1984Echoes

I accept the Hamas Health Ministry's number of dead. 30,000 or whatever the latest number is. I REJECT that there are ZERO militant deaths in that number. IDF says 14,000... they put out DAILY reports, which are easy to find. Maybe that number is somewhere in between 0 and 14,000. So here's a question, friend-to-friend: How many militant deaths out of those 30,000 do you believe there are? Just as a WAG.

Also: The IDF is ROUTINELY reporting their numbers. Mainstream media is generally not reporting them. All you have to do is look however, if you want to find them. Also: Gaza Ministry of Health (Hamas)... does NOT report militant deaths. It reports ALL deaths, as civilian. That is NOT good faith, it is Propaganda. The "good faith" that you are quoting, is a good faith effort to report DEATHS. I believe they are accurate in that number. I have never said otherwise. What I am disputing is their characterization of those deaths being 100% civilian. That is NOT good faith. And they will NEVER report militant deaths. All Gazan deaths are civilian deaths (per Hamas), and that's it. Can IDF #'s be verified? No. Are they rounded numbers? Yes. Are Gazan (Hamas) militant deaths closer to ZERO, as you are stating... out of the 30,000 that the Health Ministry is reporting? Or 14,000 militant deaths out of the 30,000. Or somewhere in between. Lastly: I'm using COMMON SENSE. ZERO militant deaths out of 30,000...? Is that reasonable? Shouldn't common sense tell you that militant deaths can NOT be ZERO. You and Tater seem to be having problems using common sense for some reason... Let me know when you guys catch on to this...

So you believe there are 30,000 dead Gazan civilians. And 0 Hamas militant dead. That's what Hamas is reporting. Do I have that correct?

New cyber capability that could destroy U.S. financial systems... or similar? Just a guess...

As long as this is true and Holmes picks up whoever this guy may be (draft OR free agent...) and the player proves out this idea... I'm good with it.

I added what I thought was the critical statement and bolded it. Plus bolded your all-caps comment because between those two... those are the key points.

Sinwar. Right? The Hamas terrorist refusing to surrender and using 100 Israeli hostages to surround and protect himself from Israel's wrath?

Yes... But I think somewhat more reliable than Hamas. Their estimates are: 1,000 Hamas killed during the Oct 7 invasion. 10,000 Hamas killed in Israel's response. And an estimated 3,000 kids that were ammunition and weapons "runners" for Hamas in the tunnels. So obviously those are very round numbers and hard to verify, and subject to some wide variances. But... Hamas: Does not distinguish between civilians and combatants. They've come under large criticism for that. By stating "28,000 civilians killed"... is an attempt at propaganda... but noone believes 100% of those killed were ALL civilians. So they've broken it down further but: There were 30 Hamas Battalions in Gaza with roughly 36,000 Hamas fighters. Again, round numbers. But roughly 1,000-1,200 soldiers per Hamas battalion. Israel has "destroyed" 26 of those battalions, only 4 remain in Rafah. That doesn't state who was killed versus who was injured versus who just ran away... But it does give some indication of what Israel has accomplished so far in its campaign to destroy Hamas military. The Gaza Ministry of Health (Hamas), looks ridiculous saying 500 of the 28,500 killed were Hamas military when 30,000 or so of their soldiers are no longer combat-capable. One way or the other. The 14,000 may not be EXACT. But it's a HELL of a lot closer to reality.

More trustworthy than Hamas terrorists and liars. And it's not even close.

If Establishment Republicans are looking for a home... I don't know where that is... What do moderate Pubs to right of center Indies want? Cutting more taxes for the top 1%? To your point, that doesn't seem to fly. A balanced budget? I could be on board with that. But not on a militant Constitutional Amendment basis, but, more along the lines of a George HW Bush or Clinton 1992 basis. A compromise between left and right that includes tax cuts in certain areas but increases in others, with an overall net increase in (tax) revenues. Spending cuts in certain areas but increases where needed and an overall net decrease in spending... But that's not a powerful platform position. Any Dem or moderate Republican can run on a balanced budget. But with the current Trumpublican Party closed off to moderates, they would need to have more than that. Libertarian? Fiscally conservative but socially liberal? I think that's a good place to be... but not on the Libertarian basis of their militant "strip-the-government-down-to-nothing". And the Party s rife with jokers instead of real politico types. But swap their militant fiscal to moderate balanced budget position and stock it with Christie-Manchin-similar types and it maybe becomes more palatable to moderate Republicans. But is that what they want? What do they want? What platform can they run on? As you've stated... that party has basically run out of ideas...

