I wonder if the Israelis are going to drive all the Palestinians out of the West Bank
They must be thinking: we have no choice. End it now. Us or them
I hasten to add I reckon this would be a catastrophic escalation. I’m just trying to get inside Israeli heads as they look at this surge of Jew hatred around the world. They will be thinking: Israel is it. Our only safe place. We can defend the Jews with nukes. But we need secure borders
= drive the Palestinians over the river
I doubt it, they can just about count on a narrow majority of at least western support to drive Hamas out of Gaza, they would lose almost all international support (except from the hardest right US Republicans) if they tried to drive Palestinians out of the West Bank and Jerusalem too
Do they care, at this point?
Moreover if they turn it into a war between Israel and Arabia/Islam then most western countries will side with Israel
Most would stay neutral, maybe even the Biden led US, if Israel invades Bethlehem, Ramallah etc.
Defeating Hamas in Gaza is one thing (and most westerners except the hard left back that), trying to occupy the entire West Bank and Palestinian Authority and all Palestinians land is quite another
Oh Jeez this is like wading through low IQ treacle
I give up
You don't need to be Einstein to know that Netanyahu going beyond avenging the terrorist attacks to try and turn the 2 state solution for the area into a 1 state Israeli occupation would have virtually no support internationally.
Even most of the US would not go that far, only evangelicals and the hardest right Republicans would back it. Most of Europe, including the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan etc would oppose
People pay lip-service to a two-state solution but opponents of Israel have talked themselves into a position where only a one-state solution "from the river to the sea" is conceivable. It makes sense from Israel's perspective to take the initiative.
Israel has been working towards a one state solution, and that state is Israel, for many years. They’ve been continuing with settlements on West Bank, illegal under international law, and the ruling coalition has an explicit policy of annexation. Multiple members of the coalition have called for a greater Israel covering the current state, Gaza, the West Bank, the Golan Heights and parts of Jordan; e.g. https://www.axios.com/2023/03/20/bezalel-smotrich-jordan-greater-israel-map-palestinians
I wonder if the Israelis are going to drive all the Palestinians out of the West Bank
They must be thinking: we have no choice. End it now. Us or them
I hasten to add I reckon this would be a catastrophic escalation. I’m just trying to get inside Israeli heads as they look at this surge of Jew hatred around the world. They will be thinking: Israel is it. Our only safe place. We can defend the Jews with nukes. But we need secure borders
= drive the Palestinians over the river
I doubt it, they can just about count on a narrow majority of at least western support to drive Hamas out of Gaza, they would lose almost all international support (except from the hardest right US Republicans) if they tried to drive Palestinians out of the West Bank and Jerusalem too
Do they care, at this point?
Moreover if they turn it into a war between Israel and Arabia/Islam then most western countries will side with Israel
Most would stay neutral, maybe even the Biden led US, if Israel invades Bethlehem, Ramallah etc.
Defeating Hamas in Gaza is one thing (and most westerners except the hard left back that), trying to occupy the entire West Bank and Palestinian Authority and all Palestinians land is quite another
Oh Jeez this is like wading through low IQ treacle
I give up
You don't need to be Einstein to know that Netanyahu going beyond avenging the terrorist attacks to try and turn the 2 state solution for the area into a 1 state Israeli occupation would have virtually no support internationally.
Even most of the US would not go that far, only evangelicals and the hardest right Republicans would back it. Most of Europe, including the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan etc would oppose
No. Israel will subtly or overtly provoke a war with the entire Islamic world (esp Shia Iran, Hezbollah, etc) knowing it has
1. Nukes
And
2. America
To back it up
When it comes down to that stand-off, most of the west will side with Israel, probably even Trump
If I was an intelligent Jew in Israel, or indeed in the diaspora. I would now realise that this is the best course of action, There are no good choices. None. They are all appalling. But an all out war NOW that Israel is highly likely to win - ending the Palestinian issue forever - is much better than an all-out war in 10 years when Iran has the bomb
No, you just have a strong tendency to taking everything to the extreme. Most normal folk realise that talking about resorting to nukes, as a matter of realpolitik, is not so mildly insane. You’re like a more twisted version of Barty.
