kfprt's comments

As a point of clarification I was disappointed that you did not give me the presumption of good faith from the outset.

>But to oppose Israel

I neither support nor oppose Israel. It could be on the moon for all the difference it makes to me. It simply doesn't factor into my life or politics.

Most Americans couldn't point to Israel on a globe. I think this implies an implicit agreement with my non interventionism. Out of sight out of mind. Domestic politics matter infinitely more than the squabbling of foreigners.

I would posit that without lobbying practically no one in America would care about Israel either. This is why it needs to be disclosed.

I wouldn't say Israel started because of WW2. The zionist congress and the migration started in the 1800's IIRC. Wasn't the Israeli government a continuation of the zionist congress too? Like a government in exile.

>people in the military-industrial complex

Those in the military complex are just that, they could care less who the bombs fall on so long as they can sell them. You could even call this a blind pro interventionism.

If Milley never takes a dollar from the military industrial complex after retiring I will eat my hat.

As a practical matter the rule of law in China is more or less nonexistent.

I find it somewhat incredulous that anyone could argue that the existence of Israel doesn't involve religion. American politics or foreign policy?

I don't see the threat, do enlighten me.

>If you don't want to know the truth about your obstacles, you don't believe in your own goal.

I am aware of my limitations, I do not have dictatorial powers. What I have said here is merely what I see as the correct solution to US foreign policy. I have no grand designs nor plans to somehow convince the rest of the country of my correctness. I do not pretend to speak for anyone but myself.

I do believe however that one can have convictions absent direct implementable practicality.

>wouldn't it probably mean expanding the bureaucracy a lot too?

Not really. Like with most laws we rely on peoples willingness to follow them.

>But then, since most of them aren't agents of the foreign government

Those that take actions on behalf of a foreign government and have a connection to that government are by definition foreign agents.

>expense to decrease tax revenue.

What good is tax revenue without a stable government to spend it?

>Do you want people with dual US/Israeli citizenship to register under a revised FARA, or do you want them to choose between the two?

That's up to them. All I'm asking for is disclosure. Merely a disclaimer.

>problem if you want to target

I don't want to target anyone. I just want it disclosed if their actions are on behalf of a foreign power.

>Ostensibly, I think for security clearances, they already take dual citizenship into account.

If it is worth disclosing in that case I don't see the harm in having some more honesty generally.

While I'm sure your religious politics are fascinating they are completely irrelevant to US policy as it relates to the USS Liberty incident. The US has nothing to gain by involving ourselves in that quagmire.

As a politically exercise I am completely uninterested in such issues. US foreign policy should be blind to them.

If Jews want to advocate for the existence of Israel that is fine by me, but they must not do it under an American flag. It is not patriotic to support another country over ones one.

I am also disappointed that you do not share the presumption of good faith.

>how hard it is to renounce US citizenship

You would not find many objectors to the cause of making bureaucracy more efficient.

My ideal model is something like what exists on twitter and youtube where there is a disclaimer if the account belongs to media funded by a foreign government. They are allowed but there is disclosure. For example if there is a dual citizen arguing in the US for policies that would impact the country of their other citizenship I would like that to be disclosed as well. If for example an Israeli/US citizen is arguing on a US website for policies that would be beneficial to Israel then I would like it to be disclosed to me that they may be speaking in their capacity as an Israeli citizen and not an American one so I can understand their position more fully. Just like ads are disclosed so should lobbying be.

Something like "As a citizen of X I may be arguing in that capacity".

It should also be noted that if you write a blog post exposing say a fraud in Nikola Motors you are obliged to disclose your short position.

>You can think that, but all I'm saying (sincerely) is that I do not have enough imagination to interpret what you write as being in "good faith".

If you're going to accuse me of something then I would prefer you just came right out and said what it is that you're accusing me of. No beating around the (burning?) bush.

>you didn't care about the Palestinians

It's not that I don't care, merely that as an American I see no benefit to intervening. To me the conflict between the Arabs and Israelis is the same as the conflict between the Hutu and Tutsi. I see them as more alike than different. As I'm not a member of either group I don't fully understand these conflicts which is all the more reason to not intervene.

