Martman

I think I've answered all your points in my thread but it appears that your mind is made up.

Every child lost is a whole world gone. In Gaza most are just kids, caught in a war they never chose (UN). Some weere even dragged into it by Hamas (UN). And on Oct 7 Israeli kids were murdered or taken (AP/Reuters). Tiny coffins on both sides. But, that’s not genocide. That’s war.

Sources: Israeli 7 Oct deaths ≈1,200 (AP; Reuters). Security personnel killed since then ≈1,152 (Israeli Defense Ministry via Times of Israel; Jerusalem Post). Israeli civilian and military deaths from Hezbollah attacks also recorded (UK Parliament brief; Reuters; Wikipedia summary).

I hear you, the toll is awful. But it isn’t one sided. Hamas killed 1,200 Israelis on Oct 7. Since then over 1,150 Israeli forces and civilians in the north have died. Hamas fight armed and among citizens. This is war on both sides, not genocide.

Totally. Nobody is against healthcare or education in principle. The fight has always been about how to fund it. These programs cost trillions, so if taxes do not rise, deficits grow. And if Washington dictates the model, states lose control. That is why even good things become battlegrounds.

6/ The bottom line is that urban fighting puts civilians at greater risk. Death tolls are always provisional, revised with time, shaped by fog of war, politics and limited access. None of this excuses violations but it shows why simple claims mislead.

5/ Models and studies show wide uncertainty. One peer-reviewed model estimated that in the 2023 Israel-Gaza conflict, 12.7% of the deaths were civilians (with broad confidence intervals), which signals how contested the classification is.

4/ As investigations progress, earlier figures are often revised. For example, the UN denied that it “halved” the Gaza toll but clarified some initial confusion: identification of bodies is ongoing, and some gender/age breakdowns were adjusted as more data arrived.

3/ Counting casualties in war is always hard. In Gaza, many “tallies” come from the Gaza Health Ministry, which does not (publicly) separate all combatants from civilians in every case.

2/ Under international humanitarian law, a civilian is protected unless and for such time as they take direct part in hostilities. But when fighters shoot from rooftops, tunnels, basements, or blend into crowds, the lines dissolve.

1/ Warfare in open terrain vs cities is not the same. In dense urban settings, fighters and civilians often live side-by-side. Homes, hospitals, schools, narrow alleys: everything is mixed. The risks of “collateral damage” climb steeply.

I get why people say “criticise Zionism not Jews,” but too often it slides into Jew-hatred, in my opinion. Let’s name that and stop it. Argue policy if you want, but keep every person’s dignity. Safety for Jews. Justice for Palestinians. Both truths can stand.

It appears that the WSJ frames this as GOP bravado vs Dem pragmatism. But both sides are acting on conviction. ACA subsidies matter, sure, but so does the bigger question: what actually holds a nation together if we can’t agree on borders or belonging? Genuinely.

Yeah fair… though funny thing is Trump did take out Baghdadi, smashed al-Shabaab, got Israel & Arab states into the Abraham Accords, and just last week floated a Gaza ceasefire Israel said yes to. Kind of messy, but historically that’s who the Nobel usually picks.

You don't think Hamas are fighting, really?

I'm not being funny with you, mate, I'm genuinely trying to understand...

I hope I'm not dead by then - I'm not fifty yet!!! 😀

We really are led by business, and it scares me too.

Have a good day, mate.

More taxes?

I can hardly pay my bills now...

Very good point. The OBR uses % of future GDP not today’s. 0.8% in 2050 will be bigger than £25bn now, but the % shows the burden relative to the economy. Exact cash is uncertain, yet the scale of lost fuel duty is still real.

I hear you, Gaza’s destruction is unbearable. But war isn’t defined by equal power. Asymmetric wars are common, e.g. Taliban vs NATO, Viet Cong vs US. Hamas are still fighting, Israel are still striking. Naming it war matters for peace and accountability, I believe. It's not one side good...

True, stability matters for those who came legally. But each grant of ILR adds pressure to schools, housing and social care. A fairer future is linking settlement to what the system can sustain, so citizens and migrants alike are protected from poverty.

Yeah I see what you mean. Insulation and heating bills matter.

But 0.8% of GDP is what the OBR say we lose in fuel duty by 2050. That is about £20–25 billion a year in today’s money. The budget of the whole schools system is about £60 billion. The NHS in England is about £180 billion.

Yes, I'm awake of the meme but there was no mention of care workers in anything I said...

True. I totally agree. But unfortunately, the grid operator says £58 billion is needed just to connect renewables by 2035. Whoever is in charge. That bill will come. Act or no Act.

Who's blaming the care workers?

Yeah. It can feel like empty words. But repeal could mean more than noise. If they replaced it with a law on delivery. With stable contracts. Grid upgrades. A carbon border tax. That might bring more investment. Not less.

I get it. It looks like an obsession. But the OBR says the big cost is lost fuel duty. About 0.8 percent of GDP by 2050. The fear is not just renewables. It is how to pay for the transition.

True. The Tory brand looks busted. But emissions are already down by half since 1990. They keep falling. Maybe the framework is working even if the politics is broken.

Yeah. She does look unserious. But the Act itself has been taken to court twice. Judges ruled the net zero plans unlawful. That kind of uncertainty can hurt investment too.

Yeah. It does sound reckless. But AR5 failed because the bid cap was too low. When they fixed that, AR6 bounced back. Investors follow contracts and schemes. Not the Act on paper.

Ah, so you hide behind an anonymous account to abuse people?

Not exactly virtuous but each to their own...