The reaction of oil markets in early March 2026 to the prospect of a closure of the Straits Of Hormuz will likely go down in the books as an example of an Eminently Knowable Yet Somehow Unknown Known.
Peaceful negotiations have worked so well that conditions on the ground have not changed in 20 years.
I get your point, I do.
But "in another 20 years, something might change" is not exactly a winning pitch.
Civil marriage is pretty great.
(And an underrated problem with Israel *within* '67 borders)
Democratic, yes, but liberal?
Good job Raytheon, I guess.
Fuuuuuck.
Oh, I can.
I just also think that we're in a situation where people are going to have to accept that peace isn't necessarily comfortable.
Like, you can either accept war will happen, or you can accept that your neighbors govern themselves.
And Israel currently seems to reject both options.
Okay, but if terrorism doesn't work (and I'd agree it hasn't) what does?
It's not like peaceful protest or appealing to Israeli courts has worked.
Likudnik/Kahanist is probably more accurate.
Zionist is a sorta worthless label. Like being an anti-disestablishmentarian.
The Church of Wales no longer exists, and the state of Israel does.
I think that it's a sorta shit situation.
Where I don't think increasing casualties is good, but I also don't think that the situation will end without the asymmetry going first.
Also, the demand of Israeli Zionists of Palestinians at this point is "die."
Like, the request is "you can be soverign and independent, just don't be sovereign or independent."
Even aside from emotion, it's not a real offer.
Exegesis doesn't let you do things.
But it also doesn't justify revenge.
Or, worse, "pre-venge."
The "losing" isn't giving up, its accepting that a grievance isn't going to be addressed.
That Gerry Adams is going to be a free man.
It's bad because while it *does* improve security and lower fatalities it reinforces the siege mentality.
So instead of reducing security concerns, it makes them more salient.
Well, for a given understanding of "real."
A not insignificant amount of this is paranoia. (And Iron Dome is particularly bad for this)
Gymnastics was an outgrowth of liberalism!
It's weird to think about, but there's an entire history there.
Someone has to chose to lose first.
And I tend to have lower standards for autocracies.
It's definitely doable.
It just requires a heck of a lot more will than I think has been in evidence.
It doesn't matter.
Like, yeah, Iran had agency.
But bloodshed for bloodshed's sake doesn't really solve shit.
The biggest issue is personnel.
We simply do not have the guys unless we bring back conscription
Which would be about as popular as syphilis.
I swear, this isn't us, all our journalists embedded with US forces during Iraq and Afghanistan and it gave them terminal brain worms
How many people bother to update their registration?
Because I'm not sure most of the AMAB folks I know bothered to update Selection Service after they moved out of their parents house.
Like, just logistically, starting it up would suck.
You need peace before people can get over it.
(arguably we were serving as a lawyer for the Republicans against the UK working as one for the Orange Order)
Everyone has to decide that peace is more important than future victory.
And nobody is really there yet.
So we await a willingness to lose.
Liberia?
Well "integration" is key.
Because if the EEC prohibited Germans from ever actually going to France outside of work, I imagine it would have been rather less successful.
Of course, I also think West Point needs to go back to its original purpose.
Being an engineering school.
I could see a case that we should be less weird about promotions and probably promote some regular reservists and ROTC sorts to captain quicker.
I do not see the case for this with *just* SV weirdos.
Wait, no, don't let the pervert do that.
