The backlash over the settlement of Northwestern University with pro-Palestinian protesters continues to mount. In a letter acquired by The Daily Northwestern, seven out of 11 members of the “President’s Advisory Committee on Preventing Antisemitism and Hate” resigned this week in protest.
Under the controversial agreement, the school will admit five Palestinian students each year, support two Palestinian faculty members annually, create special housing for Muslim students, and add students to Committees to review purchases from Israeli businesses.
The resigning committee members criticized NU President Michael Schill’s failure to seek advice from the committee regarding the agreement.
The Anti-Defamation League criticized the deal, writing: “Instead of holding the perpetrators accountable, the university rewarded them. It would be unbelievable if it wasn’t true.”
Brown University has also been the target of criticism over its settlement with protesters, including a pledge by Brown President Christina Paxson to consider the divestment from all Israeli businesses.
Rutgers may be the next flashpoint for such criticism after agreeing this week to all but two demands by protesters.
— Rutgers accepting “at least 10 displaced Gazans” to complete their studies at the university.
— Plans to create an “Arab Cultural Center” by the fall semester at every Rutgers campus.
— Creation of a “memorandum of understanding” and “long-term educational partnership” with the West Bank’s Birzeit University.
— Use of “Palestine” and “Palestinians” instead of “Middle East” or “Gaza region” in all official university communications regarding “Israeli aggressions in Palestine.”
— Training for university staff and the hiring of experts in “anti-Palestinian, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim racism.”
— Display of flags on campus of “Palestinian, Kurdish, Kashmiri and other disputed territories.”
— “Full amnesty to all faculty, staff, student organizations and students” who took part in the Rutgers anti-Israel encampment and protests the past week.
The two items not agreed upon — divestment from companies that do business with Israel and ending Rutgers’ partnership with Tel Aviv University and the HELIX Innovation Hub — will be dealt with later by the university.
Israel will win because Israel’s God is the creator God while Islam’s god is a created being under the sovereign control of Israel’s God. If it were not so then the Jews would never have gotten their homeland back after 1,900 years in exile, and they would have been wiped off the map by the Arabs by now, who have 100x as much land, people, and oil.
Campus protesters and weak-kneed administrators who kow-tow to bullies find themselves opposing the sovereign Lord and will be found wanting when He weighs them in the balance on the day when all accounts are settled.
Which god? Yahweh? El? The Israelites worshipped more than one god.
Time to start learning more about religion, Anonymous. Judaism worships one God – by whatever name you ‘smartly’ smirk at, and Christianity believes in one God. Islam has Allah — so unless there is a group of God, there is ONE God by different names. The issues at hand are not God’s but man’s — and it is over land, political power and degrading this country.
To the Universities — the leadership is cowardly. Get back to basics — and send those kids to work without ‘payment’ for protesting. Students – study. Let them see what life in the ‘hard lane’ is really like! Enough pandering to all of the colleges and universities and protestors.
Illiberal progressives should ask themselves why did the University appoint members to the “President’s Advisory Committee on Preventing Antisemitism and Hate” if not to get the advice of [all] the Committee’s members? Did the University president fail to understand that the purpose of the Committee was to prevent antisemitism, not facilitate and reward it?
Northwestern University should be congratulated for saying no to funding a Department of Martyrdom and Improvised Explosives.
Would you want your neighbor using your property without your permission?
Can all of the great legal minds out there agree that Putin is a trespasser?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trespasser
French President vows Troops
More power to you if you are French (I can’t stand the French)
They essentially started the Vietnam War, They created a genocide in Ugandan that spread to Rwanda, … … …
They start-in with their crap (Military Modalities) and someone else has to finish it and pay for it.
They hide behind NATO then disappear after the mess is made (They instigate Wars).
If the French get involved, you most undoubtedly are going to be sucked into it – Pray they Don’t.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_France#French_Fifth_Republic_(1958%E2%80%93present)
Over my dead body. These ppl fail to see the real war – oh but macron does – the brexiteers. Hmm who would they be? The dutch Farner’s ? The German farmers ? The ppl getting slow boil pol pot via dictates from the un- elected elites in Brussels? Let’s remember … Obama did not give Ukraine weapons for their civil war – where our installed kiev was still encouraging the killing of country men. Men who were for realistic purposes Russian. Biden turned up the heat. For no good reason. Was Russia suppose to sit back while we encroach and kill Russians in the Ukraine? Idk. But now it’s hot – and a war the west can not win. Dumb ass has depleted us. Now his 62 billion is sure to genocide unkraines – and lead the west into an unwinnable really hot war. Biden is suicide.
The agrrement is invalid if it was made under duress.
The administration was happy to give the protestors a win
We have a winner. The administrations and their respective professors 🙄 are and were aligned from the beginning. Don’t ask us to believe Administration accidentally hired the professors who’ve filled the empty heads of these now fully propagandized student protesters. Hide the ball Activism from Administrators for sure, but it’s more like a Sting operation. Teach your children.
It was not under duress. It was under mutual acknowledgement and a need to peacefully resolve the issue. Making a deal is not capitulation to their demands since not all of their demands were met and a compromise was acceptable. They achieved their point. Why that is bad is nonsensical. Those on the right WANT punishment and deny the students demands because they are “leftists”. It’s pretty sad actually and those who feel the need to punish and deny others certain rights because they exercised their right to protest and advocate for what is a major cause around university campuses can’t stand the idea that they CAN do that. At least not according to their preferred way, quiet, civil, orderly and preferably out of the way somewhere where nobody will notice. How awful it must be that they can protest however they want thanks to the liberty and freedom guaranteed by the constitution.
Yes, making a deal with students is capitulation. It honestly does not matter what the issue is.
Universities are run FOR students – no BY them.
The university is supposed to be doing what is best FOR students – not what students demand.
We have a major problem today because those graduating from our most eleite universities are not suitable for any job of consequence.
Giving students more of what they want is not going to solve that.
A university is NOT an incredibly expensive day care for 20 somethings.
It is NOT time for colleges to negotiate with students.
It is time for them to regaining control and deliver actual value to students.
A tiny portion of the population of the world are palestinian.
They are not consequential. There is little reason to study them – much less dedicate student and faculty positions to them.
Newton is far more consequential with respect to education than all of the history of palestine forever.
One of the problems with education today – primary, secondary or college is too much focus on the inconsequential and too little on what is important.
@john say,
“ Universities are run FOR students – no BY them.
The university is supposed to be doing what is best FOR students – not what students demand.”
Students are paying customers. The university does what students pay them for. When things are not up to par for students by a university they have a right to complain as paying customers. A university is worthless without students.
“ Yes, making a deal with students is capitulation. It honestly does not matter what the issue is.”
It matters and no it’s not a capitulation. Students are paying customers. If that demand something or don’t agree with what a school they pay for is doing they can complain. It’s their school. Their money AND their tax dollars support the federal funds that go to both public and private schools.
Making a deal resolves the issue peacefully and by compromise. Meaning nobody gets everything, but everyone gets something out of it.
“ Newton is far more consequential with respect to education than all of the history of palestine forever.”
