Trying to Peg Everything

Since I nearly got beat-up by the Freshman football team in high school when I was a sophomore (I talked them down, actually). I have realized that people try to peg, categorize, pigeon-hole and make clichés of others using easy to identify symbols.

The football players shouted out "Fags" to me and my friends who were on our way to a French club party dressed, as we always did, in our long trench coats with long highlighted bangs (1985 or so?). To me, wearing a trench coat was just a way to be self expressive or at least to fit in with my small group of friends. It had nothing to do with being a gun toting punk and nothing at all to do with sexuality since we were all mormon virgins who wanted hot girls who hated us and shunned probably hot girls who were too accessible to be desired. None of us was ever gay in our lives but we sure took some abuse for that team. Enough to appreciate what actual gay people might go through, if only in some measure.

I like to think that high school stupidity, heaping flack upon anyone different, was from youth and inexperience. Yet, somehow the attitude often carries over into adulthood.

There are so many inane ways in which people try to identify lifestyle like McCarthy sussed out communists.

Things I have heard that are supposed to indicate that people are "gay", "liberal", or "right-wing cowboys" or "assholes" are just way off. Maybe some people just mean "different" by those labels. Still, there is little openness to difference in some attitudes of those who even feel like they are "just kidding around" while they propagate and reinforce silly ideas.

Popped collars? Gay? I thought maybe it just meant "Douche Bag"? Pardon me while I also make a cliché of people!
Cleanliness? Is it godliness or godlessness that it is closest to. I think people should make up their minds.
Driving a small/big car? It would be a good thing if all big tough belt buckle-wearing men were all homophobic and drove Mining-Dump-Trucks so no one would mis-read their sexual intentions. The premise is so ridiculous.



I hear things like that a lot. "Girl Car, boy car, old lady car, gay car, dork car, cocks-drive-this-car" etc.


I saw a sticker that said "Silly boys, Jeeps are for girls".

As a rational being I have explained to many that an automobile is an abstract device that takes feet, hands, brains and eyes to drive...the genitals are not relevant and (hopefully) not involved in controlling the vehicle.

Maybe some of this is just women wanting to assert their touch upon a segment of the world to make it feel like they can have it as their own, not just borrow it from male-ness. That transition is acceptable I suppose, though some day we must finally be rational and accept no one else as worth more than ourselves no matter how their collar is placed or even what color the collar is.

Anyone can drive anything. Anyone can like anything and it doesn't have to mean some secondary thing. This is what women have been fighting to tell us since the 60's. A woman who likes sex doesn't have to also be a slut etc. A mexican doesn't have to also be saddled with every cliché ever invented about Mexicans without any compelling interest in the individual.

"You drive a girl car"... I have heard before. My Dark Blue german sedan with awesome v6 power and 5 in the floor that can cruise at 139 mph is a girl car? People are nuts. My car is also a Mexican by birth, by the way. It still doesn't like mariachi music, but if it did it would be perfectly OK.

It's all in good fun on one level, but in the process we really do try to impose an equally ridiculous standard of behavior on people who's diverse behavior, no matter how seemingly different or ridiculous, is really personal and not really any of our business.

Generalizations can be destructive. 100 a day are spouted on T.V. (Especially on those daytime talk shows and guess who watches those! Don't be tempted to generalize!) Some people cause real harm trying to socially impose them.

"Gingers have no soul" is funny to an adult, but it can be a reason for violence to children. Perhaps no one has a soul, but just because that hip guy at work is wearing a pink oxford doesn't mean he drives a jeep (or whatever nutty conclusion you'd like to draw).

Labeling is just cruel...Not all bitches are stupid :) Not all douche bags are wealthy!

I think you get the point. Cars are cars people. We should all stop thinking you can dissect people without getting to know them. Besides, we can't let gay people be the only ones who like beauty and dress well.

Pop your collar at your own risk, especially in your european convertible! (Now I'm doing it too! Make it stop!)

=sw

No War

I have been thinking about war a lot lately.

Today, in November 2009, the United States is at war. I have written before about how we won World War II. I have always had an interest in seeing, reading and hearing all I could about the World wars. Maybe it just seemed such a fearsome prospect that I wanted to be sure I understood how it came about and came to an end if only to feel it could be avoided or to feel some sense that the world was a safe enough place for me to live in.

I'd love to hate war. I'd love to work to end it and prevent it in all circumstances. I have run the theoretical models in my head over and over again. Repressive regime or dictator wants to control and enslave all mankind, I do not wish to be controlled or enslaved along with millions of others so I must stand up and fight. War is thus made.

