Lorewarn
-
Posts
2,757 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Articles
Media Demo
Posts posted by Lorewarn
-
-
3 hours ago, Archy1221 said:
I believe they did.
Interesting part about that is social media being in its infant stages so not as many people being able to immediately disseminate the correct info and them having to rely on the false narratives that were presented by “News outlets”. Also better technological video feeds 15 years later.
What's the reason to think there wouldn't be the same proportionate number of people not being able to immediately disseminate the false info in the first place?
"Misinformation was worse in 2008 than it is in 2023" is an... interesting take.
-
16 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:
Hell, it it were 15 years ago, Israel would still get blamed for the hospital situation. Luckily for them, technology has evolved to root out those lies.
News outlets didn't have the ability to get quotes from the IDF or obtain video recordings in 2008?
-
48 minutes ago, admo said:
Yeah um it's just my opinion and observations on OSU QBs I guess... just me...
PS. see post above this
The TikTok is funny, and no doubt CJ Stroud is standing out as a surprising gem.
I'm not disagreeing with you, just asking questions. Mostly in relation to the idea of them being busts - most of them were either not drafted, not drafted as quarterbacks or drafted in late rounds. Fields really doesn't suck either; I'd say that's evidenced by his numbers being average in the league, and when a team has had about 50 sucky quarterbacks in a row that means its not the quarterbacks.
-
55 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:
Every country in the history of war has always been willing to accept civilian deaths including our country. The good countries try and minimize those casualties as much as possible.
This is true, and begs the question of whether Israel is a good country.
55 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:knowing no matter hard Israel tries to avoid civilian casualties
How hard do they try?
55 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:This is also why Hamas embeds their military operations into the civilian population
Absolutely and it's horrendous. If there's any side to take it's the side of innocent civilians being hurt, killed, displaced, and put in a position to have no power to do anything other than hopefully survive. That is very much an anti-Hamas side.
-
6 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:
Hamas is keenly aware that many Palestinians hate and/or resent local Hamas rule, but if Israeli bombs start killing them, it helps unite the larger Arab world against Israel and the West.
In this sense, Hamas is not accurately characterized as a bunch of dips#!ts but more accurately as a remarkably cruel but savvy operation.
The United States learned well enough after 9/11 that in non-conventional warfare (when a small force attacks a big force), the overreaction of the big force actually helps the small force. Which was their goal all along, and after we foolishly took the bait we at least finally kind of sort of learned well enough to add it into our Law of War manual.
-
1
-
-
It seems that not only was Israel not responsible, but that the claims of 300-500 dead are also no way realistic.
-
3
-
-
5 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:
Yes....what I feel has happened though, is when the killing has stopped in the past, the rest of the world just assumes everything is hunky dory and forgets part B2. The part that makes people uncomfortable about that is, the world needs to put pressure on Israel to make it happen. Then, you're viewed as "not supporting Israel."
Bingo. Both sides of this conflict have very convincing and justified narratives for themselves in regards to being the victims and retaliating, but only one side has the blessing of the west and the massively disproportionate military might that results in a temporary thin veneer of 'peace' but really is just a volcano ready to erupt again any time.
-
1
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, TGHusker said:
Trump wants his cake and eat it too. He can’t have it both ways.
You sure he can't? Because it seems like he has for 7 decades and some change.
-
1
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Guy Chamberlin said:
Wait, are you suggesting these kinda people have a choice between extremism and golf?
I mean, this is how warlords, conspiracy cults and drug cartels have always worked. You find people who feel genuinely powerless --- because they are --- and give them a sense of power, purpose, and belonging. They're not risking much because their lives are s#!t, and they will be taking down a villain so evil and powerful they get to be a hero for once in their sad, stupid lives.
25 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:It’s a fact Israel has killed 2800
civilians? This number comes from where?
No chance some of them killed by the 20% failed Hamas rocket ratio that land in Gaza?
The Palestinian Ministry of Health reported over 2750 dead two days ago, so regardless of whether you believe the number is true it doesn't include the hospital rocket casualties.
-
8 hours ago, Waldo said:
The success rate of going D1 to Juco to domestic violence back to D1 probably isn’t high. If we have room, it might be a take but I don’t see this panning out.
No idea what you're talking about this guy is 100% just following in Cam Newton's footsteps and gonna be as great.