That’s true. But it’s still students who pay for their education that get to determine what they want from their school. They are customers are they not?
“ A tiny portion of the population of the world are palestinian.
They are not consequential. There is little reason to study them – much less dedicate student and faculty positions to them.”
So is the Jewish population. They are not consequential either. Not to most of the world.
Students who pay for their education get to choose what they want from their schools. If they want to study Palestinian culture and politics it’s their right to demand it if they are the ones paying for it.
“ It is NOT time for colleges to negotiate with students.”
Why not? Students are their customers. If they are not happy they have every right to try to negotiate for a solution. Even staff at certain colleges and universities support students protesting. Because students are the ones paying their salaries.
But that’s not what they did – they caused so much threat and chaos they have obstructed – not just finals but graduation – why? Bc despite the side they support doing sneak attack after decades claiming to wipe them off the map. Jews don’t get to invoke the bush doctrine? No these cup cakes went beyond – they obstructed. They also called for crimes against a group. If you did that you’d be quintessential original definition of a terrorist.
The Poison Ivies and other schools with woke admins & faculty are rewarding Hamas supporters for the Oct 7 massacre.
All of this war would not be happening if the massacre by Hamas had not taken place. Ignoring that reality is actually insane. These Anti-Semites are incredibly ignorant.
Hamas is winning here in the US past their wildest dreams.
Re the last two items not agreed to…Tel Aviv University and the HELIX HUB. I think it will be those two organizations that will be terminating any cooperation agreements…not the American university.
Newton was never elected to any legislative body, so his laws are irrelevant and illegitimate.
Pretty sure that Gravity does not care whether you think it is relevant or legitimate
Not does it care that you did not elect it.
Too funny. But … The earth is flat. And he didn’t get a 20 patent like for mnravax clots.
Acquiesce to well funded, professional agitators who support terrorists and who actively lead the mindless lemmings (students) by the nose. Brilliant. I am sure that will go well and build a sense of patriotism. I am certain George Soros, the terrorists and the radical communists could not be happier.
What a crock of B.S.
Acorn? In the education system? Who da thought that was possible?
Why can’t today’s youth be nice, like these wonderful kids???
Because they are overly protected and pampered and under-disciplined by entitled parents.
There was a time when children respected their elders, but now the elders
are expected to give into every whim and want of children.
The first words that children learn these days are “I WANT”.
Everybody got a trophy. Independent Bob.
Can they even tie their shoes???
If you can’t say it in 2 or 3 sentences, start your own blog. Easier to ignore. Get over yourselves.
Just because you can’t put together more than two sentences it sure as hell doesn’t make you smarter than the rest of us. So sorry if we run past your limited attention span.
Cionnath, some folks just don’t have full lives. There are a few that if I see there name I just don’t take the time to read it. You might be wise to do the same. Independent Bob.
Yes. I never read them. But I’m getting repetitive strain injury in my thumbs from scrolling past their endless inane posts.
Because you rule the world ?
It’s funny how why so many people are upset that some Universities chose to negotiate a peaceful resolution instead of punishment or using police. The level of contempt for protesters from those on the right because protesters are exercising their right to express their views through protest is clearly authoritarian in nature. The first instinct is to punish and censor their views by citing “rules” and “regulations”, the same things those on the right say is an impediment to liberty and freedom. Of course it’s only when THEY are affected.
Schools that choose to make a deal with protesting students AND staff who support them are seen capitulating to their demands because….? It’s a better solution than violence and punishment which doesn’t achieve anything. We have Republican lawmakers demanding the military get involved because some students are being disruptive and annoying instead of addressing their grievances. Students who successfully come to an agreement with their schools can resume their studies and schools can go back to normalcy. Nobody got everything they wanted, but they all got something they could live with and that much, much more preferable than punishment and no real solution to the problem.
Turley doesn’t want to seem to acknowledge that those who reach a deal are doing exactly what he often prefers, a peaceful solution. But he WANTS punishment and clearly holds those students in contempt of because they are not adhering to HIS perfect vision of what protests and disagreement should be. The professor clearly disagrees that student shouldn’t protest in classrooms and prevent speakers from speaking and always suggests students protest outside on campus which is exactly what these protests against the Israeli government are. But now it’s all about the “rules” which again, is Turley’s pet peeve when it comes to exercising free speech. For him free exercising free speech is acceptable and a duty only when it’s exercised civilly and orderly and with a minimum of disruption. That’s cute. If it were that way we would never have had the civil rights movement or have freed ourselves from the oppressive nature of the British. The Boston Tea party would never have been accepted according to the professor’s ‘sensible’ view of what free speech should be.
Protests are meant to be disruptive. They are meant to be loud. They are meant to be offensive to some. Just as the Jan 6 protest/riot. Many here happily defend the exact or worse behavior that was demonstrated by the Jan 6 event. But take deep offense and demand the harshest punishment possible for students peacefully protesting their cause. They clearly want to intimidate them from protesting in the future by threatening expulsion, suspension, and jail. Clearly those are anti-free speech. Because if it were applied to conservative students they would blow a head gasket and cry “free speech is under attack”.
It’s obvious that professor Turley does not agree with the protesters and that is ok. But his lack of a sturdy defense of their right to protest regardless of his disagreement betrays his love of the idea of free speech and why it’s important. Instead, he chooses to make excuses to trample on free speech by invoking rules and regulations that keep his sterile and plain vanilla exercise of free speech intact. Exercising free speech does not require it to be civil, inoffensive, non-violent, or quiet. If it were that way Rosa parks would never have been a historical figure, Selma wouldn’t have been a historical event, the Boston tea party, would never have gained fame.
Protests are meant to sabotage the normal course of things to get attention to a cause. To get attention it must be disruptive enough that everyone would notice. Disruption does not mean violence. Disruption means things are not ordinary, they are out of most people’s comfortable routines and that is what grabs people’s attention. Those on the right are annoyed or contemptuous because the disruption is an offense to their sense of order and lawful obedience. Which is strange because they were quite content when there was a lot of disorderly, violent, and disobeying the law on Jan 6 and according to John Say’s argument in another column they didn’t have a permit to march or force their way into the capitol. Otherwise it would have been entirely legal if they had a permit for that. Crazy huh?
Maybe you should invite them to protest at your next backyard barbecue.
Maybe you should invite them to protest at the next presidential election certification in congress?
The biggest bunch of lies every promulgated on this site. Crazy huh? Yep you are.
Nothing I’ve said is false. But if you believe I’ve made a false claim point it out so u can correct it.
Since George feels free to use the January 6th protests as a Tu quoque argument, then using “Adolph” Putin’s incursion
into Ukraine must be to his liking as well.
Crazy is that bunch of blather you wrote.
What a loon.
Well said. First Amendment crazy.
How much is Act Blue paying you?
Here’s my take- You don’t like J.R. Ewing er I mean DJT so your information sources are suspect. What has happened is appeasement of anti-American barbarians (Hamas) by the neo-Marxist administrators using foolish children taught by anti-American professors to hide the ball.
There are many reasons that people have problems.
The first is because these protestors are broadly viewed as vile.
