We just had one!
It's nothing so complicated as all that.
It's as simple as any possible solution to the issue is to Israels disadvantage, so they work to maintain the status quo.
The leadership of Gaza is Hamas. Unequivocally.
Hamas was elected to power then pulled the ladder up behind them suspending all future elections.
All officials in the Gaza government are Hamas.
Elections were suspended in the West Bank because there is a real chance Hamas would win an election there today.
This isn't a case of a tyrannical overlord ruling over the Palestinian people without their consent.
Most supported and still support the organization.
Alright. This isn't an attack, honestly.
You obviously have some sort of chip on your shoulders and an anger management problem.
You are going to continue to run into this problem in any community you interact with until you address it.
I really, really recommend you look into anger management counseling.
Again, I'm not saying this for me. I'm saying it for you.
Anytime you are doing any kind of military or police action within a civilian area there is always the risk of unintended civilian harm.
If police and military forces took this doctorine that any amount of risk is too much then they simply would be unable to operate.
There has to be a certain amount of acceptable civilian risk and that should be proportional to the threat you are attempting to stop.
Just to clarify, I'm not advocating that Israel is taking acceptable risks. But I am advocating that those risks will always exist with ANY police or military action and the primary debate is over where the red line of acceptable/unacceptable is.
If she were trying to have children, sure then I can believe medical science could make that happen.
But menopause happens in part because the body runs out of viable eggs. The body doesn't produce more over a life; you are born with your supply.
Why would medical science have given her more eggs at some point?
Sure, like I said, there is going to be harm the black market creates.
I still feel there is a good chance for a net positive here.
prohibition doesn't work
My first gut response was 'We should outlaw murder, I bet that'd stop murder from happening!'.
But as hilarious as it is, lets ignore the hyperbole.
The fact is that laws never stop all the activity they are intended to prevent. If they did we wouldn't need a court system.
No, the question is does the law do more good than bad for society?
Smoking causes 480,000 extra deaths yearly according to the CDC.
And smoking related illness costs around $300 billion annually in the US.
As we both agree, outlawing the sale will not prevent 100% of usage. But it will almost certainly prevent some usage.
And I agree that a black market will form and that black market will cause some societal damage.
So the question is, will the affects of the black market created by prohibition do more damage to society than the reduction in existing societal damage that we should see from prohibition?
Considering the above statistics, it may be worth the gamble.
Been listening to this all week.
Then don't answer?
It's not like sending the call to voicemail is going to hurt my feelings.
Asking to call seems redundant. The call is the ask.
Kepabar
joined 1 year ago
I've seen... Primer and Gattaca.