Sometimes I think the most reasonable end to war is overwhelming force. Back in the day we used incendiary and even nuclear weapons to make the point that Empires and Reichs were not going to dominate free people. To make the point stick required unhindered recourse.

How can I hate war but call for overwhelming violence? If there must be war shouldn't it be decided as swiftly as possible?

I really don't enjoy considering the plausibility of the theories that profiteers arrange for wars to be able to buy up wealth when prices are low or panicked and thereby own more of the world after the prices recover. What a cold rationality.

Then again, we have had a population crises before and I think a philosopher like Nietzsche would applaud convenient solutions such as global conflict to reduce the exponential growth.

My very religious mother likes to say "God has plagues, wars, famines and thirst to handle population growth, don't worry about it". That sounds like the least-managed outcome I can envision.

Dr. Norman Borlaug died this year. He helped forestall what might have been a major 20th century disaster by encouraging the use of new high yield crops and by lobbying for policy changes in areas of high growth in population such as India and Pakistan. He warned that while the grain production might now be ahead of the population growth, the limit would be reached again as the population grows beyond the ability of science to produce higher yields while at the same time arable land shrinks because so many more people need to live and be housed.

Many religious cultures would try to out grow their counterparts by overbreeding to the point of senselessness watching infrastructure fail to keep up. Attitudes like that are deeply detrimental to the future of life on earth. If the capacity of the planet is greater than the current population, we should grow cautiously and sensibly. Now it seems there is a war to flood the world with ones own culture and ethnicity.

In a contest such as this, those who limit their reproductive rate risk being overwhelmed by the others. It reverses the logic of cautious growth. This push to maintain relevance in exponentiating throngs will bring conflict over finite land and water resources.

I think the irrationality of religious belief often becomes the core cause of war. It is often religious people who aspire to have as many children as possible. This is also usually much more than just a personal hope, it is thought to be a moral duty to God.

An American Physicist and Nobel Laureate said:

With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
-Steven Weinberg

What is the solution to be? Is the prescription really war, famine, flood and pestilence?

Perhaps the earth can sustain more people that I might think. Maybe a sentient culture needs many people to survive at all. Still, where ever the limit, there is one and I think the problem is not being addressed. Violent evil dictators have tried their solutions. I think there is something better.

Can we live without war? I would like to think so, though my common sense sees a different picture.

-sumwun

MSI's Craptastic Philosophy

Maybe they should be called "Mac's Slow Imitator" oh yah... with gold star support for a lousy OS!

Again I say, no one wants underpowered, less useful computers. Getting the price lower is only meaningful when performance is matched or improved upon. You can make it pretty, but a personal computer is ultimately a device valued most for what it does. The other thing is...if you want innovative design, look somewhere else. MSI's Wind is essentially a knock off of an Apple monitor design from 10 years ago.

MSI 2009:



Apple 1999:


Ten years is along time in the computer world.

Yes I know, MSI made an "all in one" computer out of Apple's Cinema Display design. They also already tried to copy the new iMac's form factor, missing the boat in my opinion.

MSI:


Apple:


I think MSI should "come orignal" (as 311 sings), and build some powerful machines instead of trying to make people happy with dumbed down, wholly inadequate machines.

Their designs are already not only far behind Apple but also failed attempts to imitate Apple. Another sad truth about being far behind... so are their OS options.

=sw

Thinking Back on World War II

I hear so much uproar about the idea that we can never stop fascism, pirates, suicide bombing and the culture of terrorism.

They can use human shields and take hostages and threaten everyone, decapitating our citizens or soldiers with impunity. When we kill a pirate or an extremist fighter their martyrdom breeds 20 more, it's said. It's not socially acceptable or even morally right to demonize the religion they exploit to carry out whatever crime they want god to back.

I have a kind of tongue in cheek argument against all that. I would by far prefer a peaceful co-existence of free and diverse societies to war. Though if it must be war...if Islamist, Taliban or other extremist fighters feel emboldened enough to behead their neighbors, then something is deeply out of sync with that peaceful vision.

So I propose, mostly as a thought exercise, an alternative to feeling victimized by terror.

Comparisons can be made of the Word II War Axis powers to the the anti-semitic, anti-western rhetoric of radical Islamic movements of today. In some ways we are even referring to governments in the Muslim world who use propaganda to educate children with rhetoric that demonizes Jews and Westerners, makes suicide bombing an ideal for living and even speaks of the annihilation of Jews, Israel and any other culture or group that aligns with the Jews. They teach children that a god turned Jews and Christians into apes and pigs and other ridiculous rhetoric. Students are shown videos of real and dramatized suicide bombing acts, to glorify these and recruit new bombers. For some reason, one needs a steady stream of new recruits to continue suicide bombing campaigns.