These prohamas protests are FAR more disturbing to people than the BLM riots.
I support the Right of Nazi’s to march through Skokie – that does NOT mean that excercising that right makes Nazi’s into good people.
These protestors are NOT good people – they are supporting terrorists. They are supporting antisemites.
They are supporting the worlds worst homophobes and mysoginists, and racists. And many of the protestors themselves are anti-semetic.
Still we support their right to PEACEFULLY protest.
Even if we do not support the cause of the protestors or the values of the protestors.
We do NOT support disrupting the education of students who are at college to learn.
These colleges are going to provide Hamas with scholarships to their college.
The colleges, with entire floors are populated with Ph D’s , those Ph D’s have other Ph D’s as their office assistants.
All the brain power is totally ignorant of the fact that Jordon, or Egypt, or any other Muslim nation refuses any hamas terrorist to cross the border into their Nation, because of the threat they pose to society. But American colleges are going to give free rides to the exact same people, with the exact same ideas.
“These colleges are going to provide Hamas with scholarships to their college.” If that’s true, I heard Trump is going to start a Truth Social porn site featuring Melania and Stormy in some AI generated girl on girl action. Think of how much he could make off that. Hey, you ought to totally buy it given how detached from reality you are.
non sequitur.
Egypt won’t accept Gazan “refugees”, Jordan won’t accept Gazans, Saudi Arabia won’t accept Gazans and Iran isn’t even asked to accept Gazans and yet the America hating Joe Biden wants to accept Gazans into an America that he has allowed 10 million other illegals into over 3 1/2 years.
Nobody wants an open border and yet we have an open border.
Nobody wants student loans paid off (except for said students) and yet Boden is paying them off with our money.
Nobody (almost) wants “no bail” laws and yet we have them.
Nobody (almost) wants electric cars and yet they are mandating them.
Nobody wants more spending that causes inflation and yet we have more spending.
Nobody wants boys playing in girl’s sports and yet the government is pushing it.
Nobody wants men in woman’s locker rooms, jails or other spaces and yet it is happening.
Nobody supports Iran and yet Biden (and Obama) give them billions.
Nobody, and I mean nobody other than brain washed students, supports Hamas and yet students are demanding concessions from schools as they support Hamas.
Nobody likes Joe Biden and yet he will probably be “re-elected”.
It is so frustrating to have a scintilla of logic and be stuck trying to understand what is happening to our country. It is maddening!
Why the simplistic Trumpbilly list of grievances pretending to be policy?
“Nobody wants an open border and yet we have an open border.”
An open border would imply very minimal or no restrictions on the movement of people across borders. The United States does not have an open border policy. The U.S. has established and enforced immigration laws, border controls, and customs requirements, which include:
Legal Entry Points: There are designated ports of entry where individuals must present themselves to U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). At these points, CBP officers check travelers and their belongings, determining their eligibility to enter based on U.S. law.
Border Patrol: The U.S. Border Patrol actively monitors and patrols the border areas between the official entry points to prevent illegal crossings and activities.
Visa Requirements: For most non-U.S. citizens, entering the country requires a visa, which involves a vetting process before arrival. There are exceptions under programs like the Visa Waiver Program, but even these involve pre-screening through an electronic system.
Asylum Procedures: While individuals may present themselves at border points or after crossing to request asylum, this is a legal process with specific criteria and does not equate to open borders. Asylum seekers must go through a legal process to determine their eligibility to stay in the U.S.
Enforcement and Deportation: The U.S. government actively enforces immigration laws, including deporting individuals who are found to be in the country illegally or who have violated the terms of their stay.
There may be laws on the books, but they are not being enforced in any meaningful way. Watch the news. Just don’t vote.
Watch Fox News and you’d think prostitutes are just waltzing in with the a backpack full of drugs and the INS handing them $3,000 in cash.
What’s your proof the Border Patrol and INS aren’t enforcing the laws?
“On March 15, 2023, then-Border Patrol Chief Ortiz testified before the House Committee on Homeland Security that DHS did not have operational control of the border, either by the statutory definition or not.” https://homeland.house.gov/2024/01/03/chief-patrol-agents-confirm-lack-of-operational-control-in-their-southwest-border-sectors/#:~:text=On%20March%2015%2C%202023%2C%20then,the%20statutory%20definition%20or%20not.
“Asylum Procedures”
This is what this guy need. He needs to be committed to an insane asylum.
I’m assuming you let out a big burp as you finished your six pack. You’re smart.
Are you still looking for the booze you drank but fail to remember drinking? It goes along with the territory. Does Wernicke Korsakoff sound familiar? Check your discharge papers.
You should read outside the bubble a whole lot more. U.S. Congress hearings are on video and available for free.
Data points are easily researched. No mention of human smuggling, no mention of why the sponsors of many thousands of unaccompanied children aren’t on file. No mention of 100 thousand American Fentanyl deaths and growing. Show me the immigration laws being followed when Cartels own the human and drug smuggling on both sides of the border.
Have a nice day. Careful about your medications. Say a prayer for the children.
And here comes Sargent Shultz “I see nothing. I hear nothing. I know nothing.”
“Nobody wants student loans paid off…”
It’s true that forgiveness would have a high cost, which would be borne by taxpayers, including those who did not attend college or have already paid off their loans. It’s true there is also the issue of moral hazard, where forgiveness might encourage future students to take on debt with the expectation that it will also be forgiven.
But there is a profoundly strong argument for economic stimulus. By reducing or eliminating monthly debt payments, individuals have more disposable income to spend, invest, or save. This increased spending power can potentially lead to higher consumer demand, which can stimulate economic growth.
Economists have pointed out that, much like food stamps, money doesn’t disappear. It is recirculated back into the economy.
What’s probably most true is not that “nobody wants student loans paid off,” but that right wing extremists recognize educated people as being left of them, and therefore they perceive debt forgiveness to benefit people they hate.
I paid mine off – took16 years but I kept my part of the bargain. Let the kids today do the same
So you fall into the final paragraph.
Debt redistribution through progressive prices.
Doesn’t everybody know that debt redistribution for companies is the only kind that’s okay. How’s a billionaire supposed to keep up maintenance on their mansion in Florida?
Student loans are unconstitutional.
Student debt forgiveness is unconstitutional.
Article 1, Section 8
Congress has the power to tax for and fund ONLY debt, defense, and general Welfare (i.e. basic infrastructure to enable ALL to WELL PROCEED).
Congress has the power to regulate ONLY the value of money, commerce (buying and selling only) among nations, States, and Indian tribes, and land and naval Forces.
The Department of Education is unconstitutional.
unconstitutional by any court. The student loan program, particularly the federal student loan program, operates under the authority of the Department of Education and was established through legislation passed by Congress, such as the Higher Education Act of 1965. This act, along with its subsequent amendments and reauthorizations, lays out the legal framework for federal student loans.
Challenges to the constitutionality of various aspects of federal programs, including student loans, would typically need to show that such programs violate a specific part of the U.S. Constitution. As of now, no such ruling has determined that federal student loans, as a concept or program, violate constitutional provisions.
