oblong Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 It sucks to find out after ****ing around but when people say "Hamas aren't terrorists" and "Jews collobarated with Nazis in WWII" and "Oct 7 was fake".... oh well. I followed that account for along time. Some of the tweest they exposed were blatantly offensive and antisemetic. I am not seeing the issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Just as an example.... here's one. These aren't victims. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 (edited) 1 hour ago, oblong said: Just as an example.... here's one. These aren't victims. They’re just young people yelling at each other. In 10 years she’ll have a family in the suburbs. Edited April 17 by Motown Bombers 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigeraholic1 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 2 minutes ago, Motown Bombers said: They’re just young people yelling at each other. In 10 years she’ll have a family in the suburbs. They just like the hippies of the 60's peace, love, chopping babies heads off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 Rik from the Young Ones always had his radicalism cast in that light. The "Peoples Poet" was presumed to eventually be a Tory suburbanite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted April 17 Share Posted April 17 So, heroes. OK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 (edited) On 4/16/2024 at 2:39 PM, gehringer_2 said: Israel has always said that if you kill our people, there is nothing we care about you hiding behind that will stop us from coming after you. This is a basic premise of the position they take in a hostile neighborhood. It's a piece of their deterrence posture, just like a Trident submarine is for us. We can express our own scruples about it but we shouldn't be surprised by it or think it represents any change in long standing Israeli policy. I have no problem with an aggressive defense strategy, but if you want my support, I hope you follow international laws even if your enemies don't. But if the defense of "that's just what they do" is valid, them what are we doing in Ukraine with Russia? That's just what they do. Lastly, if Israeli truly will kill anyone that kills there own, why didn't they kill OJ? I would have been perfectly fine with Israeli dropping a jdam on a foursome with OJ on a golf course in there last 30 years. Edited April 18 by ewsieg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 These dumbasses were literally protest inside Google offices. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted April 18 Share Posted April 18 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Explosions in Iran, may be Israeli missiles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 In Isfahan, Iran's nuclear development facilities. WAG: Successful software attack by Israel melts down... something... This could get very, very... bad. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Possibly Natanz as well...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Current play-by-play on incoming information of this strike(s) in Iran: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Market futures are tanking right now due to Israel's attacks on Iran and other... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Explosions in Iraq and Syria too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 I can't believe Israel retaliated after the city of Chicago passed a ceasefire resolution. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Reported cyberattacks as well but no idea of the impact... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted April 19 Author Share Posted April 19 (edited) 24 minutes ago, 1984Echoes said: Reported cyberattacks as well but no idea of the impact... It would be beautiful if the detonations in Istfahan were cyber induced and Iran's air defense net had just gone bonkers for show. Probably not the case but amusing possibility. Edited April 19 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewsieg Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Sounds like the US knew about a "limited" response. I don't know. I wanted Israel to 'take the win' and see if we could find a way to deal with Iran in less public ways. That said, almost wish it wasn't 'limited'. If you're going to do it, do it. I keep hearing that US intelligence says Iran is close to a nuclear bomb again. If true and they just did a 'limited' response, it only hurt the situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 I think I just heard clip of Blinken on C-SPAN saying they did know but US not involved in any way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 8 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: It would be beautiful if the detonations in Istfahan were cyber induced and Iran's air defense net had just gone bonkers for show. Probably not the case but amusing possibility. that woulda been pretty awesome, like hack caused them to bomb themselves! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 (edited) 8 hours ago, ewsieg said: Sounds like the US knew about a "limited" response. I don't know. I wanted Israel to 'take the win' and see if we could find a way to deal with Iran in less public ways. That said, almost wish it wasn't 'limited'. If you're going to do it, do it. I keep hearing that US intelligence says Iran is close to a nuclear bomb again. If true and they just did a 'limited' response, it only hurt the situation. Israel decided that "all out war" was probably not a good idea. I don't think this has any effect, whatsoever, on the Iranian nuclear bomb situation. Why would you think so? Or, exactly how is this "hurting" the situation? I think this should be looked at simply from the Israeli-Iranian sides, not from American or anti-nuclear bomb perspectives. I disagree that this hurts any situation. I believe, looking at it only from... Israel: "We killed an architect of the Oct 7th attack on us. It was an Iranian IRGC General and his team in a military annex to their embassy in Syria. They responded with a limited attack on our territory which we succesfully defended. We also will not allow an attack on our territory without a response. We have responded, in a limited manner. the offramp for both our countries to de-escalate is still there. As how the