What does modern Israel have in common with 1950's Alabama?

[Hauldren Collider]

It's probably just because it's so cold. They can't survive in such a frigid wasteland since they've adapted to the heat of the desert.

[OzzyKP]

Then why hasn't Canada? Canada is a big US ally. In fact, about 3/4 of polled Americans think we should defend Canada if it were attacked, probably because you guys can't defend yourselves and we always feel sorry for people like that.

By your logic Canada would have been a target because of their freedom & democracy.

[Hauldren Collider]

But it isn't as prominent as the US. It isn't #1, so to speak.

[KrazyHorse]

Then why hasn't Canada? Canada is a big US ally. In fact, about 3/4 of polled Americans think we should defend Canada if it were attacked, probably because you guys can't defend yourselves and we always feel sorry for people like that.

2/2

[Hauldren Collider]

can you explain "2/2"?

(sorry, perhaps it is poly slang I don't know?)

[OzzyKP]

The US' prominence is because of our strength, influence, power, and aggressive foreign policy.

The terrorists struck at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. They didn't hit the Statue of Liberty despite the serious psychological blow that would have given us.

[Asher]

2/2

[KrazyHorse]

I've already trolled you on this.

[KrazyHorse]

The US' prominence is because of our strength, influence, power, and aggressive foreign policy.

The terrorists struck at the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. They didn't hit the Statue of Liberty despite the serious psychological blow that would have given us.

That would just have been silly.

[Kuciwalker]

How else does one determine if you genuinely violated a law without a court of law?

What are you trying to prove at this point? You said that the law is a black and white affair. This is hilariously ignorant. Legal interpretation is an entire field of academic study, and what a particular statute "means" can completely change over time.

Just concede the damn point, you can't possibly win on this (because you're utterly wrong) and it isn't all that central to your argument.

I'm fascinated to learn how we determine who genuinely violates the law without a jury or a court.

So you really do think that juries and courts actually figure out precisely whether someone is actually guilty, 100% of the time. They are never mistaken? People who have never killed aren't ever convicted of murder, and serial killers are never found not guilty?

Yes, my ignorance is what worries about the precedent of permitting world powers to violate international law due to their perceived notion of the outcome.

Since that particular ship sailed long, long ago (did countries ever respect international laws that weren't backed up by force or sanction?) you can't possibly imagine that this event actually diminishes respect for international law in general.

[Asher]

So you really do think that juries and courts actually figure out precisely whether someone is actually guilty, 100% of the time. They are never mistaken? People who have never killed aren't ever convicted of murder, and serial killers are never found not guilty?

This is perhaps the most pedantic argument in the history of Apolyton.

Congratulations, I think.

[Al B. Sure!]

The concern about the arabs getting nukes is that the governments of Iran, Libya, Syria etc might be stupid/crazy enough to actually use them.

There are a lot of Arabs in Iran, HC?

[Hauldren Collider]

Yes I know Iranians are technically Persian. They also hate us though, so my point stands.

[Kuciwalker]

This is perhaps the most pedantic argument in the history of Apolyton.

Congratulations, I think.

No, Asher, you're the one who complains I can never see the omnipresent shades of gray - oh wait, except wrt the law, where there ARE no shades of gray and everything is absolute! Your idea isn't just incidentally wrong, it is completely absurd.

[Asher]

No, Asher, you're the one who complains I can never see the omnipresent shades of gray - oh wait, except wrt the law, where there ARE no shades of gray and everything is absolute! Your idea isn't just incidentally wrong, it is completely absurd.

I'm a practical man. Only an omnipotent being could know with absolute certainty who violates what law and when. We use the court system, here on Earth, to determine who is or is not guilty.

I'm not sure what your point is, but I suspect you don't either.