Moreover, the government’s role in providing and managing student loans has generally been seen as within its powers to promote the general welfare and support education, which are recognized as important for the country’s economic and social development. Any significant legal challenges to the program would likely focus on specific aspects of its implementation rather than its overall constitutionality.
Article 1, Section 8
Congress has the power to tax for and fund ONLY debt, defense, and general Welfare (i.e. basic infrastructure to enable ALL to WELL PROCEED).
Congress has the power to regulate ONLY the value of money, commerce (buying and selling only) among nations, States, and Indian tribes, and land and naval Forces.
The Department of Education is unconstitutional.
But there is a profoundly strong argument for economic stimulus. By reducing or eliminating monthly debt payments, individuals have more disposable income to spend, invest, or save.
This as stupid as raising the minimum wage to $30 an hour. if $30 is good, $60 fixes ALL the poverty.
Have the govt pay off all the auto loans, and credit card Debt. Think of the stimulus. BUT BUT BUT BUT, I’M SERIOUS, Never reduce taxes! ! ! Because those loan payments going back into the cash economy is different then citizens keeping the money they earned going back into the economy.
Please spare us all the idiotic faux economics.
Students MAY spend more, but over the long run ALL OF US will spend LESS.
If you give away education for free – that comes at the expense of something else.
Everything spent – by this govenrment and by the rest of us privately REQUIRED that some of us produce the value that is being spent.
You grow the economy by producing more.
You can not spend what you have not produced.
What you spend on one thing – you can not spend on another.
It is also bizarre that after the massive post covid stimulus that ANYONE would argue this nonsense.
It is precisely the delertorius effects of the Covid stimulus that have cause inflation, and the economic stagnation that we have right now.
And idiots like you want to repeat that same stupidity with eduction.
#4 Ideas Respec Ranked economist Robert Barro maintains the worlds most extensive database on govenrment spending.
He has found that the efficiency of government spending is between 0.25 to 0.35 – that means for every $1 that govenrment spends.
Between 1/3 and 1/4 of a dollar of value is created. conversely for every dollar spend in the free market between 1.1 and 1.2 in value is created.
And you want more government spending ?
Which economists ?
Lets assume that you are correct – that this would be economically stimulative.
Then why not bypass students entirely – forget paying off student loans. Just have the government dole out cash to everyone.
Or better still – just go arround buying things and then destroying them.
That would be massively stimulative wouldn’t it ?
The answer is NO. Actually rational economists have rejected these stupid arguments for almost a century.
Besides it has been tried repeatedly and it always fails.
It is just this idiocy that lead to the stagflation of the 70’s, and is driving us towards the same stagflation now.
“By reducing or eliminating monthly debt payments, individuals have more disposable income to spend, invest, or save.”
In other words: Let’s rob Peter to pay Paul. Look, Paul has more money. And what about Peter?
That is the tunnel vision of the broken window fallacy.
You’re evading the fact that those compelled to pay the loans have *less* disposable income to spend, invest, save.
“Nobody (almost) wants “no bail” laws…”
I suppose no bail laws are so awful to you, you’ve never seen anything like it. It’s a disgrace to our great country, yada, yada, BS, BS.
There are good arguments on both sides of the issue, although you apparently think these arguments don’t matter:
Serious Crimes: No bail laws are often applied in cases involving serious crimes such as murder, terrorism, or severe violent offenses. The rationale is that releasing individuals accused of such crimes could pose a significant risk to public safety or lead to them fleeing to avoid prosecution.
Flight Risk: In cases where there’s a substantial risk that the accused might flee the jurisdiction to avoid trial, judges might deny bail to ensure the individual appears in court.
Repeat Offenders: Some jurisdictions might have policies that deny bail for individuals who are considered habitual offenders, especially if they are deemed a continuous threat to society.
Protective Custody: Occasionally, no bail is set not just for public safety but for the safety of the accused themselves, in cases where there might be a threat against them.
“Nobody (almost) wants electric cars and yet they are mandating them.”
While it’s true that not everyone is eager to switch to electric vehicles—due to concerns about range, charging infrastructure, cost, and other factors—surveys and market data show a growing acceptance and interest in EVs among the general public.
And as Elon Musk has pointed out many times, going forward the development roadmap for EVs blows the development map for gas powered cars away. It’s not even close. In fact, race car organizations are grappling with the how to transition to EVs, because the technology allows for cars that would smoke gas powered cars… and result in extremely dangerous situations.
The only reason EVs are more expensive isn lack of scale. When EV makers reach a tipping point in terms of sales, EVs will be much cheaper to buy and operate.
There are some barriers to scale and it’s not the development of cars themselves. It’s the grid. There is no standardization. Musk’s idea is that cars themselves become electric storage devices for the network. But who’s network? That is the major issue. Buy an EV. Great. But where are you going to power up away from home?
Bottom line, arguing that no one wants electric cars is like arguing in 1840, no one wants newly invented harvesters in corn fields. Yeah, it’s that stupid of an argument.
Your statement is not “arguing” either. You say nothing.
-Did those “harvesters” require tax subsidies to stimulate and sustain demand?
-Phrases like “a growing acceptance and interest in EVs among the general public.” are as nonspecific as one can get in attempting to make a point while saying nothing.
-This is an economic driver for EVs? “In fact, race car organizations are grappling with the how to transition to EVs, because the technology allows for cars that would smoke gas powered cars… and result in extremely dangerous situations.” One wonders, will a 100 mile race include a 2hour pit stop for re-charging? That will certainly stimulate interest in a dying sport.
-This phrase ignores the realities of limited resources impacting an anticipated growth industry of any sort: “The only reason EVs are more expensive isn lack of scale. When EV makers reach a tipping point in terms of sales, EVs will be much cheaper to buy and operate”
Please provide a financial disclosure. Are you an EV dealer or otherwise profiting from the EV industry?
Bravo. You’re clever enough to reply to a material statement by merely saying it’s not saying anything. You must watch a lot of Fox News.
“Did those “harvesters” require tax subsidies to stimulate and sustain demand?” Shall I expose your ignorance and answer the question?
Overwhelmingly yes. As millions of people were losing jobs in the agricultural sector in the 1800s due to mechanization, the U.S. land grant system was established to promote education, development, and settlement in new territories and states. The system played a pivotal role in expanding higher education and agricultural development across the United States.
The most famous legislation related to the land grant system is the Morrill Act of 1862, signed by President Abraham Lincoln. This act allocated federal land to states to fund the creation and support of land-grant colleges. The primary goal was to make education more accessible and to focus on teaching agriculture, military tactics, the mechanic arts, and classical studies without excluding other scientific and classical studies. This initiative was instrumental in establishing many of today’s public universities, which continue to play critical roles in educational development and research in the U.S.
Besides education, the land grant system also aimed to facilitate economic development and the settlement of new areas. Various other land grants were made to support the construction of railroads, roads, and canals, which were critical for the economic development of the American West. These grants helped fund infrastructure by allowing private companies to sell the land to new settlers, thus promoting the expansion and development of the U.S.
