dlubarov

9 ms·

121.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
Hiding behind proxies doesn't absolve the Iranian regime of culpability for their aggression. Hezbollah alone fired tens of thousands of Iranian rockets at Israel just in 2023-24. There's no mystery about who provided the weapons
122.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
> victims of aggression There is no such notion in IHL. IHL has a notion of self-defense, but that's only relevant to jus ad bellum. Once a conflict exists, there are no carveouts whatsoever for those who claim self-defense, or cons
123.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
How does one accidentally kidnap someone like Kfir Bibas? A kidnapper has to be physically present, at which point it's rather obvious that a baby is not a soldier.
124.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
Wikipedia has developed a strong anti-Israel bias, particularly since Oct 7. If we ignore Wikipedians' spin and look at actual data like the Global Slavery Index, Israel is ranked 114th out of 160 countries, meaning better than 71% of
125.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
Okay, if you like, we can stretch the definition of "evidence of X" to "anything that has any bearing, however slight, on the likelihood of X". By this absurd definition, - Sure, Epstein having a Jewish client is evidenc
126.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
You didn't answer my questions either. Again how is a business relationship with a wealthy Jewish family evidence of being a Mossad spy? But okay, I'll respond to yours - > he [probably] worked for both the US and Israel. Why e
127.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
None of this resembles what we normally call "evidence" at all. It's like accusing someone of being a Mossad spy because they're holding an iPhone, which relies on a bunch of Israeli IP. > "As you probably know I
128.
by dlubarov 8mo ago
Going through the first several - > his girlfriend was the daughter of a Mossad agent Some have speculated that he could have been; that doesn't make it true. Anyway, not everyone copies the career track of their ex-girlfriend'
129.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
If usage of an app gives Apple some justification for taxing payments, by similar logic would usage of the iPhone itself, and Safari, give them a similar some justification? "The user would have used our payment rails had there not bee
130.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Until a court order stopped them, Apple was collecting a 27% tax on certain external payments even though they didn't control the payment rails. They required developers to report their external payment revenue and sent them invoices.
131.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Trump is resisting the idea [1], though it's too early to say how it will ultimately go. It's a confusing time, particularly those who were fighting for an end to the aid, but couldn’t fathom supporting something that Netanyahu wa
132.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
While you're correct, it's worth noting that this only happened because the judge in the Epic lawsuit ordered an injunction forcing Apple to allow it. Apple then "maliciously complied", allowing it while demanding a 27%
133.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
If that was what they actually wanted, why did none of them seem to care when Netanyahu proposed tapering off of US aid, or when a credible ceasefire agreement was finally being negotiated? When opportunities arose to achieve the outcomes t
134.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Wikipedia has become a very poor source for anything Israel-related. The basis of the article is just - Israel supported a non-violent predecessor org, which is pretty irrelevant to Hamas. - Israel allowed Qatari aid to fund some Gaza infra
135.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
If protestors were so concerned about Israel's conduct because of our tax dollars, then - Why didn't any of them seem to care when Netanyahu proposed tapering off US aid? Shouldn't they have been celebrating a major stepping
136.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Yeah - in principle betting markets are also bribery markets. Instead of betting based on expectations, one can bet the opposite of the outcome they desire. It's interesting how those markets avoid any language like "death,"
137.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
I think you would have a point if such biased statements had tags such as [1], directing readers to the relevant discussions. Attempts to add such tags are normally reverted by the usual anti-Israeli editors. So we have theoretical transpar
138.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Both sides try to manipulate it, but in certain topic areas, the numbers are highly skewed such that one side wins almost all disputes. For example, Wikipedia's definition of Zionism was updated to include "as much land, as many J
139.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
I would say it absolutely violates the NPOV policy, and it's worth noting that both Wikipedia founders share this view [1] [2]. It's the only thing they've agreed on in many years. Ultimately it's just a numbers game - W
140.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Larry Singer was essentially running Wikipedia in the early days though, until he was laid off, so in some sense we could think of him as a co-founder who was ousted. It's true that he didn't contribute much (as an unpaid voluntee
141.
by dlubarov 9mo ago
Friendly fire happens all the time. Israel handled it about as well as they could have, by apologizing and paying reparations. It's also been 58 years now since the accident. American soldiers have also killed thousands of American sol
142.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
"Palestine is under ICC jurisdiction" is the court's claim; that doesn't make it a legal reality. It relies on the theory that PA is the government of Gaza, despite never having controlled it.
143.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
Even if we had some legal theory under which ICC could assert universal jurisdiction for certain crimes, the ICC doesn't do so. It has to abide by its own jurisdiction rules, which have no such mechanism. The ICC's jurisdictiona
144.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
Those were after Germany's defeat, and those put on trial were no longer active combatants. I'm pretty sure no military in history has ever delayed taking out an active threat in order to conduct legal proceedings. They don't
145.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
Responsible for what? In war, enemies combatants aren't slain as punishment for crimes, but simply because they're enemy combatants. Likewise prisoners of war aren't (typically) detained on suspicion of crimes, they're d
146.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
It’s like saying that border control with Mexico is apartheid because the main motivation is racism against Mexicans. There’s a grain of truth (racism exists), but it’s not really the reason we have border control, and even if it was it sti
147.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
Sure it may be somewhat unusual; that doesn’t make it apartheid. The legal system one falls under is still based on citizenship, not race. US service members sometimes fall under a different legal system; that’s likewise not apartheid becau
148.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
> Israelis fall under Israel's civilian legal code while the occupied non-citizens fall under a harsher military occupation system without due process. Every country treats citizens and non-citizens differently. Apartheid is about d
149.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
While there isn't one standard definition of terrorism, Hezbollah's untargeted bombardment of Israeli towns qualifies under pretty much any definition. You seemed happy to use the term against Israel [1], claiming an operation whi
150.
by dlubarov 10mo ago
Thanks for the added context, that sounds reasonable to have wanted the product to continue under Dutch ownership. > I never wrote it was created as a front. I don't believe anyone asserted that. There seem to be vague insinuations

More ›