lornemalvo

All neighboring countries have a fair share of experiences with palestinian groups starting civil wars/trying to overthrow their governments. Even if it was not for keeping the conflict with Israel alive (which is a perfect tool for them to distract from their own problems), they would not want them in.

Framing it as some kind of "(post-)colonial" conflict inevitably leads to skewing/biasing the whole analysis and is theoretically flawed.

Do you really think that the Russo-Ukrainian war has 10x LESS civilian fatalities than the current Gaza war?

You are reading very selectively (and I think fir a reason):

> From 2004 to 2014, these attacks have killed 27 Israeli civilians, 5 foreign nationals, 5 IDF soldiers, and at least 11 Palestinians[11] and injured more than 1900 people.[12] Their main effect is their creation of widespread psychological trauma and disruption of daily life among the Israeli populace.

Please at least try to stay true to the facts, even if you are not willing to steelman the other's arguments.

Claiming that "All reports" are saying this does not make it less of a conspiracy theory.

In which way has it failed?

There is no link between getting appointments easier with private insurance and the quality of the medical advice you are getting. I might be wrong, but it feels like you had bad experiences with some doctors and took it personally.

This has always been the argument for technologies that failed too. In many cases it turns out that it is rather "easy" to get the first 90% working but the remanining 10% are not only exponentially more difficult to get going, but also what is the difference between a tool and a toy.

Example?

There are shows/movies with so much depth, that you grasp some details (about the plot, characters, composition or the art design) only when watching it a second or third time.

Welcome to representative democracy.

When I look at the list of famines in the last centuries, it does not look like capitalism provides any kind of food security.

Isn't reading a book the same, by this definition? You could say that when picking up a book you do control the topic (while in social media it is others), but this is an illusion if you do not read that book for the second time.