Some land grant acts, such as the Homestead Act of 1862, provided land directly to individuals, including many Civil War veterans. These acts allowed settlers to claim and settle on federal lands, promoting the settlement of frontier territories. The provision of land to veterans served both as a reward for service and as a mechanism for populating and cultivating remote areas.
ROTFLMAO,”Anonymous”!
No, I don’t watch Fox but apparently you do and enough of their competitors to be able to divine some sort meaning and imply qualifiers to your “material statement”. Live simply, eh?
Thus, the simple question was: ‘Did “harvesters” require tax subsidies to stimulate ans sustain demand?’ Your answer was “Overwhelmingly yes”. And did you support this answer by naming those specific subsidies? Nope. Rather, you provided examples a diffuse array of government programs designated for education and development. So, presuming that your argument that these government programs are, indeed, tax subsidies (of course, with that line of thinking any and every government action/program is a tax subsidy that could be directly or indirectly tied to almost any event in history). So, without those tax subsidies “harvesters” would never have made it? Are you kidding? Is that how the ‘wheel’ came about? Did government programs retrain all those people pulling sleds?
“Phrases like “a growing acceptance and interest in EVs among the general public.” are as nonspecific as one can get in attempting to make a point while saying nothing.”
According to the International Energy Agency, global electric car sales have been growing rapidly, with a record number of about 6.6 million electric cars sold in 2021 alone, which was almost double the sales from 2020. In the United States, the EV market has also seen significant growth. For example, EV sales in the U.S. more than doubled from 2020 to 2021, and the trend continued into 2022 with substantial year-over-year increases.
Market research from firms like J.D. Power and Associates consistently shows increasing consumer interest in EVs. Their studies often highlight that factors such as environmental concern, lower long-term costs, and interest in the latest technologies are driving consumer curiosity and willingness to purchase EVs. Improvements in battery technology and infrastructure have helped reduce “range anxiety,” a significant barrier to EV adoption in the past. As more charging stations are built and EVs with longer ranges become available, consumer confidence increases.
Surveys by organizations such as Consumer Reports and Pew Research have shown that a growing number of people consider purchasing an EV for their next car, citing concerns about climate change and the environment as significant factors. Younger consumers, in particular, are more likely to favor electric cars, indicating a generational shift in preferences that could shape the future automotive market. The integration of advanced technologies in EVs, such as autonomous driving features, connectivity, and superior performance metrics in terms of acceleration and handling, has also attracted tech-savvy consumers.
But now it’s your turn to say, “you’re not saying anything,” lol.
@”Anonymous”
Of course, you note that very same International Energy Agency states in their recent report “Every other car sold globally in 2035 is set to be electric based on today’s energy, climate and industrial policy settings, as reflected in the IEA’s Stated Policies Scenario.” The implication is that ‘governments’ will successfully dictate and manage the EV market. Really? Is that how the “harvesters” came to pass? Government and pseudo-governmental agencies set the policy so development followed? LOL!!
Consumer “interest” and “consideration” are important entities, but the all important factor for ANY business is sales. So that “interest” and “consideration” must translate into real purchases. And while the 6.6 million EV sales you mention is significant, it does not even amount to a double digit percentage of the entire market globally. And the toughest part of that market is what lies ahead. Undoubtedly, EV will have a place at least as a niche market always. But the doubling from a single digit position to another single digit percentage in the market, while encouraging, is underwhelming.
So, yes, I will say it: “you’re not saying anything,” lol!.”
“This is an economic driver for EVs? “In fact, race car organizations are grappling with the how to transition to EVs, because the technology allows for cars that would smoke gas powered cars… and result in extremely dangerous situations.” One wonders, will a 100 mile race include a 2hour pit stop for re-charging? That will certainly stimulate interest in a dying sport.”
Too dumb to reply to. You seem half intelligent enough to look up the development of Formula One electric cars.
Car racing is dying? Ha ha, no.
“Too dumb to reply to. You seem half intelligent enough to look up the development of Formula One electric cars.” I agree, too dumb to reply to.
“This phrase ignores the realities of limited resources impacting an anticipated growth industry of any sort: “The only reason EVs are more expensive isn lack of scale. When EV makers reach a tipping point in terms of sales, EVs will be much cheaper to buy and operate””
Huh? You’re saying when it comes to electric vehicles there are limited resources which makes development finite, but in gas powered cars there are no limitations. Did you even read what I wrote? “…the development roadmap for EVs blows the development map for gas powered cars away.”
Let me list the development roadmap for just batteries:
Solid-state batteries replace the liquid or gel electrolytes commonly used in lithium-ion batteries with solid electrolytes. This technology can potentially use less scarce materials, improve battery life, increase safety, and enhance energy density. Sodium-Ion Batteries… sodium is much more abundant than lithium, making sodium-ion batteries an attractive alternative. These batteries could provide a similar performance to lithium-ion technology but with more readily available materials. Lithium-sulfur batteries offer a higher energy density and are less dependent on cobalt and nickel, which are critical and expensive components of many current lithium-ion batteries. Technological advances in recycling used batteries can alleviate the need for raw, limited resources by recovering valuable materials and reintroducing them into the production cycle. Research is also directed toward repurposing batteries from electric vehicles for less demanding applications, such as energy storage for renewable energy systems, which can extend their useful life and reduce waste. Magnesium, Zinc, and Aluminum… these elements are more abundant than lithium and are being researched for use in batteries. Magnesium, for instance, has a high theoretical capacity and is safer to handle. Organic and Polymer-based Batteries… these batteries use organically derived materials that are potentially easier to source and more environmentally friendly. Bio-Inspired and Bio-Derived Batteries… some research has focused on using biomaterials for battery components, which could help in creating biodegradable or less resource-intensive batteries. Graphene, a form of carbon, is being researched extensively due to its exceptional electrical conductivity and mechanical strength. It can potentially be used in supercapacitors and as an additive in battery electrodes to enhance performance.
Lemme know when you advanced to the point of looking things up before you comment.
Nope. I did not say “You’re saying when it comes to electric vehicles there are limited resources which makes development finite, but in gas powered cars there are no limitations.” How old are you?
BTW, a very nice “development roadmap for just batteries” and you prove the value of AI and Google. But I note your repeated use of the words “potentially” “could” and “being researched”. And while the projects you associate with those words are commendable, those same words decorate every failed project in the history of mankind. And since the government is intervening NOW, since the policies are being pushed NOW, since the subsidies and expenses are distorting the market NOW, how about you provide specifics of what is actually available and proven NOW. Have you advanced to that point? That is the key difference between theoretical and applied science. And, as you conclude your high school career, you will hopefully learn that difference in college and beyond. You may even learn that when attempting to combine insults with theoretical arguments, your argument is only weakened.
There is not a “new” battery technology that you are mentioning – that has not been considered long long ago.
They were looked at and rejected before. They are being looked at again, because we are not going to vercome the shortage in lithium production for atleast a decade – and frankly not then – because Every single thing about “Green energy” requires orders of magnitude more batteries of some kind that we are producing.
I do actually expect improvements in battery technology, but these will be 10% improvements, and they will have atleast a decade to go from the lab to production – and probably more. And getting them into production is only the first hurdle.