IDF.

A resounding crushing of Republicans in November... Is just the ticket needed to get that Party to reform itself.

Yep. This. This is my official position.

I think it's actually been a slow roll... But it does seem like it is building... again, slowly. I think it started with how disgusting Trump was. Jan 6th was the matchstick that lit this... fuse? Damn long... and slow burning fuse that... probably results in nothing more than a loud firecracker. The mid-term 2022 elections went against Republicans for the most part. I think the immigration ****show and the continual boot-licking of Putin are adding to it. The incapability of the Republican Party to actually govern is showing them to be a dysfunctional rabble that does not deserve to be in office. But I think the loud bang (from that firecracker...) is from Trump appearing to win another nomination (I think HE is the straw. Or at least the most important one. He's toxic beyond all measure and driving hordes of middle to right moderates away from the Republican Party). IMO. I think right-leaning Indies are leaving the Republicans in droves. No longer interested in dysfunction, no longer interested in their ****shows and other performative garbage, and most definitely not interested in Trump. I think moderate Republicans and right-leaning Indies are looking for the exit, and for what comes next. A 3rd party? A No-Labels party? Trump is the loud bang that is breaking up the Republican Party. I think I predicted that back in 2016... and every year since... and it's been a slow burn trying to get to this point... But I think Trump is finally creating a breakup of the current construction of the Republican Party. I don't know what happens next after the November elections show the unviability/ unelectability/ ungovernability of building a party completely and solely on White Trash Bigotry and Grievances.

Finally!!! Can we have enough of this Republican **** show? Have people woken up yet? Maybe... Yes.

Currently, I see some Canadian players but they've stuck with their NFL teams and never played in the CFL: Michael Hoecht is a pretty good DT for the Rams with 6 sacks, a forced fumble and 81 tackles in 2023. (Seems like a lot of tackles for a DT... he's 6'4" 310 which doesn't say anything... maybe he has some "wiggle"/ athleticism to get to guys...? Jevon Holland is a pretty good safety for the Dolphins. Dalton Kincaid: Pretty good TE for the Bills. I had to Google just to find that as I have no clue otherwise... Fun fact: Eddie Murray is Canadian? Damn!!!

Different league though. I mean, I love what he's showing on tape... but we'll see what happens when he faces NFL players. He's smallish (6'0" 248 if that's accurate and not exaggerated...), so... he's on OLB'er? Pass-rush specialist? I don't see him as the bookend to Hutch because there is no possible way he's going to hold the edge against NFL tackles. But hey... any kind of pass rush help the Lions get is a plus... again, we'll just see what he does against NFL players. At his size... he seems like another James Houston (although with different technique as you can see on the tape...). A plus to Holmes for finding "things" underneath every single stone ("leave no unturned..."). We'll see if he found a little golden nugget or just some pyrite.

This is what I am hoping for. Republican moderates getting the hell out of Dodge... The MAGA crazies get crushed by all sorts of Dems in the general election... And the subsequent implosion of the "Republican Party" discredits the current wave of Fascism in America. One can only hope...

First two years versus second two years. It's the House of Representative Republicans that have gone completely off the rails. Their only Campaign Platform is: "We are Dysfunctional. If you love a dysfunctional government, do-nothing, corrupt, ineffective government, vote Republican."

I'm not angry or combative at all. I just think it's BS that he's going to get a top 10 Guard contract. Am I not allowed to say that? Oh yeah... This: And this too:

A Democratic takeover of Congress, both houses... Means we will be a functional country again.

This generation apparently does not....

Ragnow is getting injured often. When he's out 6 games next year, what's the backup plan? Interior line of Awosika-Glasgow-Sorsdal? Sorry... but that doesn't give me any comfort level whatsoever. Can't afford Jonah is bull****. IMO. He won't get top 10 guard money... that's BS. The O-Line is the ENGINE of this team. **** up the O-Line and we **** up our Super Bowl chances. Sorry, but I'm overruling you. Of all of our Free Agents this year: Jonah Jackson is our priority re-sign #1.

Yes they were talking about it quite a bit... Before and during...

You FINALLY figured it OUT!!! GOOD JOB!