Americans say: 'The ball is now in your court'. " Iran: "We attacked Israel (limited) in response to the attack on our embassy/IRGC general. Israel attacked us in response, on our home territory? We don't know what you are talking about... we shot down a few small birds that were hovering over our military bases... nothing to see here. We consider the matter closed." This is the only thing that matters right now. The viewpoints of these two countries, only, towards each other. And Israel's attack was much more limited than what it first might have thought to have been (including me), which is allowing an off-ramp for both of these countries to stand down. That is the best, immediate, outcome. Iran's nuclear capabilities are a separate issue, IMO, to be dealt with on a separate basis. Edited April 19 by 1984Echoes 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chasfh Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 22 hours ago, Motown Bombers said: These dumbasses were literally protest inside Google offices. In their defense, kind of, it looks as though Google themselves may have fostered an environment in which protest is invited. Also, what Google does not say in its statement is that they "fired 28 (these) employees on Wednesday after sit-ins at the company's offices in protest of its cloud computing contract with the Israeli government." Whether we believe it actually involved screaming and whistles and yelling like street protests depends on whether we take their version of events on its face. https://www.axios.com/2024/04/18/google-israel-cloud-contract-protest-firings?stream=top 1 big thing: Protester firings mar Google's ivory tower Illustration: Shoshana Gordon/Axios Google's firing of 28 protesting employees Wednesday sends the clearest signal yet that the tech giant — whose founders pledged it was "not a conventional company" — has become just that, Scott Rosenberg reports. The big picture: Silicon Valley's leading firms have long told talented employees to think of the office like a campus, "bring their whole selves" to work and change the world for the better — but workers who bought those promises are facing a moment of truth. Driving the news: The 28 firings followed sit-in protests Tuesday at Google offices in Silicon Valley and New York City. The demonstrators opposed a $1.2 billion 2021 Google Cloud contract with the Israeli government, arguing Google's support for the effort — known as Project Nimbus — was harming Palestinians in Gaza. Nine employees were arrested at the sit-ins. What they're saying: In a note to employees, CEO Sundar Pichai wrote, "This is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics." Google also says that the Project Nimbus contract is "not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services." Between the lines: Google prided itself from its early days on creating a university-like atmosphere for the elite engineers it hired. Dissent was encouraged in the belief that open discourse fostered innovation. "A lot of Google is organized around the fact that people still think they're in college when they work here," then-CEO Eric Schmidt told "In the Plex" author Steven Levy in the 2000s. Yes, but: What worked for an organization with a few thousand employees is harder to maintain among nearly 200,000 workers. Generational shifts in political and social expectations also mean that Google's leadership and its rank-and-file aren't always aligned. Flashback: Google has already faced several waves of employee protest over its programs. In 2018, thousands of Google workers protested its participation in a Defense Department effort called Project Maven that attempted to apply AI to the Pentagon's image-recognition needs. Some employees quit, arguing that their research should not be used to help target drones. The company has also previously undertaken high-profile firings or quasi-firings, like those of AI researchers Margaret Mitchell and Timnit Gebru. (Google maintains Gebru resigned.) With this week's dismissals, the company made clear that it views the current protests not as a form of intellectual disagreement but as a matter of rules enforcement and security. Social media posts and reports of the debate on internal Google message boards show a deep split in thinking on the firings. One group of observers — often older or more conservative in perspective, and including many business leaders or investors — applauds Google, saying the protesters got what they deserved and were deluded for thinking that the workplace was an appropriate forum for political action. Another group — often younger, more progressive and more friendly to labor — sees the protests as an act of conscience and the firings as a betrayal of Google's founding values. Our thought bubble: If you build a corporation that conditions employees to see themselves as eternal students, you can't be that surprised when some of them decide to hold demonstrations. Conversely, if you work for a fabulously profitable corporation that counts many of the world's governments as its customers, you can't be that surprised when it prioritizes business needs and political expedience over individual expression. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted April 19 Author Share Posted April 19 (edited) Seeking moral clarity or consistency from any profit based organization is an exercise in futility. Such is the nature of activity in the pursuit of profit. That shouldn't be taken so much as a bad thing as just a recognition of reality. You don't get maple syrup from an orange, you don't bother listening to anything a corporation says about its "beliefs" or "ethics" because it can't possibly have any. By definition, everything a corporation does is transactional. Whatever they tell their employees (or any other segment of the public) does not flow from "belief", it flows from marketing to those employees in the pursuit of a workforce to produce profit and will be non-operative as soon as it's seen as an impediment to profit. That's just the way it is. Anyone who goes to work for a corporation expecting more is as logically impaired as a Supreme Court justice that voted for Citizen's United. 😉 Edited April 19 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted April 19 Share Posted April 19 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.