OK Mr Tedious. What would your game theory suggest: as the right long term move for Israel? Given what has happened?
Remember, I am not judging anything, I am not saying what is right or wrong, I am trying to put myself in the minds of the Israeli Cabinet first, then Israelis in general, then the diaspore - alarmed by this horrible surge in anti-Semitism
Further recall that this solution has to make Jews feel permanently safe in their Jewish homeland, and therefore be sellable to the Jewish electorate
It's in the nature of history that there are lots of histories. I suppose if the statement was that, "the history of Wales is incomplete without the history of black experience in Wales," then that would be less prone to willful misunderstanding, but it's perhaps not so pithy.
IDK, it seems about as pithy to me, and clearer. So poor drafting is all.
I wonder if the Israelis are going to drive all the Palestinians out of the West Bank
They must be thinking: we have no choice. End it now. Us or them
I hasten to add I reckon this would be a catastrophic escalation. I’m just trying to get inside Israeli heads as they look at this surge of Jew hatred around the world. They will be thinking: Israel is it. Our only safe place. We can defend the Jews with nukes. But we need secure borders
= drive the Palestinians over the river
I doubt it, they can just about count on a narrow majority of at least western support to drive Hamas out of Gaza, they would lose almost all international support (except from the hardest right US Republicans) if they tried to drive Palestinians out of the West Bank and Jerusalem too
Do they care, at this point?
Moreover if they turn it into a war between Israel and Arabia/Islam then most western countries will side with Israel
Most would stay neutral, maybe even the Biden led US, if Israel invades Bethlehem, Ramallah etc.
Defeating Hamas in Gaza is one thing (and most westerners except the hard left back that), trying to occupy the entire West Bank and Palestinian Authority and all Palestinians land is quite another
Oh Jeez this is like wading through low IQ treacle
I give up
You don't need to be Einstein to know that Netanyahu going beyond avenging the terrorist attacks to try and turn the 2 state solution for the area into a 1 state Israeli occupation would have virtually no support internationally.
Even most of the US would not go that far, only evangelicals and the hardest right Republicans would back it. Most of Europe, including the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan etc would oppose
No. Israel will subtly or overtly provoke a war with the entire Islamic world (esp Shia Iran, Hezbollah, etc) knowing it has
1. Nukes
And
2. America
To back it up
When it comes down to that stand-off, most of the west will side with Israel, probably even Trump
If I was an intelligent Jew in Israel, or indeed in the diaspora. I would now realise that this is the best course of action, There are no good choices. None. They are all appalling. But an all out war NOW that Israel is highly likely to win - ending the Palestinian issue forever - is much better than an all-out war in 10 years when Iran has the bomb
I think they're going to annex the northern half, settlers, big wall etc but unless they can push enough Gazan's onto Egypt they can't grab everything. Of course this means razing the north and terrorising the locals, just what's happening now.
Bear in mind, too, that Egypt and Israel have pretty good relations. I don't think Israel will want to jeopardize that.
Does Egypt care that much about the Gazans, or Palestinians in general? History says no
I agree that Cairo won’t want 2m Gazans abruptly turfed into Sinai
I wonder if the Israelis are going to drive all the Palestinians out of the West Bank
They must be thinking: we have no choice. End it now. Us or them
I hasten to add I reckon this would be a catastrophic escalation. I’m just trying to get inside Israeli heads as they look at this surge of Jew hatred around the world. They will be thinking: Israel is it. Our only safe place. We can defend the Jews with nukes. But we need secure borders
= drive the Palestinians over the river
I doubt it, they can just about count on a narrow majority of at least western support to drive Hamas out of Gaza, they would lose almost all international support (except from the hardest right US Republicans) if they tried to drive Palestinians out of the West Bank and Jerusalem too
Do they care, at this point?
Moreover if they turn it into a war between Israel and Arabia/Islam then most western countries will side with Israel
Most would stay neutral, maybe even the Biden led US, if Israel invades Bethlehem, Ramallah etc.