Comparisons can also be made between the rise of racist, anti-semitic fascism in Germany and the rise of anti-western anti-Israeli Fascism in Iran and Pakistan. Many Palestinian, Saudi, Iranian and other Islamic populations believe in the idea of conquering the west and having a world governed by religion, specifically their Muslim Sharia law. The Taliban movement instituted that system in Afghanistan and is now trying to "Talibanize" Pakistan now that Afghanistan is occupied by coalition powers (or Allies of nations standing with the Unites States).

Sharia law is something Muslims are trying to push into government all over the world, including large countries in Africa like Nigeria and even in England.

Some think that the west is idling its way to being conquered, while ignoring these trends on a kind of autopilot of political correctness.

As I promised, I wish to break the politically correct barrier and recall some of the factors that allowed us to win World War II, which was a battle against seemingly all powerful fascist, totalitarian governments that wished to conquer the world and racially targeted millions for murder.

Studying a past victory over fascist, racist enemies should give us a hint as to how to defeat the same kind of culture in our time.

Stalin's soviet regime bore the brunt of the Allied casualties. Stalin apparently killed many of his own people. He also had heavy losses because of Hitlers decision to break promises and breach accords and attack the Soviet Union. These facts were important in the turning of the tide, though when taken in total, the war required other efforts to succeed as well.

There were brave, determined soldiers who simply marched into harms way, landing on beaches and throwing themselves into the fight who turned many occupied areas into reclaimed Allied or liberated lands. An example of this the Americans in North Africa, who learned hard lessons of combat and pushed to defeat the Germans there with the British pushing from the other side.

I could cite the British Commonwealth citizens as examples. These were troops from New Zeeland and India who fought along side Polish, and American troops in Italy to slowly push back Nazi positions. I am sure I have left many nations off the list here.

Also the British, Canadians, Americans and other Allies that pushed up onto the beaches of Normandy to break the German occupation.

I could say that, from an allied perspective, many manufacturers took part in designing, building and deploying the needed hardware for war. Many of these allowed women and minorities to support the war effort by working on weapons or taking on varying degrees of military duty.

Americans grew victory gardens to stem food shortages and did without or rationed many goods so soldiers could have provisions.

Another thing that America and Britain did to push for victory against Germany and Japan was the practice of indiscriminate carpet bombing with incendiary bombs. The Nazi's started the practice during the blitz on Britain. Thermite and White Phosphorus were used to purposely ignite fires, even fire storms. These substances once alight could burn through metal.

At least 25 German cities and many Japanese cities were bombed in this way. Dresden and Tokyo are among the stand out examples where the destruction was the most horrible. More Japanese people lost their lives in the Tokyo firestorms from American incendiary bombing than in the Nuclear strike on Nagasaki (that came after).

Because of the terror associated with this kind of attack, they have been outlawed by the UN.

Our modern high tech weapons try to reduce collateral damage, in what is a seemingly more humane practice of targeting closely what are deemed military assets.

Using firebombing exacts a cost on an entire society for what their fighters are doing. It is a terror weapon, creating the fear of overwhelming, indiscriminate, random destruction. The humanity here is the intended effect that a culture can be freed from oppression for future generations, reducing, in the long run, the suffering of themselves and others under fascist regimes that institutionalize killing and hatred.

Some say there is no terror weapon greater than the suicide bomber. I would disagree with that and insist that the fire-storm method of exacting a social cost for war-like, murderous and other terrorist behavior is an effective weapon even more frightening than suicide bombing.

I can see the arguments people make...that bombing a poor and starving population during war is insanely cruel and it is really the evil dictator and his power structure that should be the true targets.

Yet, pin point bombing of Nazi tanks, gun positions, planes,ships and other military assets may have slowed their war machine but the entire Nazi culture, ideals and spirit were what firebombing suppressed and defeated. It was the Allies way of saying...the cost of your evil ideology is to be paid by all of you until it is brought to an end.

Nothing would bring terrorist warriors to change their ideology faster than the understanding that the cost was indescribably high and poignantly dear for continuing to teach, promote, indoctrinate their own people and carry out such evils.

There are no effective human shields against indiscriminate regional bombing.