-
1
-
-
3 hours ago, admo said:
Eh, it's still early. Pretty neat though. Maybe he will be the one Ohio State "can't miss" quarterback to figure out reading defenses in the NFL.
We have certainly been down this road before with Ohio State quarterbacks having tremendous college careers that put up short stinker NFL careers in the League.
Someday draft experts like Mel Kiper have to stop hurting NFL franchises, because JT Barrett, Haskins, Fields were all "can't miss" evaluations. Always wondered if he got a kick-back from agents to hype them.
CJ Stroud
Justin Fields - sucked
Dwayne Haskins - sucked
Cardale Jones - sucked
JT Barrett - sucked
Braxton Miller - sucked
Terrell Pryor - sucked
Troy Smith - sucked
Craig Krenzel - sucked
Who are some current or recent quarterbacks that don't suck, excluding sure-fire hall of famers and pro bowlers?
At the end of the day quarterback evaluations for the NFL are more luck than skill, and always have been.
-
On 10/16/2023 at 6:10 PM, Mavric said:
Seems like a winning formula and reason for hope for the future considering every other team on that list (except Arizona?) is either ranked or has recently been ranked.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Red Five said:
I'm thinking we wear those god awful blue trimmed jerseys this game
Yeah, I think that had been confirmed in the preseason that the alternates were for Northwestern week.
-
22 hours ago, Dr. Strangelove said:
The word 'Genocide' is tossed around so casually it loses all meaning and gravity.
Well the definition of genocide is actually a pretty loose one, so I'm not sure what gatekeeping metrics you would suggest be put on it.
But I do generally agree. Abortion, for example. Even if we do say for the sake of argument that it's murder, it doesn't fit the definition of genocide.
-
1 hour ago, suh_fan93 said:
Didn't they already do this, and he violated it, and nothing happened?
-
2
-
-
5 hours ago, Decked said:
Very interesting. I thought I had seen that Israel only supplied about 11% of water to Gaza. Cannot confirm if that figure is accurate.
That's right, but the rest comes from the sea and has to be desalinated and make its way to people, which is pretty tough without electricity and fuel.
-
1
-
-
2 hours ago, Heretic Husker said:
To answer the otiose meme, yes, I do speak, and write in English, and if you were as perspicacious in meme posting as English comprehension, you'd understand the meme was an infelicitous act and an ignominy in application. But it is a funny meme, cheers
-
1
-
-
12 minutes ago, suh_fan93 said:
It's crazy to see this and think, "wow, how refreshing" when this really should just be normal and expected. Instead, in comparison to the absolute loony toons in the GOP over the last several years, it hits me as fresh and surprising.
-
7
-
-
3 hours ago, TGHusker said:
So where can we hear or read this speech
GBRewind on youtube or just look at will compton's or a bunch of other people's twitter feeds
-
52 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:
I thought they seemed pretty excited when Stanford started making a game of it.
But they also had absolutely nothing to say about Shadeur's horrible terrible interception and Travis Hunter being trotted out with zero stamina and getting slant routes spammed all over him and dominated.
-
1
-
-
-
1
-
1
-
2
-
-
28 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:
Can you tell me what “illegal occupation” exactly means in how you reference it. It’s very vague and nebulous.
Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention says “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” It also has language about individual or mass forcible transfers as well as deportations, all of which has been happening in Israel-occupied Palestinian land for decades. Israel is occupying land that isn't legally theirs, displacing people that lived on that land, and controlling all of the movement, the water, the energy and the food coming in and out.
Quote
The international community considers the establishment of Israeli settlements in the Israeli-occupied territories illegal on one of two bases: that they are in violation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, or that they are in breach of international declarations.[a][c][d][e] The United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Committee of the Red Cross, the International Court of Justice and the High Contracting Parties to the Convention have all affirmed that the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to the Israeli-occupied territories.[f][g]
Numerous UN resolutions and prevailing international opinion hold that Israeli settlements in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are a violation of international law, including UN Security Council resolutions in 1979, 1980,[1][2][3] and 2016.[4][5] UN Security Council Resolution 446 refers to the Fourth Geneva Convention as the applicable international legal instrument, and calls upon Israel to desist from transferring its own population into the territories or changing their demographic makeup. 126 Representatives at the reconvened Conference of the High Contracting Parties to the Geneva Conventions in 2014 declared the settlements illegal[6] as has the primary judicial organ of the UN, the International Court of Justice[7] and the International Committee of the Red Cross. United Nations Security Council Resolution 2334, which passed 14-0 with the United States abstaining, declared that Israel's settlement activity in the occupied Palestinian territories, including East Jerusalem, "has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law", and demanded that Israel "immediately and completely cease all settlement activities".[8]22 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:“Uprising” not necessarily “civil uprising”. And It’s a strange thing to call for immediately after Hamas attacked civilians in Israel. Take the accusation for what you want.