Defeating Hamas in Gaza is one thing (and most westerners except the hard left back that), trying to occupy the entire West Bank and Palestinian Authority and all Palestinians land is quite another
Oh Jeez this is like wading through low IQ treacle
I give up
You don't need to be Einstein to know that Netanyahu going beyond avenging the terrorist attacks to try and turn the 2 state solution for the area into a 1 state Israeli occupation would have virtually no support internationally.
Even most of the US would not go that far, only evangelicals and the hardest right Republicans would back it. Most of Europe, including the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan etc would oppose
No. Israel will subtly or overtly provoke a war with the entire Islamic world (esp Shia Iran, Hezbollah, etc) knowing it has
1. Nukes
And
2. America
To back it up
When it comes down to that stand-off, most of the west will side with Israel, probably even Trump
If I was an intelligent Jew in Israel, or indeed in the diaspora. I would now realise that this is the best course of action, There are no good choices. None. They are all appalling. But an all out war NOW that Israel is highly likely to win - ending the Palestinian issue forever - is much better than an all-out war in 10 years when Iran has the bomb
No, you just have a strong tendency to taking everything to the extreme. Most normal folk realise that talking about resorting to nukes, as a matter of realpolitik, is not so mildly insane. You’re like a more twisted version of Barty.
OK Mr Tedious. What would your game theory suggest: as the right long term move for Israel? Given what has happened?
Remember, I am not judging anything, I am not saying what is right or wrong, I am trying to put myself in the minds of the Israeli Cabinet first, then Israelis in general, then the diaspore - alarmed by this horrible surge in anti-Semitism
Further recall that this solution has to make Jews feel permanently safe in their Jewish homeland, and therefore be sellable to the Jewish electorate
The problem is, though, that driving the Palestinians out of both the West Bank and Gaza will make antisemitism around the world worse.
I wonder if the Israelis are going to drive all the Palestinians out of the West Bank
They must be thinking: we have no choice. End it now. Us or them
I hasten to add I reckon this would be a catastrophic escalation. I’m just trying to get inside Israeli heads as they look at this surge of Jew hatred around the world. They will be thinking: Israel is it. Our only safe place. We can defend the Jews with nukes. But we need secure borders
= drive the Palestinians over the river
I doubt it, they can just about count on a narrow majority of at least western support to drive Hamas out of Gaza, they would lose almost all international support (except from the hardest right US Republicans) if they tried to drive Palestinians out of the West Bank and Jerusalem too
Do they care, at this point?
Moreover if they turn it into a war between Israel and Arabia/Islam then most western countries will side with Israel
Most would stay neutral, maybe even the Biden led US, if Israel invades Bethlehem, Ramallah etc.
Defeating Hamas in Gaza is one thing (and most westerners except the hard left back that), trying to occupy the entire West Bank and Palestinian Authority and all Palestinians land is quite another
Oh Jeez this is like wading through low IQ treacle
I give up
You don't need to be Einstein to know that Netanyahu going beyond avenging the terrorist attacks to try and turn the 2 state solution for the area into a 1 state Israeli occupation would have virtually no support internationally.
Even most of the US would not go that far, only evangelicals and the hardest right Republicans would back it. Most of Europe, including the UK, Canada, Australia, Japan etc would oppose
No. Israel will subtly or overtly provoke a war with the entire Islamic world (esp Shia Iran, Hezbollah, etc) knowing it has
1. Nukes
And
2. America
To back it up
When it comes down to that stand-off, most of the west will side with Israel, probably even Trump
If I was an intelligent Jew in Israel, or indeed in the diaspora. I would now realise that this is the best course of action, There are no good choices. None. They are all appalling. But an all out war NOW that Israel is highly likely to win - ending the Palestinian issue forever - is much better than an all-out war in 10 years when Iran has the bomb
History tells you that you are wrong I am afraid.
