Opinion letter.

None of the accusations in the title can be substantiated, more than a dozen other apps and technologies are backed by the same organization the article mentions funds part of a signal’s budget.

Assertions that TOR has a governmental back door, that the CIA wants people to use Signal, are not substantiated, and the article states at the same time that there are fears the anonymity of Signal threatens western governments. Can’t have it both ways.

The only definitive thing this article can prove or cite is where some OTF funding goes, which was publicly disclosed since it’s inception. It reads like a /r/superstonk GME reeeeeee post equivalent for communication security by a ti foil hat.

Who is we and deep into what?

I simply responded to your statement that you couldn’t think of a way to express the position without sounding as if you were against another people.

It feels very very simple.

The actions of those who cause harm to innocent people are deplorable. Those who order such actions or commit them, should be held accountable. I don’t have to say any proper nouns or even make it specific to this conflict to express that.

“I don’t want the response to horrific things to be more horrific things inflicted on those who have no control of these events.”

That seems pretty cut and dry…

We do distinguish primary residence vs non-primary residence for property records. Should be doable to remove the corporate purchases that way.

deleted by creator

That seems to be you declining to provide an example of a reasonable response then.

That doesn’t answer my question. Nor is it 100% historically accurate.

If the only proper response is discontinued existence, then you have left no possible response.

this leaves only two outcomes.

Either be killed by terrorists, or dissolve your entire society and nation state.

Israel would of course not see either of these solutions as options.

I am not being disingenuous, I acknowledged history. I am not blind to the motivations of either party. These latest events were started by choice, when any other action could have been chosen but to behead children in diapers.

According to your answer, the only right act appears to be dissolving their entire country and giving it to the people who kidnapped their people in this latest round of violence. I can’t think this makes sense in any other situation, so it’s can’t here.

Something between doing nothing and what they are doing as middle ground in response has to exist as an option that is acceptable.

If the only option is complete dissolution of a nation state to avoid bloodshed, it is effectively not an option. Propose a solution that isn’t the continued deaths and is not the total dissolution of a nation state, which no nation in earth would agree to.

What exists as an option in response besides these two extremes?

Negotiating with them would give them reason to take hostages again.

Terrorism definition: the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.

So if you reward violence with success to political wins, this would give violence a reason to happen more as a tool. This obviously isn’t an answer if you are Israel wanting to prevent your citizen and other nations being killed / violently victimized to force capitulation of your government.

So from their perspective, or any other government of the world, this is a non starter.

Let me try again.

What is the action that you would deem correct and just in response to the attack by Hamas that started this latest series of events?

I do not discount the past, Israel’s culpability in escalation, human rights violations by its military members, and politics that favor them over Palestinians. I do not discount the international error of the two-state solution imposed by external countries.

I am asking, in response to 1400 dead civilians IN THE PRESENT, what any nation’s correct action is as a response. It is easy to decry the current decision, but I have heard little proposals to the contrary of what perfect looks like for an Israeli response.

So, IGNORING WHAT CAME BEFORE THE EVENTS THE ARE CURRENTLY UNFOLDING, what would you have deemed the correct response?

This didn’t answer my question.

Humor me. As a third party with no side in the fight, what is the correct response from Israel to the massacre of citizens?

Obviously this isn’t it.

So what is the answer, ignoring anything before the inciting attack from Hamas, from either side, what is the cause effect reaction that you would deem appropriate by Israel?

If the program is paying you significantly less than what it should, you can’t rely on it for retirement calculations.

It isn’t enough to retire on on its own today. The program paying significantly less of its distributions as a result of being not possible to fully fund, results in many of us believing it is a program that served the elderly of today ( boomers) and not those who come later as a result of the funding to withdrawal ratio that the baby boomer generation will create.

It’s an unfunded mandate. It can’t if the fund has no money. Touch nothing and the program runs out of money to pay the drawing population. Basic math.

Something as to shift or it will in fact not be able to pay out for all members drawing in it given enough time.