But not a strange thing to call for if you're Palestinian after Israel responds tenfold and is bombing the s#!t out of anyone, not just the terrorists.
A little bit of history to help contextualize how we got here for anyone interested:
Hamas didn't exist during the first Palestinian antifada. It was a series of boycotts of products/services, refusing to pay taxes, strikes, and also some varying degrees of civil unrest and violence. Israel did what Israel does which is respond with a massive f#&%ing hammer sending 80,000 troops in and f#&%ing s#!t up (death counts were 100 to 1 against Palestinians).
That's when/where Hamas was founded. Now, while some folks did and do support Hamas because of its military tactics (ie, terrorism), most in the region support(ed) them because of their social welfare projects. They built and staffed schools, mosques, clinics, etc. Not all that dissimilar to something like the Black Panthers in our own history.
While secular groups were having absolutely zero success being seen as legitimate or getting any results in trying to negotiate with Israel, repeatedly failing for decades to make any progress on behalf of occupied Palestinians, many of them ended up turning towards Hamas as the only group who they saw as willing or even just able to do anything at all, which of course has led to (depending on the perspective either intentional or unintentional) consequences of these horrific attacks. A lot of desperate folks in a desperate place desperately turning to the only people they thought could do something rather than nothing at all.
It's been more or less clockwork ever since, with Hamas launching rockets and killing civilians and then Israel retaliating tenfold also killing civilians, prompting more outrage and more rockets from Hamas, and on and on and on it goes. Both sides are good at pointing fingers but it's ultimately a consistent failure for either side to understand any legitimacy of the other side's narrative.
-
4
-
-
6 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:
They certainly aren’t chanting we want water for Gaza so we support Hamas ! Instead they chose “intifada”
Intifada means "shaking off" in terms of a civil uprising. What's the accusation here, that anyone calling for Palestine to be liberated from an illegal occupation is tantamount to agreeing with rape and killing babies?
-
1
-
-
38 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:
Yes. You could possibly stop the current violence with fear. But, long term, you are not going to win them over without kindness.
And...you have to do that with the civilians while resisting and fighting Hamas.
In terms of "the majority of Palestinians support Hamas", I'm not sure what that does mean or is supposed to mean but it's not a strong statement.
Support is a vague and nebulous term. Massive amounts of Americans support Israel, yet I'm sure they don't support apartheid or bombing civilians. I support Nebraska football but I don't support Arik Gilbert breaking into vape stores or many of the ethically grey things Osborne did in the 90's. I support the troops but I don't support drone strikes on American citizens.
So I guess I'm left with a question of, 'Ok, what does that even mean?' While others seem to have their mind made up with a simple framework of good guys and bad guys, that seems to be the same kind of thinking that leads to decades worth of retributive violence that gets us nowhere.
Between the options of 'most palestinians support everything that Hamas does and cheer on murder and rape' vs 'most palestinians live in a context with zero good options and are forced to compromise at every turn for the sake of survival and want to be free of the occupying boot on their necks' one seems like a talking point and one seems like an invitation to learn and understand more.
-
2
-
Biden Foreign Policy
in Politics & Religion
Posted
Found some interesting info. One of the main answers to your questions is because of Military Order 158, which did two things in 1967:
• First, it completely consolidated all power over all water resources and infrastructure in the occupied palestinian areas under Israeli control.
• Second, it blocks Palestinians from constructing any new water installations without obtaining a permit from the Israeli army. Can't drill wells, deepen existing wells, install pumps, access the Jordan River or even collect rain water without very difficult to obtain permission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Military_Order#:~:text=158 (1967)%3A "Order Amending,Order No.
https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/mde15/027/2009/en/