You're on the verge of sounding racist, dude. I'm sure that's not what you intended. — frank

I despise any group that treats women as second class citizens, whether they be brown, black, or lily white MAGA Republicans.

And so did Israel. Your point being? — Tzeentch

Who would you prefer babysit your toddler? Israel or Hamas? More to the point, who would you trust as a nuclear power, Israel or Iran?

While the possibility remains that the Russian regime turns into some kind of death cult and tries to burn it all down, it doesn't seem to make sense to base any decisions on this possibility. — Echarmion

It doesn't have to be a death cult. The Regime just has to be very desperate, to the point where they start thinking, "a few tactical nukes, strategically placed..." If it looks like Ukraine starts pushing Russia back to their border, or Putin thinks he's about to be overthrown, why not roll the dice, from his point of view? If he thinks it's likely he's going to be deposed and killed, what would he have to lose?

Russia is unable to widen the war without jumping up a nuclear option. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Yes. That's what worries a lot of people.

We've drifted into a very brittle situation, and we don't think Russia will widen the war because Russia hasn't widened the war, but of course that can change. Every weapons system we give the Ukranians carries the risk of escalation. The politicians have to be extremely cautious. It sucks for the Ukranians.

:100:

As a side note, this is an excellent source for human rights abuses by Israel on the occupied territories, by an Israeli Human Rights organization, very much worth looking at in general:

https://www.btselem.org/ — Manuel

The shithole countries in the Middle East are terrorist-loving human rights abusers on a scale that makes Israel look like a piker. Israel should take over that whole sorry region.

At his point in time, given the lack of investigative evidence,
Any suggestion that it's clearly one or the other only reveals the bias of the person offering the opinion.
— Hanover — magritte

:up:

Israel suffered the equivalent of seven 9/11's. Any country in that situation is going to retaliate and make sure such attacks can't happen again. Why should we hold Israel to some unrealistic standard that doesn't exist in the real world?

:smile:

They have done nothing to deserve it. — NOS4A2

They're building weapons to fund the war effort. I'm not asking whether they "deserve it", but rather "is it immoral to bomb munition factory workers?" If you are fighting a war, and you can end the war by destroying the enemy's war-making industries, don't you have a moral obligation to your own people to do so?

I was snarky. My apologies.

Who you rather have won WW2, the Allies or Axis? It's a really easy question to answer, is it not?
— RogueAI

I don't find it easy. I know roughly where we are, but I have little idea of where we would be if everything was different. — unenlightened

Really now. You actually have to think about whether America or Nazi Germany should have won?

Because they're just trying to make a living? — frank

A) people in the military are trying to make a living too
B) people working in armaments factories aren't JUST trying to make a living. They're helping the war effort as well.

The idea of bombing civilians with any kind of bomb would strike most sensitive people as immoral. — frank

Why is it immoral to bomb workers in armaments factories?

And this is where Israel has not been justified in it's more limited military actions since 1973. The entire "mowing the grass," philosophy of counter terrorism they developed was morally bankrupt because it was counter productive in terms of long term peace. It couldn't reasonably be expected to ever lead to lasting peace. — Count Timothy von Icarus

The difference here though is that after WW2 was over, Japan and Germany were done fighting. They were whipped and submitted meekly to the Allies. Would the U.S. have done the Marshall Plan if Germany was still determined to eradicate the Allies?

The only "side" that ever nuked anybody was the "Allies". — Benkei

Who you rather have won WW2, the Allies or Axis? It's a really easy question to answer, is it not?

This was a giant question for me back in the day. I had a philosophical epiphany over it. Probably off topic though? — frank

I don't know. Seems pretty on-topic.

And yet, you didn't answer my question: who would you prefer won WW2? Let me answer for you: The Allies. I'm sure you agree. And yet, the Allies killed an ungodly number of civilians. Doesn't this suggest that in a conflict, even if one side kills huge numbers of civilians, they can still be the side to "root for"?

Let me ask you another question: Who would you rather trust with nuclear weapons? Hamas/Hezbollah/Iran or Israel? Of course, Israel.

Yes, the Allies also committed plenty of war crimes. — Benkei

But you would still prefer the Allies had won WW2, right?

Morality 101, don't bomb civilians. — frank

We bombed civilians in WW2. Did that make us the bad guys?

In any conflict, I give this question a lot of significance: "Who would you rather live under?" In this case, the answer is obvious: Israel. Nobody here would choose to be governed by Hamas, or Hezbollah, or Iran. How much significance should we give that when determining who to back in this conflict?

It looks like it's going to end with no Palestinians in Gaza, in other words, a massacre. — frank

The Allies massacred civilians on a level Israel can only dream of in WW2. Yet that did not create a moral equivalence between the Allied and Axis powers.

Do you think a mindless universe is possible? What do you think would happen to this universe if all minds disappeared? Would the stars, galaxies, planets, etc. still be here?

But peace can be made with Hamas. — Benkei

Don't they want to annihilate Israel?

:up:

What does your theory have to say about machine consciousness?

Could consciousness be a form of energy like the rest? — Benj96

What happens to the consciousness when energy is transformed into matter?

Aside from the stupidity of using race as a taxonomy with which to order human beings into this or that category — NOS4A2

Maybe if the racial differences were hard to notice. The racial differences between blacks and whites are very noticeable. This makes it a lot easier for whites to "other" blacks, almost to the point where blacks are considered a different species (one that is closer to apes and chimps, of course).

The appeal of race consciousness and racial identity politics to supporters of it is that they get to retain the use of race as a heuristic in their thought, and all the perversions that necessarily arise from it. An example is on display in the criticisms above, where the race of the speakers and not their arguments are all that needs be considered, even if proponents of color-blindness are of all supposed races. The racial heuristic—used as it was in the old racism as it is today, and in the exact same fashion—serves to stop and hinder thought precisely when it is needed most. — NOS4A2

There are eight black CEO's in the Fortune 500. That's about 1.5%. Yet blacks make up 12% of the population. Their representation is off by almost an order of magnitude. Given how blacks have been treated in this country throughout it's history, don't you think racism has something to do with how few blacks there are running Fortune 500 companies?

When I hear conservative white guys railing against 'Woke-ism' and CRT by promoting how 'color blind virtuous' they are it always sounds insincere to me. — GRWelsh

And they pine for the 1950's.

:100:

Is extreme idealism not prone to illusion and misrepresentation of the world? Even with all the justification, your own mind created evidence, logic and justification without the external reference would be still illusive and deceptive. How do you prove it is real, and doubtless knowledge? — Corvus

I can't speak for Wayfarer, but as an idealist, my own thoughts on that are idealism inevitably leads to god for just that sort of reason.

Put another way, it is empirically true that the Universe exists independently of any particular mind. — Wayfarer

If anything exists in a universe with no minds, then non-mental stuff exists in that universe.

I do. But I think racism is an aberration of thought and belief rather than a feature of some particular system. — NOS4A2

It's a feature of any human system.

Or that that the term “racist” is being too liberally applied. — DingoJones

Except I know some racist people for whom the term is not being too liberally applied and I bet everyone here does too.

Do you know any racists? I bet you do. So do I. So does everyone here. That suggests it's systemic, no?

You see how educated people twist themselves in knots trying to answer a simple question? There is no "solid". There is no matter or fields or particles. It's all just a dream. Idealism solves so much and asks so little.

Yes, it won't be easy. Fossil fuels are cheap. Countries can quickly increase their standards of living using them.

I don't get your point about government spending to combat climate change. Are you saying there's a worldwide conspiracy by governments, scientists, and research institutes?