and nobody could possibly be ignorant that they are a thinly veiled front for the Ayatollahs and ISIL. The ONLY way there could have been any kind of peace was with a two state solution. Fast forward to this week. What ISIL did (ohhhh...sorry...HAMAS) was with the 100% guarantee there would be massive death among the civilians they were elected to represent. The Israelis had very little choice but to respond to an attack by THOUSANDS of missiles, not to mention territorial invasion and attrocities. But: was blowing up 4 thousand or so innocent civilians the appropriate response? Was depriving them of the necessities of life and telling whole hospitals to move in 24 hours with no resources available to do so the right response? Of course it isn't and Hamas knew damned well this is what would happen in some form or another. No way I can "take sides" but I sure as Hell pissed off with Romans and Zionists (who BTW were the original terrorists by most definitions).

The international response will be interesting. Putin happier than pig in shit to see Yanks attention split. Parallel is Crimea was once Russian, given up by Nicki (with many objections from within), taken back by Vlad. Xi probably as confused with how this plays out vis-a-vis his designs on Taiwan. The little Tur....uh....TRUdo too stupid to realize we are in same boat with indigenous Canadians. So do we get pissed off with Rome, the Slimey Limeys (who, as one might recall were authors of both Canada and Palestine's current problems), the Zionists or the Paleos??? What Israel is doing now is pretty much what Russia did to Ukraine, but a bit more of a stretch to think a fully functioning democracy (albeit a very corrupt one - but show me one that isn't) is fair game for a state that no longer exists? Even UK must be thinking back to Ireland's history of occupation. How far back do we look to decide what is and is not a valid claim to territory? 1948 is not very far.

To fully appreciate that you need to look back just over 90 years. The really big greed grab that went crash in 1929 resulted in some serious re-think of financial regulation and laws were made, regulations written and the back rooms had a lot of meetings. When FDR told the banksters that he would tax every penny of earnings over $250,000 the shit hit the fan. In the end, after all of the leverage they could manage the top tax rate dropped to IIRC 95%. The Banksters had moved their game to New York because it was pretty loosely regulated, they had a fair bit of influence, the Greenback was rising to global hegemony and they actually OWNED (and OWN) the central bank (courtesy of Woody Wilson). They could just speculate on anything they chose and pass the bill for increasing the money supply onto the US taxpayer. From that confrontation with FDR, the banksters pledged to use all of their power, money, influence - whatever it would take to infiltrate every governing, regulatory and enforcement agency that could effect their business. Money has literally no partisan home, all the political BS is a smokescreen so we don't bother looking behind the curtain. Ever wonder why virtually every administration for decades has been run financially by top dogs of ONE company? That's how you get "too big to fail". Banksters now reward themselves for their treachery since they literally run the show. BTW: Anyone else remember Ronny Ray-Gun coming onto your boob tube and telling you not to trust government pensions but give your money to Wall Street in a 401K? Part of the strategy to include as many as possible into the fantasy that finance was there for YOU.

One of my sons-in-law is a decorated Afgan vet and he and our daughter have worked extensively with troubled returned vets. Not a lot of Canadians realize how great a price many of our soldiers paid for their service. My condolences to the friends, family and compatriots of Pte. Larochelle. He is a great loss to all of Canada.

I used to wonder who would be so incredibly stupid as to encourage immigration from a culture such as India with a society based upon privilege and corruption. Then I realized: it is a dead ringer for Ottawa.

I am just LMFAO with the 2 ideologies of the Uniparty somehow think their total BS arguments have a sweet goddamned thing to do with anything that is going to save the US economy from spiralling down the toilet of Empires past.

We DO get an annual "White/European Heritage Day" = last day of April when we have to cut the cheque to pay for all the rest of this woke bullshit.

Because if scientists examined the body of evidence they would expose the BS behind the scam. Economics as a profession exists to perpetuate the scam of banking and finance's world of Casino Capitalism. You can not run perpetually on speculation

I am endlessly amused at the doings of economists and bankers. They have managed to codify and institutionalize a mess of hogwash that can precisely calculate and predict things they actually know very little about. Spoken by someone once trained as a banker and still involved peripherally with compliance and regulation.