We are not even close today to being able to produce the quantity of litium batteries we could easily use if they were available – and that demand is growing faster than supply.
Is that an insurmountable problem ? Nope. But even if we were to double the production of litium batteries every year – we would fall FAR FAR FAR behind the needs for electric cars and other green energy systems.
Lion batteries are atleast a real world technology – improvements in production and efficiency of lion batteries are engineering problems.
The other technologies you discussed – may well be the future, but all of them are at best promising laboratory technologies – and all incremental improvements over lion – they are not exponential jumps, and none of them are ready to address mass production problems. Remember – we KNOW all the science and the engineering and the production of lion batteries and we still can not make enough.
You are expecting a quantum leap. Your as likely to see a viable warp drive in the next decade.
Your posted is replete with the word “research”.
That means we are still working on the basic science.
That means we are a decade or more away from real world use.
There is no battery technology even in the research phase that has the energy density of fossil fuels.
There is not one that is within an order of magnitude of the energy density of fossil fuels.
There will be a growing number of EV’s in the future. There are many uses cases for which they are superior.
But they are incapable of replacing fossil fuel vehicles in all applications today, and likely for a long time to come.
I am not saying “never” – but there remain a huge number of problems to solve – and those solutions are NOT coming quickly.
Musk has worked miracles – in the low hanging fruit. He can produce excellent EV’s that are suitable for a significant percent of automobile needs. That said Tesla has made incremental advances in things like battery technology.
It has not accomplished quantum leaps.
EVs have limited versatility, viability, and a large environmental footprint.
“EVs have limited versatility, viability, and a large environmental footprint.”
Certainly you’re more intelligent than to argue that EVs are a failed technology. They have only just begun to be developed.
All the environmental footprint effects are still unfolding, the materials are not being mined or processed using ecologically sound processes. The recycling of the batteries a costly and environmental hazard causing process. The rush for their goals of zero emissions is bypassing logically reached limitations of the current technology and ecological problems that a normalized reasoning process would have exposed as a problem!
surveys and market data show a growing acceptance and interest in EVs among the general public.
But new car inventory and used EV prices, provide factual proof, you polls are worthless. The entire EV thing is stalled because consumers wallets say it is stalled. MUSK has just eliminated 500 workers from the EV charger side of his business.
There is little doubt that EV’s have a future.
At the same time absent an order of magnitude improvement in battery technology there is ZERO possibility they replace fossil fuels.
Frankly then can not anyway as the electricity we need for EV’s must come from somewhere, and absent fossil fuels, nuclear and hydroelectric we still have no reliable means of creating the electricity we need when we need it or storing it to be used later.
Musk has done incredibly well, and there are probably more to come. But the improvements in range and charging necescary to replace all fossil fuel powered cars have not come and do not appear to be on the horizon.
There are some basic physics problems involved. The first is that 2/3 of the fuel of a fossil fuel powered vehicle is NOT carried with it.
Gas powered cars get oxygen from the air. Battery powered vehicles must carry all the materials for the generation of energy with them.
This is a portion of why batteries do not come anywhere near the energy density of fossil fuels either by weight or volume.
And nothing has dented that in decades.
This may not be an insoluable problem – but it is still a basic science problem – not an engineering problem, and that means we are likely a very long way from resolution.
No the EV problem has nothing to do with lack of Scale.
Economies of scale are a diminishing returns system.
i.e. it costs far less per item to make 10 than to make one.
But the drop in price to 100 is less than 1 to 10 and so on.
The production costs for EV’s will continue to improve – but not dramatically.
Frankly the biggest “scale” problems that they have is that we do not mine enough of key materials such as lithium to produce EV’s at greater scale – and are unlikely to do so for more than a decade.
Those problems will eventually solve themselves -but not soon.
“Nobody wants boys playing in girl’s sports and yet the government is pushing it.”
The poster boy (or girl) for right wing extremist Evangelical bogeyman fears. There are about 500,000 athletes participating in all NCAA sports. While there is no direct data as to how many are transgendered, for context, the Williams Institute estimates that 0.6% of adults in the U.S. identify as transgender. If similar proportions hold in the context of collegiate sports, the number would be about 300.
You also have to remember a significant number of transgendered people are those who were born with genitalia which made it unclear as to their sex, at which time their parents or doctor made a decision what sex they would be. As their bodies developed, boys who were feminine and girls who were masculine was a common result for the tiny percentage of people in this category. Their decision to switch sexes is not illogical.
Are their masculine men who become women? Yes. Does this set outside of the expectations we have for women’s sports? Yes. You are right about that. You must be very disappointed your school’s volleyball team lost. Aside form that… it’s an issue that pales in comparison to what really important in society.
Like political congruence (“=”), reproductive rites, progressive prices, ethnic Springs, excess murder, rape, and rape-rape through immigration reform, diversity (e.g. racism), DEI (e.g. affirmative discrimination), and a Green blight. Yes, the female sex should take a knee to trans/neo-feminine gendered and trans/homosexual males as rent-a-wombs.
The Jews will never again submit to annihilation. Bibi will finish the job of wiping Hamas out no matter who does or does not support Israel. That includes whatever military operation is needed in Rafah. The protests on American university campuses is totally irrelevant.
The Iran nuke facilities MUST have been taken out.
Israel and Iran were eyeball to eyeball and Israel just blinked.
the Williams Institute estimates that 0.6% of adults in the U.S. identify as transgender. If similar proportions hold in the context of collegiate sports, the number would be about 300.
You also have to remember a significant number of transgendered people are those who were born with genitalia which made it unclear as to their sex,
Did you cut and paste this, or is this lie, all yours?
You cite numbers and percentages and minimize the number affected, then switch to mere fraction of that number you minimize, and call it significant.
Pathetic
“Nobody wants more spending that causes inflation and yet we have more spending.”
Economists have long ago debunked the argument that public spending automatically results in inflation. Can you think of something that happened in the last couple of years which could have upset the balance of supply and demand?
Your comment does not take into account demand-pull inflation, when demand for goods and services exceeds supply, which can happen independently of government spending; cost-push inflation when rising costs for wages, raw materials, and other inputs can lead to higher prices, contributing to inflation; and external factors such as changes in exchange rates, global economic conditions, and prices of imports and exports also affect inflation; international relations, such as wars and political disagreements which can greatly disrupt supply chains; famines, natural disasters or public health emergencies, which can significantly disrupt labor participation and also disrupt supply chains.
Have you thought about any of that? Apparently not.
Inflation progresses through debt/credit exceeding the rate of productivity. It is mitigated through labor and environmental arbitrage, obfuscated through immigration reform, hidden through redistributive change (e.g. shared responsibility, capital extraction), debt forgiveness/sharing, etc.
The statement you’ve provided contains several economic concepts and connects them in a way that does not work.
“Inflation progresses through debt/credit exceeding the rate of productivity.” – The of credit and debt linkage to productivity grossly oversimplifies the complex dynamics that contribute to inflation.
“It is mitigated through labor and environmental arbitrage.” – Arbitrage typically refers to taking advantage of price differences in different markets.
