fair

i guess most western maps are arranged in such a way that the middle east is in the center and the atlantic is on the map completely because

1. the atlantic has probably been more important historically than the pacific, as europeans sailed over the atlantic, not the pacific.

2. the pacific ocean is a bigger body of water, so having it on the “back” side of the globe makes sense because this way, you have a more uninteresting back-side of the globe and a more interesting front-side.

pretty by conventional beauty standards, yes

Das Internet wird heutzutage von fast 100% der Bevölkerung genutzt, weil es Ragebait enthält und süchtig-machende Inhalte. Beides ist nicht gesund.

Wenn man diese beiden Elemente entfernt, dann sinkt zwar der Nutzerzahl von 100% der Bevölkerung auf 10% der Bevölkerung, aber die Qualität würde massiv ansteigen, weil gesunde Diskussionen wieder möglich sind.

Womöglich wird die zunehmende Enshittification von commerzialisierten Platformen der treibende Faktor sein, um Leute zum Umsteigen zu bewegen?

This might sound ridiculous to you.

But, it does matter. Ultimately, those in charge determine whether there would be a war or not. That’s why their perspective matters.

It’s ultimately because a war does enormous harm and throws the country’s progress back by decades why the rich are (or should be) against war. That is a very important message that can have a lot of influence on the world!

heheh ^^ i genuinely don’t know where you take your motivation from to be so excited, but i appreciate it :)

Das ist nicht gut.

It’s really not. I just checked. At least not in the online version.

Construction workers built all the houses.

Why shouldn’t they own it?

i tend to cover the ads part of the screen with my hand so i don’t see them.

?

what’s wrong with the term “functionally” according to you?

yes :D i’m nikaaa

ok i guess then it’s just my personal experience that Israeli struggles get highlighted more.

I just want to respond to my own comment with some follow-up thoughts:

Israel is mostly backed by the US to “protect US interests in the area”, which i translate as: mostly oil.

Since the transition to renewable energy is happening at an exponential speed, i guess that the consumption of fossil fuels could be reduced by 2040 by 90%. That would make the US completely independent from oil from the middle east, and the US would no longer need Israel, which would weaken Israel’s grip in the region. That is why i think they would retreat, instead of attack.

Just my two cents.

there’s a low likelyhood.

The key question is what will happen to Israel in the future?

In my opinion, Israel cannot stay in the middle east for much longer. They have to move out.

Israel is so universally hated in the middle east, it’s difficult to put into words. (at least that’s what i got from other people’s messages). it’s difficult/impossible to conceive a long-term stability in the region with Israel in it. and israel knows this, of course.

The question is: what will israel do? Will it escalate the conflict to try to grasp to power through military dominance in the area? Or will it soften its grip and let go of control in the middle east?

To be fair to the Germans, I can understand how the Holocaust is integrated into them as a kind of “original sin”. What was done to the Jews under the Nazis was so unspeakable terrible, and German society as a whole has done an enormous job at ingraining in themselves that nothing of the sort should ever repeat itself.

The problem with Germany is that they learned the wrong lesson out of WW2.

Instead of learning “genocide is bad”, it’s “Jews are always on the right side of history”. And that’s why Germany is completely uncritically supporting Israel with everything that it does.

Their government is way worse than Israel’s.

So why bomb Iranian civilians?

Israel is not only at the very center of the world (look at maps: it’s very much the geographic center. That’s why we call it middle east.)

it’s also reckless and like a dying star, a supernova. it blows up without regards to casualties. it is a very dangerous situation that we’re in indeed.

The acorns of our time.

that’s not how democratic changes are done.

progress happens because people demand that society walks in a sane direction. taking things into your own hands basically never does anything good.