I agree, and I found it interesting that Israeli leaders were not accused of genocide or anything to do with their bombing campaign. Instead, it was the specific war crime of causing starvation due to their interference with humanitarian aid and food delivery. Kind of provides additional context for the US decision to build a floating pier off the Gaza coast.

Interesting that you keep saying ‘civilian death’ and not ‘child.’ Seems like we’re talking about two very different things.

Maybe so. But personally, I believe that all civilian deaths are equally tragic whether of a child, an old man, or a mother. In fact, I would object if someone said “X dead women is acceptable, but X dead children is unacceptable”, because personally I believe that whatever X you choose should be age-independent. YMMV

I didn’t say it was acceptable. It is no more acceptable than civilian deaths in Germany, Japan, or Chechnya.

People are often more concerned about the rate of deaths because Gaza is relatively small. But if you really are counting how many and not the rate, then the vast majority of wars were worse than Gaza. The number of civilian deaths in Dresden alone is comparable to those in Gaza. Over 150,000 civilians have died in Iraq.

And as I said, some people find one civilian death to be unacceptable, others are willing to accept more than one. I’ve never met anyone who is willing to accept “any amount”.

from 2019 through 2022

That’s cherry picking.

The civilian casualty rate in Gaza is about the same as the Second Chechen War and less than on the East Front, in North Korea, or in Vietnam.

I’m neither pro-Israel nor pro-Hamas, but I believe the correct answer is “same as in every other war”.

In other words, the maximum rate of Gazan casualties you will accept depends on the maximum rate of Axis casualties you would have accepted in WW2. That might be zero or it might be fairly high.

Plenty of countries have nationalized their oil industry. None of them reduced oil extraction.

It’s all in public.

You only heard about the bad stuff if you listen to Fox News or to other people who got it from Fox News.

Fair enough, but if an invasion of Canada is not necessarily genocide then there must be more to it than attacking a less powerful neighbor.

Ok, then why would a hypothetical US invasion of Canada (which today, unlike in 1812, would be imbalanced in favor of the US) be better than an Israeli invasion of Gaza?

Imagine the board came to an agreement with the protestors, but the president refused to abide by the agreement. You would not be surprised if he were suspended, after all the board is the president’s supervisor.

Well, this is the same thing. The board didn’t want this agreement but the president went ahead without them. So the outcome is not surprising. Insubordination is insubordination regardless of which side you’re on.

All wars are targeted at a specific group of people.

So if your definition amounts to a highly favorable balance of power, then all countries at war would aspire to make it a “genocide”.

A nation taking lots of casualties has the same responsibilities as one taking few casualties.

That said, the proportion of civilian casualties to the total population of Gaza is comparable to that of Chechnya and less than in Vietnam, North Korea or the East Front of WW2. Unfortunately, civilian casualties are an inevitable part of modern war.

“Genocide” is just another word for “war”?

I mean, there isn’t any obligation in war to make sure casualties are evenly distributed among both sides.

Normally, a lopsided war ends only when the losing side surrenders.

Not just the US. Chechnya was invaded by Russia. German civilians were bombed by the UK and USSR.

In fact, it’s hard to find a large-scale modern war that didn’t cause thousands of civilian casualties.

If so then the wars in Korea, Vietnam, and Chechnya were all genocides.

Pretty much every medical device is made by people who are equally interested in the bottom line, they just aren’t constantly in the media spotlight like Musk.

Fortunately there are government agencies that closely watch these companies to make sure patient safety comes first.

By the same token, medical devices have more built-in redundancies in case of partial failure. That’s why the overall impact on the patient is more important than how many electrodes are operational.

I’d be pretty fucking mad if my phone had dead pixels less than 6 months

That’s because screens are a mature technology. Twenty years ago, you expected one or two dead pixels in every brand new screen.

Here’s an example of a replacement policy from those dark ages:

The LCD display of products under warranty will be replaced if CTL determines that it has 6 or more bright sub-pixels, 6 or more dark sub-pixels or a combination of 6 or more bright and dark sub pixels.

Now it sounds like Dems get one and Republicans get one. Both will win the one hosted by their party and declare the other biased.

No, the debates will be hosted by CNN and ABC.