“Labor arbitrage” often involves outsourcing work to regions with cheaper labor, and “environmental arbitrage” might involve relocating production to areas with less stringent environmental regulations. Both practices can reduce costs for businesses, but their direct connection to mitigating inflation is mischaracterized. Typically, these strategies are more about profit maximization and cost-cutting than tools for controlling inflation.
“Obfuscated through immigration reform.” – While changes in immigration policy can affect labor markets and economic dynamics, saying it obfuscates inflation doesn’t connect to an economic principle.
“Hidden through redistributive change (e.g., shared responsibility, capital extraction), debt forgiveness/sharing, etc.” – Describing these actions as hiding inflation is misleading. While such measures can impact economic dynamics, including demand and spending power, they don’t “hide” inflation so much as influence its components or the perception of its impact on different parts of the population.
It appears you looked this up and simply pasted in random sentences you do not understand and created an ambiguous word salad.
“Nobody supports Iran and yet Biden (and Obama) give them billions.”
I won’t call this a lie but it stupidly simplifies and misrepresents complex international relations and U.S. foreign policy decisions regarding Iran. Obviously, your statement is not an intelligent comment but an attempt to smear Biden as an Iran lover.
Iran does have support from several countries and entities globally, depending on specific issues. For example, Russia and China have historically had more cooperative relations with Iran, especially in areas like trade and defense. Iran has allies in the Middle East, such as Syria and various non-state actors like Hezbollah in Lebanon, which align with its regional strategic interests.
Under President Obama, the U.S. and other world powers reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, in 2015. This agreement aimed to curb Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions, including unlocking Iranian assets frozen in foreign banks, which amounted to billions of dollars. This was Iran’s money, previously frozen due to sanctions, not a direct transfer of new funds from the U.S. to Iran. Supporters argued it was a necessary compromise to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons. President Biden has expressed interest in returning to negotiations with Iran with the goal of addressing not only its nuclear program but also its ballistic missile program and regional activities. However, as of the latest updates, substantial progress has been difficult.
Yes, Obama released over a hundred billion dollars in disputed funds and billions in cash, funding Iran in a second Iraq war, attacks on Israel through proxies and direct action, and nuclear development. Biden doubled down on his ethnic Spring series in Afghanistan, Ukraine, etc. Then there are the diverse wars in Africa where Black Lives Matter.
So, you’re saying your ignorant about the details and historical implications of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
“Nobody, and I mean nobody other than brain washed students, supports Hamas and yet students are demanding concessions from schools as they support Hamas.”
You’re right. There are students who actually support Hamas. This is tragic. However, there are many who do not support Hamas but object to the apartheid-like situation of Israel and the Palestinians. I would much prefer our politicians call things according to what they actually know and not for the optics of the matter. And most people don’t actually “know.” I don’t. It’s vastly complex. I’ve visited Israel for my job many times, worked with Israelis and some Palestinians. This problem is a mixture of many volatile prejudices. Just one sliver I saw was the differences in opinions of Jews who’s families are Middle Eastern (they were already there and didn’t move to Israel from somewhere else) and those Jews who emigrated from Russia. Historically, Russians treated Muslims much the way Americans did toward native tribes in America. But unlike many Americans today from all political corners, we regret how treated Native Americans, Russian Jews in Israel tend to be hardliners with the feeling that the only good Muslim is a dead Muslim. And many Muslims in the Middle East feel the same about Israelis. That’s just one of many complexities. The one thing that shouldn’t be complex is support for Hamas. It’s like supporting the Manson family.
“Nobody likes Joe Biden and yet he will probably be “re-elected”.”
Not hard to understand. A career issue-spinning right of center politician who has a tendency to cave to the extreme left versus a pathological lying used car salesman malignant narcissist who colors his face orange, who tried to pervert American democracy by subverting a US election, who shared military secrets with people who don’t have clearances, got almost nothing done as POTUS, and just about everybody who’s ever worked with him turns on him because they say he’s incompetent and self-centered… and who’s only real policy position is that he hates liberals.
If you prefer to not get anything done, be in chaos, but piss off liberals… Trump’s your guy.
I’ll betcha this. If karma exists, what are the chances that Trump is convicted in the Stormy Daniels case, and he’s back in court for the check bouncing in his E. Jean Carroll rape case, and Florida releases its sealed information of the Epstein flight logs (remember De Santis said it’s sealed only because it’s protecting rich people, like “billionaires from New York,” ALL IN THE SAME WEEK? The Trumptards won’t care. But there go the independents.
We should have chosen Nikki. Just saying. She would have wiped the floor with Biden.
–‘We should have chosen Nikki. Just saying. She would have wiped the floor with Biden.’
One problem with this^ is that many of the people voting for her in the primaries
were people who are actually Dems and will be voting for Biden/the Dem in Nov.
Many of them are on video admitting as much. Are quoted in various news pieces/articles.
That they just voted for her at the time to mess with Trump.
A good percentage of her total came from people who wouldn’t vote for her when it really comes down to it.
Hullbobby, I suspect we really must be in the minority. Most of america must be crazy left. Independent Bob.
I wonder if DeMac, gigi, fishwings, anonymous, etc. are Ukrainian trolls?
I think NW should hire some Taliban and Iranian religious police to join the gay and gender studies departments and teach what true liberation would look like. What sick institution
Please wake me up when you have determined how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
This is an absolute outrage!
Universities and their faculties have now demonstrated a complete inability to govern themselves in terms the very founding principles of the United States by allowing overt antisemitism to flourish. If they co not even stand against the threats and activities of bigots and terrorists, that is bad enough. But to actively condone those same activities by caving to their demands? This needs to come to an end!
Universities and their faculties have failed the US citizens. They need to lose their tax exempt status. Why would ANY institution that condones or otherwise supports terrorist activities qualify for 501(c) or any similar such tax exempt status? Joe Biden is constantly saying that the “wealthy” should pay their ‘fair share’. And that fair share should include wealthy donors that make tax deductible contributions to institutions that are nothing more than breeding grounds for political hacks and intellectuals bimbos. And why should those same universities be able to collect virtually tax exempt income off of their endowments while effectively condoning if not outright spewing bigotry? Not while taxpayers fund those institutions directly or indirectly.
US citizens deserve better than this type of shoddy, low brow performance from universities and their faculties. It is past time to get these under-performers off the dole. Eliminate ALL tax benefits for these bigoted, blood sucking tax dodgers.
EVERY entity should pay their “fair” share Joe, even cheap hoods and under-performing universities. It is their right to be bigots but the taxpayer should not be obligated to fund their incompetence directly or indirectly.
The Faction must preserve the mission, which is to preservation the Macro-Economics that feed the Shadow State.
(Markets, Banks, Fiat $, MMT, … that keeps it all rolling and into Their coffers)
NU and Other Uni’s are just a foot-note in the scheme of things.
Wait until They start the Draft, then the fireworks will really fly.
Do the new Immigrants know that their going to be sent (fed) to the War front?
Did the Squad tell E’m ?
What a wonderful cluster-f we live in
The nazis also worked with the moslems to hunt the jews… 100 yrs later what’s the difference. Same ignorance and antisemitic behavior.