The outcome of World War II was not reinvigorated angrier Nazi's with martyrs to inspire them, it was the total defeat of the institution and the culture that supported it. Sure there may be people who still harbor similar pathologies, but they are entirely marginalized and outlawed. Similarly, the attacks on Japan did no lead to more Bonsai charges and angry Kamikaze raids with even more emboldened killers shouting praises to the Imperial emperor. It ended the culture, the ideal and the concept of Japanese Empire. It does not mean there are no longer criminals or evil intentions in Japan, but they are no longer the main stream. A peaceful society is the main stream.

For example, the wars between Israel and Palestine will go on forever because the Fascist palestinian terror gangs desire the complete destruction of Israel (and perhaps western culture in general). The way to end the war is to end the ideology of hatred toward Jews and the West. Then future Palestinian peoples can rejoin the world community and begin to live in peace like Germans and Japanese now do.

Can we end that ingrained, under-educated and brainwashed militancy with peaceful means? I welcome that. I am not sure how well that would have worked against Nation Socialism or Imperial Japan.

As it is, we tend to be apologetic far too often. It is not acceptable for people to teach hatred in their schools and religious gatherings. It is insanity, irrationality and makes such a culture not a moral equivalent for our western culture and freedom.

We know how to defeat the most fearsome, powerful and overwhelmingly indoctrinated fascist regimes. It is was done in WWII against overwhelming odds.

I would think we are in a much better position now to combat ignorance, Fascism, Totalitarianism and religious extremism. We must simply remember the justness of our cause, the value of our freedom and way of life and the reach of the options available to us to counter the vast and deep ignorance, hatred and violent nature of an enemy we surely don't want to have charge of our lives, our lands and our governments.

I think we should stop cradling and apologizing to "the good people" while trying to target "the bad people" and send a message that the price will be shared by all members of an antagonistic culture until the ignorance is eradicated.

Sometimes I am of that mind, that we should use all means to defeat the terrorists. Other times I wonder who can describe the peaceful resolution to the conflict created by radicalism and the huge obstacle of years of ignorance through indoctrination.

Indiscriminate firebombing is a weapon against suicide bombing and terrorism. If there is a peaceful solution, it must involve showing millions of indoctrinated people how wrong they all are before the Religious government is instituted under our feet and therefore over our heads.

I often repeat this example about what makes war so unavoidable. I truly am a peace-loving person. I do not wish to harm or kill anyone. Though, in a symbolic example that applies to nations, someone may come along and put a gun to my head and insist that my way of life is offensive and evil and that they desire to destroy me. Whether or not it can be argued that I could improve my way of life, this situation leaves me with a choice. I can die a pacifist, allowing those who would gladly commit violence to live on, reproduce and occupy the world or I can have enough strength to stand and counter that argument and choose to live on myself and fight so long as my life is threatened.

I'd rather stand up, push back and fight to defend my way over the other way. Then people like me, who do not love war or killing, but who will defend their lives are those that live on in the world.

I would love to be able to conceive of a peaceful, effective tactic or "weapon" against mass-ignorance, suicide bombing and terrorism. Until such time, I think the UN should lift the ban on incendiary weapons and firebomb the hell out of the war lords, perverse militants and murderous movements of the world and stop impotently messing around as if our western society isn't ultimately better, more deserving of preserving and refuse to accept any "inevitability" or purportedly "irreversible" trends.

=sw

The Context of Israeli Military Action

One valid argument Palestinians have made against Israeli practices is all about settlements. Israel has, over many years established "Kibbutzim" or "Clusterings or Gatherings" and other settlements all over the West Bank and Gaza. This seems to be an attempt to change the facts on the ground and perhaps expand Israeli land claims.



For there to be peace, the right thing to do would be for Israel to unilaterally halt settlement expansion and even withdraw from existing settlements. This would be a painful and dramatic process, removing Jews from their adopted homes and forcibly returning them to Israeli lands.

This moving process was begun in the Gaza strip. Israeli soldiers, in their largest Peace-time operation, gathered settlers and removed them from their homes, lands, greenhouses, neighborhoods, gardens and synagogues. This web site shows the process:

Israeli Exodus from Gaza

This was a painful, humbling process which was the right thing to do. The removal of Israelis from Gaza by their own military was carried out with love, concern and patience but with a determination to reverse the settlement trend in this first test case.

Once Israel had conceded that they should leave settlements as part of the peace process, how did the Palestinians respond? By allowing a foreign (Syrian) terror gang to take over and begin to fire rockets into Israel.