As far as I am aware the Iranians are an indo european population group but this is an academic exercise not a political one. I would recommend the lectures given at the Oriental Institute at the University of Chicago if you would like to learn more.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCitjN1GDlEVcLz-fAy5VIpg

>But if you respond to the one I deleted, you should respond to the one I didn't.

I had already written my reply and felt it more expedient.

>you wanted to bomb Israel, in the 21st century

Of course it is not possible to right all old wrongs. I think we can agree in principle that the correct move on the US's part would have been to bomb Israeli military targets in 1967 though.

I am far more concerned with the present. I think all lobbying on behalf of foreign powers should be subject to FARA, paid or unpaid, as long as there is a proven link to that foreign power. For example dual citizenship should automatically trigger FARA reporting. The American people deserve to know who is working on behalf of foreign powers and may have interests that do not align with their own.

>Also also, if you can reply to a deleted comment, you can reply to the one that wasn't.

If you would like to retract your previous statements, feel free.

>If you want to blow up Israelis

As I said in my previous comment I have no opinion of intra semitic squabbles. I'm merely suggesting the US should have a foreign policy that treats other countries equally and that it would be in the national interest to be seen as a fair arbiter in the world.

>Also, "proportional response" is a red flag for me

If you are suggesting a disproportionate response that would be fine by me. There are details for military planners not foreign policy advisers.

>It seems like you won't break character.

I think you are arguing in bad faith if you accuse me of being 'in character'.

>Still, the overarching goal of destroying the US's relationship with Israel is the only political motivation I can think of.

As an American my only consideration is that which is in the national interest. Ideologically I'm mostly a america first non interventionist. I am well aware there are many in this country that would lobby on behalf of foreign powers and I think they should register under FARA.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Agents_Registration_Ac...

I can't think of a more Orwellian name for a group set on controlling online speech.

Since you deleted your other comment I'll reply to it here.

>I haven't been talking to you about it for 50 years. I haven't been talking to anyone about it even as often as every year. Despite that, you can't engage in any way other than considering me part of the conspiracy?

>I'm not an Israeli, and I'm willing to discuss the topic without debating whether Israel should in fact exist or what motivations someone might have for wishing it didn't.

>Furthermore, I am not especially hostile, as an American, to the idea of disengaging from the middle east and the particular relationship the US currently has with Israel.

>So I'm completely sincere and trying to be constructive when I give my personal view on tactics to disrupt it. I'd like to get behind the facade and understand what motivates people like you.

>It's important to not believe your own BS even if you are propagandizing. To be aware of the correct history, for your own sake.

Why do you assume I care about whether Israel exists or not? From my perspective it's a world away and has absolutely zero impact on my life. It's not my place or America's for that matter to get involved in intra semitic squabbles.

What I find insidious are those who would propagandize and coverup the incident within this country. Such activities are utterly poisonous to an open democratic society. Frankly unamerican.

As an addendum I think that if anyone deliberately attacks US military personnel then they deserve a proportional response. Who they are is irrelevant.

If it's Gaddafi bomb him. If it's Al Qaeda bomb them. If it's the Vietnamese bomb them If it's Israel bomb them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1986_United_States_bombing_of_...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War

Nothing is quite so toxic to my willingness to part with money that the term 'subscription'.

There are a lot of casual users that the business model doesn't address. If you're a pro artist then CC is just a business expense and your clients pay for it. If you're not it's really hard to justify spending that amount of money for software you use once or twice a year. Don't forget the piracy to pro pipeline either.

The implications seems to be that 'It was a long time ago, it didn't happen and if it did happen it doesn't matter'. An impressive amount of cognitive dissonance. It's not that people aren't trying to re contextualize the past all the time, the 1619 project for example. There is also much still kept secret 50 years on and it would be nice to learn more. Anyone who isn't pushing an agenda would agree with that. Personally I find it extremely distasteful that people here are still trying to bury this.

'But Sir, It’s an American Ship.' 'Never Mind, Hit Her!'

The new XPS has windows hello AND a super thin bezel. Imagine that.

This thread has a lot more on the current state of vGPU. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28944426

It's amazing the level of defensive outrage this event generates 50 plus years on. If we can't have an open discussion about shady events in the past then maybe we need to investigate the current interests preventing that open discussion.

Ted Kaczynski noted that over time all large organizations trend towards self preservation projects.

I think Hertz figured out what their meme investors want.