En même temps, pas très malin d'utiliser le dog whistle <<du fleuve jusqu'à la mer>>.

Ce qui sous entend au pire un génocide et au mieux la situation des juifs de l'Algérie après la libération.

Assez surpris que LFI l'ait accepté. Après les républicains ont bien Meyer Habib.

Now let's look at Office. Open an Excel spreadsheet with tables in any app other than excel. Tables are something that's just a given in excel, takes 10 seconds to setup, and you get automatic sorting and filtering, with near-zero effort. No, I'm not setting up a DB in an open-source competitor to Access. That's just too much effort for simple sorting and filtering tasks, and isn't realistically shareable with other people.

Am I missing something or isn't it exactly the same thing in libre office ?

I don't agree. Curvy roads are dangerous, but there are much more conflicts in cities. You're not going to have many pedestrians in curvy mountain roads.

That said, you are right that the ideal comparison would be int the same city. But I'm not sure that the data exists, I'll have to look this afternoon.

That said, even if my data is not perfect, it's much better than taking one accident and saying that self driving cars are dangerous. They are not going to be magically better than humans, after all driving is a difficult task, but we should at least crunch the numbers before dismissing them.

You can't take one accident and use that to generalize.

You need to take into account all accidents and see how worse humans are.

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2023/12/human-drivers-crash-a-lot-more-than-waymos-software-data-shows/

Cars are naturally dangerous. A robot car is going to have deaths no matter what. That does not mean they are bad if they mean a reduction of cars and accidents. Taxis if done properly can help a public transport system.

Frankly both are awful and both should not be allowed to take control of Israel/Palestine. I have no idea what solution there is to this conflict honestly, I just want things to stay somewhat factual.

I agree that the 5000 figure seems highly improbable. Israel has been quite effective at killing high members of Hamas but I doubt they have killed 5000 out of the 30000 militants.

Where did I say that one side didn't want to genocide the other ? Hamas is more public about it and won't even try to justify their civilian killings, but Netanhyu government has made it clear again and again that they are willing to do collective punishment. The high civilian death rate is of course intentional.

Hamas has also killed plenty of civilians, and they don't even try to pretend that it was accidental. That said you are close to their ratio which is three civilians for every military death.

Israel's civilian deaths to militant deaths is probably higher due to the usage of bombs (10 civilian deaths per explosion) and intentional starvation but it isn't 100:1.

Hamas' strategy of hiding behind civilians is also a war crime since it obviously increases the number of civilians killed.

If you believe Israeli propaganda, they have killed 5000 Hamas militants. Reality is probably smaller than that, but since Hamas intentionally doesn't publish their militant casualties we won't have a good estimation. That said 500 Israeli soldiers have died and seeing the asymmetry in warfare, you can expect much more Hamas militants to have died. I have not been able to find an estimate from an independent source.

Yes ? Do you really think only 200 Hamas militants were killed ? Because that's what your ratio would suggest.

Israel is unnecessarily killing and starving civilians, but once again gross misinformation serves nobody and only justifies more horrors.

This is plain wrong and disinformation. Israel has killed way more civilians than is usual or acceptable in a war but nowhere near the numbers you cited.

See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_2023_Israel%E2%80%93Hamas_war

I gave the polls, you can look at the Fatah party to see how popular the Abbas led government is. Historically you are right, but right now Palestinians are not looking for peaceful solutions. I think Israel made them understand that they would be slowly annexed.

Edit: also I'd recommend reading the two state section of the Wikipedia article on Hamas.

Nobody can vote in Gaza. But saying that Hamas was created and financed by Israel when their ideas are clearly popular is ridiculous.

You can say that Israel caused this mess by annexing Palestine. By putting an effective regime of Apartheid. But saying that Hamas or their actions are not popular among the general population is false.

Sure but look at alcohol, the consumer knows exactly what he's purchasing. Didn't stop a person I knew from dying from this shit.

Drugs should be difficult to get to reduce the chances of recreational use.