With this as a result, Israel cannot progress to the next logical step, which would be an exodus from the West Bank settlements. Israel is compelled to close crossings and invade Gaza to put a stop to the madness of Hamas rocket attacks.

Palestine will never become a state (comprised of the West Bank and Gaza) while the insanity of Hamas continues. Hamas militants bring down death and destruction upon their own people, their own families, by firing Rockets or participating in suicide bombing. That is all they are achieving. They are not accomplishing even a step toward a Palestinian state. Israel has to fight their ideology, there is no other reasonable choice. Although, Hamas can prevent more harm.

Wise Palestinian leaders could turn back the Israeli tanks and shells with a short declaration. It is not even that much.

Simply express a desire to have a viable Palestinian state, recognize Israel's right to peace and security and claim that right for yourselves by abandoning violence.

Teach your children to love their neighbors and they will have a future.

Turn your anger and indignation against radical militants among you. See that they are the cause of the suffering. When a militant fires a rocket from near a school, he is designing the death of your children as a feeble attempt to discredit the just actions against them. Israel would never fire weapons on Gaza were it not for militants firing rockets.

Hamas are not heroes loyal to the Palestinian people. They are the enemy of a Palestinian state and the enemies of Palestinian peace and prosperity because, in their minds, Israel should not exist.

Militants will never have their unjust desires fulfilled. Their attitude only leads to more pain, more suffering and the destruction of their own people. Eventually Hamas and other radical militants will be put down. If not by Israel, but Israel's allies. Even the Arab countries must concede Israel did the right and noble thing withdrawing from Gaza and they are justified in stopping the rocket attacks.

Palestinians and Arab nations that can influence events in the region must actively reverse the culture of suicide bombing and rocket attacks. Teaching violence and hatred to generation after generation is no way to get peace.

If the best we can get from Palestinians is rockets, suicide attacks and an endless culture of hatred and irrationality then what is so bad about Israeli settlements? They may even change the character of the lands enough to stop the madness.

Eventually, civilized nations will reluctantly exercise the power needed to end the evil ideologies of Hamas as they have against other evil ideologies in the past. It is possible to put an end to evil cultures, designs and ambitions, no matter how insurmountable Hamas may seem, they can be absolutely and utterly defeated should that be the only way to stop their attacks. The Nazi Third Reich and the Japanese Empire seemed utterly insurmountable and had conquered vast regions of the world. Their ideologies were utterly defeated, though not their peoples.

Just as a peace loving Germany and Japan are welcomed and embraced by the world after the defeat of their former regimes, it is not Palestinians that need to be defeated. They are long over due for having a Peaceful, stable status. It is the ideas of the militants that must be defeated.

=sw

CNN video problematic

Shifting in a lurching way from serious international conflict to domestic internet annoyances, I have to complain about CNN video.

They deploy an HD-shaped window on their site then proceed to STRETCH content that has a Standard Definition aspect ratio (4:3) to the 16:9 shape of their window.

I have complained about televisions doing this, but this is a web site... there is absolutely no excuse for this kind of stupidity in visual rendering.

I believe it calls their journalistic integrity into question. It would be offensive if they animated mustaches onto faces or digitally altered images to include animated digital hats or logos. What they actually do is distort every single pixel of the image, stretching it out of reality.

Here is a captured image from their site:



Here is my digitally corrected version, restoring the real inherent aspect ratio of the video content:



It's clear that the corrected image is far more true to life and real than the stretched one. This lovely woman's face is stretched to pancakoid by CNN's flawed video deployment.

Try opening those two images into separate browser windows to their native resolutions and comparing the look and sizing of them.

I doubt they do it on purpose, it's just that they don't care enough to deliver the best. They are just too lazy to care.

That is a shame, since their business is producing video content and deploying it!

I hope they "find the side bars" for their non HD content and stop stretching the truth.

=sw

About Israel in Gaza

I think it can be seen by everyone that Israel's air strikes and invasion of Gaza appear to be disproportional to the amount of death and destruction caused by the thousands of rockets fired into their territory in recent months by the Hamas "defacto" authority in Gaza.

Looking at this conflict as it is in one moment is not adequate. On the face of it Israel is killing many more people with its response to the scourge of rocket attacks than the rocket attacks killed. First, numbers are not the best way to see this and secondly, Israel is fighting something much more serious that is only represented by the rocket attacks.

To my first point, every life is valuable. The quality of those lives is valuable in a way that cannot be counted. I feel the pain of the losses on both sides. I don't blame the children who are killed in Gaza for the politics that led to their deaths. Every Israeli life is precious as well. The Israeli people must also live in constant anxiety from rocket attacks.

