unicorn

There's a tautology for you. Obviously, if the movement failed, it didn't result in a country, so it cannot be named. One cannot name the Basque Republic, Tamil Republic, nor the Catalan Republic because those peoples' fights for independence failed. Your question was the equivalent to asking "Name me someone who failed but succeeded." Just silliness, really. Of course, there are quite a few countries which de facto govern themselves, but are not recognized either universally (i.e. Kosovo), or even barely at all (i.e. Transnistria).

Yes, because, as we all know, if Paraguay were to send missiles into civilian areas of Bolivia, Bolivia would just sit there and invite Paraguay to send some more. But Bolivia should know something about starting a conflict without knowing how it would end. The conflict they started with Chile resulted in that country now being land-locked.

Ridiculous. Only a complete fool would believe that a civilian power station has any (much less significant) military relevance. I doubt you're a complete fool, so I don't know why you would post such garbage. It's obvious to just about everyone that bombing these power stations has no function but to hurt civilians. Putin isn't bombing those power stations to give him any military advantage, as you well know.

Sorry, but you're factually wrong (NOT a matter of opinion): https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/military-objectives/ "...The destruction of the object—in whole or in part—capturing it, or neutralizing it must show a specific military advantage. Hence, attacks that will result in solely unspecified or potential advantage are prohibited...". Civilian power stations are NOT legal targets, but rather terroristic ones.

I cannot believe that anyone in this discussion could be so ignorant as to be unaware that Israel is the #1 recipient in US financial largess, and could not have flourished to the extent it has without the US's generosity: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2023-10-10/how-much-aid-does-the-u-s-give-to-israel "...The United States has given Israel more than $260 billion in combined military and economic aid since World War II, plus about $10 billion more in contributions for missile defense systems like the Iron Dome, a U.S. News analysis finds. That’s the most granted to any country throughout that time frame, and around $100 billion more than Egypt, the second-highest recipient historically...". Had the Palestinians received such aid, obviously they would be doing quite well. Also, Israel controls most traffic in and out of Palestine, as well as their power and water. Yes, Palestinians should have recognized Israel by now, and Israel should also long ago have recognized Palestine. For its part, the US should not have allowed this situation to continue indefinitely. The US should have put its foot down and said "Peace in this area is in the US's interest. We will donate generously to both Israel and Palestine, and help the two countries flourish, IF AND ONLY IF each recognizes the other's right to exist." I personally can't see this happening with either Hamas or BN at the helm, and the US should make the voters of Palestine and Israel aware that their votes have consequences.

Well, at least you are informed that your blessed Putin intentionally bombs critical civilian infrastructure, rather than military targets, in violations of international military law. As you therefore know, and everyone else knows, Putin is intentionally targeting and terrorizing civilians, rather than enemy troops.

I do agree in this case, since there was no immediate threat. However, in the case of missile launch sites and munitions storage areas placed under schools and hospitals, that's on Hamas, since potentially many Israeli civilian lives are at stake. I would think, however, that taking out dozens of civilians to kill one military leader probably does represent a war crime. If it doesn't, it should. That goes beyond decency. Just because Hamas behaves like animals shouldn't given the IDF the green light to do whatever they feel like with no accountability.

It doesn't matter what the religion or nationality. Hamas has no respect for any human life. They even kill their own people, by putting munitions under schools, hospitals, and other civilian targets, in clear violation of international military law.

Since it's factually false, where's the irony? That EM is a liar?

Absolutely absurd. Since Putin controls all of the press, obviously Russians are only going to hear great things about him. If Trump were also able to be the dictator he wished he could be, we'd only think great things about him as well. Even though Trump only controls Fox News, those who listen to Fox believe Trump's a victim rather than the fraud, liar, thief, and cheat that he is. At least he's not a murderer, as far as I know. Of course, you may say that most Russians are already aware that Putin's a mass murderer, liar, cheat, and thief, and I suppose that Russian admiration for murderers does say something about the Russian people. That being said, as you well know, any credible opponent of Putin's will find himself either dead or incarcerated. Only a fool would say that Putin's support is legitimate.

That's a ridiculous statement and you know it. Putin will murder anyone of importance who even speaks against him, much less run against him. It's quite preposterous to say he was elected. Putin is simply a murderer, and you and everyone else knows this.

I've been as surprised by the popularity of BN as of DT. I mean, even if one were to agree with his policies, how can one support someone so completely lacking of any moral fiber or character? One so completely bereft of any sense of honesty or trustworthiness?

Sociopaths usually get their due eventually. Still waiting to see Trump sent to the jailhouse.