You know when the Japanese attacked the United States at Pearl Harbor on 12/7/1941 they pulled off one of the cleanest surgical strikes by a military up to that time. They were quite precise in avoiding civilian targets. The US suffered 2100+ dead (1100 on the Arizona) but only 70 civilians and most were casualties of anti aircraft debris. Despite that we launched a war that nearly eradicated the Japanese Culture and Society from the planet. The Japanese, pre-war, thought they were the victims because the US had laid down trade and oil embargoes because of their actions in China and yet the Japanese felt that they were the aggrieved party.
I would say that the Israeli’s have a far greater claim, at this time, for total war against the minions of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. I, for one, would have no problem removing any and all leashes that might restrain the Israeli’s. It is not enough to win but you must crush those 3 so they know that they have been beaten and their only alternative is total surrender and acceptance of the defeat or annihilation.
What could go wrong? There are only 1.9 billion Muslims in the world.
And if you ain’t a moslem you’re cannon fodder to them. The jihad is coming.
That’s too superficial an observation, considering that Islam has been undergoing a major schism between secular and fundamentalist forces for the past 100 years (Attaturk’s secularlization of Turkey in 1923, and a similar movement in the Malay Peninsula were the starting point).
The secular Moslems would be only too happy to see Iran’s theocracy overthrown, along with defeat of the radical Islamism it has been spreading in Lebanon, Gaza, Yemen, Syria, and Iraq. Why the hell do you think Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Arab north Africa are not jumping in to fight Israel?
So there are 1.5 billion Chinese, do you let them attack us just due to population size? There are many more Muslims than Jews, but how is that germane to having a moral foreign policy? There are many more Russians than Ukrainians should we abandon Ukraine? There are many more communist Chinese than free Chinese on Taiwan should we abandon Taiwan?
Appeasement doesn’t look good on you!
The Muslims are not united. The greatest killer of Muslims are other Muslims. There was a schism by the 2nd generation after Mohammed. The main problem is Iran and militias and terror groups supported by them. Other than Iran and it’s puppets it would seem most of the Arab states in the Middle East would like to see Gaza and their Iranian overlords disappear
Yes, Hamas and Hezbollah can only be destroyed by overwhelming outside force. Iran?….that’s a different situation, because there is pent-up, widespread antagonism within Iran against the unhinged zealotry and perverted priorities of the regime. Iran is not monolithic in its anti-Americanism. It is quite vulnerable to internal revolt — I believe the Iranian people are waiting for the Ayotollah to die of old age, and will move to block succession at that point, marginalizing the theocracy. The question is: is the U.S. planning for this transition? Will we handle it smartly with pre-preparation?….Will we make the right moves to help a permanent transition to secular rule?….or will we bungle it taken by surprise?
Without support from Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah will cease to be military threats to Israel. So, our strategy must be helping internal change in Iran achieve a sustainable outcome. We can’t control the timetable. But we must know exactly what to do and how when the time comes.
So is that why Obama gave them pallets of cash without congressional approval?
No, it’s because the US froze Iranian sovereign bank accounts after the 52 hostage crisis in 1979. The value of assets grow over decades. That money was never NOT the property of the Iranian govt. The U.S. had to unfreeze those assets at some point. The only part that is debatable is whether Iran’s claim for asset appreciation should have been approved. When the U.S. freezes a foreign country’s assets, and keeps them frozen for decades, what happens to appreciation? I mean, those banks were able to appreciate the value of those assets. I don’t remember any public debate over this question. It remains unsolved, and now it’s Russian state assets ($300B) being frozen.
Why do Trumpbillies sound like drunk relatives in a Thanksgiving family argument taking everything out of context? In pbinca’s well-reasoned comment, the idea is that Iran is set up for an inflection point in which a war could be avoided in a transition to power away from theocracy. At no point was there any reference to anything that the reply, “So is that why Obama gave them pallets of cash without congressional approval?” was relevant.
Pbinca, when the people were rising Obama shut them down because Obama supports Iran and therefore puppet Biden supports Iran too. Anywhere else in the world Obama would have supported the people against the tyrants, but when the tyrants are muslim fanatics he supported the fanatics.
Obama did not support Iran. Are you the old bag who told John McCain that Obama was a Muslim?
and yet the Japanese felt that they were the aggrieved party.
I would say that the Israeli’s have a far greater claim, at this time, for total war against the minions of Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran. I, for one, would have no problem removing any and all leashes that might restrain the
Israeli’s.
I screwed up my comment I need to comment on GEB post concerning retalitory military responses
Yes I fully agree that HAMAS must be wiped from the Planet. Unfortunately there are several 100’s of thousands of children in the GAZA strip that are already Hamas terrorist, ready to take up arms to continue the stated goal to eliminate JEWS from the planet.
I think the comparison of Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor, it important that Japan military was not fighting for the people of Japan. The maniacal, and brutal action of Japan Military fighters was due to the worship of the Emperor of Japan. The Emperor was not elected. He is a direct decendent from the Sun GOD, 6th century BC.
It was a very different culture from Western values. Just think about the difference between POW’s taken by Germany vs Japan.
Iowan2 The POW’s taken by Germany were treated brutally and especially the Russians. The main thing that determined German Treatment of prisoners was whether they were taken in the West or on the Russian Front.
Oh sure, the Japanese were really humane.
Maybe because Pearl
Harbor is not embedded in a residential area and US troops were not hiding among civilians?
The Japanese were known for their gruesome treatment of prisoners and oh yeah, they raped thousands and thousand of women in China and had the comfort women in Korea.
So please.
I liked the point that GEB was making with his comparison of Japan to Israel but Anonymous is right here, the Imperial Japanese were Nazis of the east and they had to be crushed.
In the 1930s-‘40s, the Japanese Empire committed atrocities across Asia, such as the Rape of Nanking. German crimes such as human medical testing committed in concentration camps tend to receive more attention than Japan’s crimes against humanity, as more research has been done and more historians have spent time looking back and studying these horrific acts. However, the Japanese too played a part in human medical testing in a secret project called Unit 731.
https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/history/unit-731/
It reminds me of the human breeding practices of slave owners in the American south. While not as sophisticated as scientifically-based breeding programs of today, the knowledge of horse and dog breeding was applied to humans throughout the south, hence a 200 year practice of breaking up families which can be seen as a cultural defect in many African American families today. This is just to support the notions about the Japanese, the Germans and Hamas. After the Japanese and Germans were defeated, the US essentially made military illegal. But, like AT&T, warfare is in their DNA. Both Japan and Germany are currently developing state of the art military hardware. Do you think China and Russia are noticing?
@Anonymous
Yes, they did. And more. Just ask the ‘comfort women’. 😐 No culture on earth can point the finger at another regarding atrocity, it’s been universal for all of history; but that said, no country or culture has done more or lead the way more than the United States in its attempts to transform those things. It is part of what makes it so maddening about today’s ignorant, privileged toddlers dragging us backward by decades, and they are/have. There are days I think this may very well just be the last stand of the old aristocracy, and beating them now means beating them for good.