Secondly, Israel is not fighting a legitimate group. They are fighting a bunch of thugs and terrorist gangsters who, no matter how organized, how religiously faithful to their beliefs or how elaborate their clothing and weapons, are just like their counterparts in Lebanon (Hezbollah), an illegitimate, violent, hate-fueled band of bully-thugs whose only goal is the destruction of the tiny minority of Jews in the world and the negating of Israel in its entirety.

Jews aren't just any group. They have been conquered and pressed like olives to make oil over thousands of years. These are they who suffered at the hands of the tyrannical racist Nazi regime a holocaust of death greater than the entire population of Palestinians living in the Palestinian territories. Those lands only seem exclusively "Palestinian" because of an insult to Jews by the Roman Empire where upon conquering the Jewish lands renamed the whole area "Palestine". Note how remarkably Roman the symbol of the Palestinian Authority appears:



The Palestinian Authority is, by the way, the group that should be in charge in Gaza and be well on its way to being a state that peacefully co-exists with Israel.

Suppose a violent race-based gang took over a populous county in the United States. How long would we let that stand before the military was sent in to stop the nonsense? That's exactly what's happening in Gaza. A violent gang has wrangled control and is attacking Israel, inciting violence and calling for Israel's destruction.

The British defeated the Ottoman Empire in World War I and therefore took control of those lands. They wisely preserved one of the traditional and few places that can be called a Jewish homeland. The response of a number of the Palestinians living there at the time (already among many Jewish settlements) was to be a bad xenophobic neighbor.

America welcomes thousands of refugees from war torn countries. Imagine if I turned on the new arrivals and spat venom and hatred about them and even attacked them in the streets. In the case of Israel, Jews fought back and empowered themselves to preserve the new nation the UN mandated for them and the Jews weren't all refugees. Some Palestinian "bad neighbors" who didn't have to lose their homes under the treaty, responded to the circumstances ignorantly and with xenophobic rage and not a little Islamic pride and made war with the Jews instead of living in peace.

There are still Palestinians living inside the borders of Israel. It's not impossible for people of different faiths to live in peace even inside the Jewish state.

The gangster war-makers must be shown that their methods are madness. The Nazi's were defeated for the same reason and it was awfully violent and required overwhelming force exerted from all sides. 20 million enemy Germans died. Their losses numbered greater than the Jews they killed. The same lesson is in place now. It's not the small numbers of deaths caused by Hamas rockets that should be the focal point. It is the evil of their ideology that must be defeated and their losses will be far greater until their world view is fundamentally defeated.

It's not so much how they wish to worship, though their predominant religion is exploited and intertwined in their hateful message, it's their attitude that "the Jews don't deserve to exist and have a state". That's what puts the Palestinians on a losing side, no matter their over-breeding to compensate for their losses.

I can think of almost no level of Jewish aggression that is too high when their survival as a people and their sole refuge in the world, that they can call their own, is threatened. The death toll on the Palestinian side is as individually tragic as that of every Nazi father lost to his children fighting for a flawed ideology. I feel all the human losses, but there is no doubt that the internationally recognized sovereign state of Israel is justified in this conflict while Hamas is a criminal organization on a mission of genocide. It is only lucky their rockets are not bigger and more deadly, because they would surely use them.

If it were up to me, Lebanon, Syria and the Palestinian territories would become vassals to another more powerful nation who would rebuild their culture to be residents, not refugees and reconstruct proper education, political institutions and economies. I know some would say that these militant gangs take on this role in the absence of stronger leadership, though I know that they behave more like children having a tantrum. Children with access to explosives.

The militant gangs like Hamas and Hezbollah are wrong and must get their crying done and comply with civil living. They will only hurt themselves banging their childish heads against a wall and fretting over what they think they are due. Meanwhile, they miss out and grow poorer and suffer, behaving like victims. They are truly victims of their own violent hateful ideals. The moment Palestinians become good neighbors, their lives can begin to be rebuilt and improve. I know of no rogue Jewish gangs firing missiles into the civilian neighborhoods of the Palestinian Territories. All the Jews want is to control their own peace.

Every dead child, parent, sibling or loved one in Gaza and Israel must be placed at the feet of the ignorant and futile ambitions of Hamas (and Hezbollah, to say nothing of their probable backers in Iran). They are the cause of the suffering. When a child is hurting himself and others, he first must be made to stop. Hamas is like that child.

=sw