I hope he wins the primary. It will be the Democrats' best chance. If anyone can lose against Trump, it's Biden.

I agree. As with other religions, Buddhism is rooted in faith and a belief system, rather than on facts and science. While not monotheistic, it involves prayer, a religious caste, devotion, and so on. Although quite different from the Abrahamic religions, it certainly requires buying into a certain mindset. And, as with other religions, there have been wars and murders in its name (look at Myanmar).

https://attachments.f95zone.to/2022/07/1950709_Thebestkindofweaponistheoneyouonly_113539a9b1183c52c9599bf8a66e7746.gif

I guess you thought I wouldn't click on the link and actually read the article. For the several people who "liked" your post, and therefore didn't bother to click on the link, I will tell them that that article has ZERO to do with the current situation, and in particular NOTHING to do with taking down the sites with which Hamas is using to volley missiles into Israeli civilian areas. All it does is suggest that negotiating with hostage-takers is a good idea. Nice try, but again devoid of integrity. Obviously, even if one were to buy into the idea that negotiating with hostage-takers is a good idea, that argument does nothing to address the immediate issue of stopping the Hamas missile launches. To address your aside, which has nothing to do with the situation we were supposed to be discussing, I personally think it's a bad idea to negotiate with hostage-takers, as this only encourages further hostage-taking. Nothing wrong with pretending to negotiate while planning a rescue mission, but I would oppose any concessions. Otherwise, one will end up in an endless cycle in which one gives up more and more as more and more hostages get taken. That being said, I strongly oppose Israel's recent policies vis-a-vis the Palestinians, especially the settlements in the West Bank, which are simply obvious provocations. One could also argue that placing a kibbutz, such as Nahal Oz, right on the border wall with Gaza, might also be construed as a provocation and/or asking for trouble--not that this would excuse slaughtering unarmed civilians or hostage-taking. I very much understand the Palestinians' frustrations, especially at the arrogant and offensive policies of Netenyahu. However, the insurgents would have had my sympathy had they limited to targeting IDF troops, and lost my sympathy by shooting and kidnapping women, children, and the elderly.

You may have missed the part in which he was being entirely sarcastic.

There you go again with the false narrative that the Israelis are bombing Palestinians, or, even more ridiculously, that the goal of the Israelis is to "shock and awe." As my father wisely used to say, there's only been one war which has ever been won with bombing, and that's WWII--and we certainly never want to go there again. Only a fool would believe that a war can be won by bombing. Anyone who looks at the facts rationally and impartially understands that the goal of the Israeli bombing is plain and simple: to take out the Hamas missile sites which are volleying the rockets Hamas sends towards Israeli civilian areas. What you're saying is the complete opposite of the truth. It's Hamas which is (unsuccessfully, of course) trying to "shock and awe" the Israelis by targeting civilian areas. This sharply contrasts Israeli bombing, which targets only military objectives. If Hamas puts these military objectives in areas heavily populated by civilians, that's entirely on them.

Since you can't even name one alternative (as I already knew couldn't), after falsely stating you knew several, perhaps you'd do better to keep quiet rather than extol your lack of integrity. And, of course, you know full-well that the Israelis don't bomb civilians. They bomb missile launching sites. Hamas has zero need to put them in areas heavily populated by civilians, of course. The civilian deaths are 100% Hamas' responsibility. Hamas kills Palestinian civilians for propaganda purposes. Bear in mind, that I very much support Palestinian civilians, and have donated thousands of dollars over the years to help them. It pains me to see Hamas slaughter them.

Now there's a preposterous "alternative." Lots wrong with it. First of all, planning and arranging for a ground invasion takes a lot of time. It's absurd to imagine that Israel would just let Hamas continue to simply spew missiles towards their territory day after day, while planning a dangerous invasion (oh, and of course ignoring that if the missile sites are left intact, Hamas could easily target the potentially invading forces). Secondly, such an invasion would be extremely dangerous as Hamas is entrenched in cities they know well, and they have tons of tunnels, booby-traps, and so on. Thirdly, and most obviously, who in his right mind would imagine that a ground invasion in and of itself wouldn't result in ample civilian deaths? And, even if Hamas were to somehow wait around and just leave those missiles lying there, the missiles are still in highly populated areas. Missiles are, to put it mildly, explosive. Or do you imagine that Hamas is going to simply hand over the missiles to the ground troops, saying "Here you go!"?????

OK. So why can't you name ONE? I would be even more impressed if you can enumerate the SEVERAL you claimed to have immediately thought of.