I’m not saying that I am right or wrong. Especially not morally. I am trying to predict the future, which is what we do on here
If you apply game theory to Israel’s terrible predicament, I reckon this is what you come up with as the only plausible long term “solution” that gives Israel long term security
Drive the Palestinians into Arab lands. Secure defensible borders, and a perpetually Jewish state. I am pretty sure Israel has been stealthily doing this since the Oslo accords broke down, but now everything is accelerated by a million. Israel needs to do this soon before Iran gets nukes, and now is the moment to strike
To make sure Israel does not lose western backing it needs to provoke Tehran and its underlings in a subtle and deniable way in a way that makes it look like Israel is being attacked first. Should not be impossible, Iran is itching to have a go anyway
Once Israel is seriously under siege Daddy America will come to the rescue and Naqba 2 will be enacted
That’s what I would do, if I was Israeli PM with a drink problem but a good mind
That's interesting and I think I get your reasoning. But how does Iran "have a go". It has proxies like Hezbollah but they don't have an army so no proper military engagement possible beyond rocket lobbing. What could they do that would legitimately lead to Israel striking Iran with an outcome that delivers some kind of advantage to Israel. Don't see it.
Courthouse News Service - As Election Day looms in conservative stronghold of Mississippi, a Democrat may have shot at governor’s office
Democrat Brandon Presley has found significant support with a populist message, while infighting and scandal surrounds Republican incumbent Tate Reeves. But pundits are unsure if that will drive voter turnout.
How likely is it that a Southern state governed by a supermajority of Republicans in the Legislature, a state where Donald Trump won 57% of the vote in 2020, would elect a Democratic governor just three years later? There’s a chance, some polls and pundits suggest, that Mississippi voters could do just that on Election Day Nov. 7.
Even though he is touting record low unemployment, improvements in student testing and a record high budget surplus, there’s just the right amount of scandal, disapproval and division surrounding incumbent Republican Governor Tate Reeves that some experts believe he can be defeated.
Democrats hope they have supported the right candidate in challenger Brandon Presley, a former mayor of the small town of Nettleton in the northeast corner of the state who since 2008 has served as a member of the Public Service Commission.
Presley announced his campaign in January and within weeks received endorsements from influential members of the state and national Democratic party. As he built momentum by the summer, campaign contributions began flooding in. A campaign finance report submitted Oct. 10 indicates Presley had raised nearly $7.9 million, with a balance of about $1.8 million in the final weeks of the campaign.
Reeves raised about $5.1 million over the same period, but he began with more cash on hand and filled a war chest with about $4.2 million entering October. In recent weeks, airwaves, billboards and other media in the state have been blanketed with ads for both candidates, as some polls indicated Presley is within the margin of error.
Presley, who is also a second cousin of Elvis, has painted Reeves as an elitist who doesn’t care about poor or struggling residents. He also highlights the governor’s ties to a $94 million welfare scandal which saw money steered toward lobbyists and political supporters, including former NFL quarterback Brett Favre and a nonprofit run by Reeves’ former personal trainer. . . .
Seriously. What a privilege to see it in this slanted light
Looks as if will be pretty impressive when they finish it. Looks like all the workers are having a siesta in that image.
The poignant thing is that originally it would have been painted in really garish - to our eyes - colours. Vivid reds and blues and whites. Like a fairground attraction
But now the colour and polish is all gone and you’re left with the naked golden limestone - which looks so much better (especially to contemporary tastes) - and absolutely gorgeous in slanted October sun
So it’s good it was ruined
It now turns out that Gobekli Tepe was painted. They’ve found scarlet pigment. It would have been multicoloured. It is inexplicable. A painted sequence of temple towns buried 10,000 years ago. An utterly confounding civilisation, 6000 years before “civilisation”
Graham Hancock may have been right then
I hardly think paint is proof that Graham Hancock is right! We have cave paintings going back 64,000 years. Paintings, i.e. uses of paint. Something being painted a mere 6,000 years ago is interesting, but hardly groundbreaking.
Er, 12,000 years ago. Idiot
Still not 60,000 years. Graham Hancock has never knowingly been right on anything he has ever written on archaeology and I don't expect him to start now.
Er, Gobekli Tepe's heyday wasn't 60,000 years ago.
Nor did I say it was. But cave paintings were.
But the first serious cave paintings are Chauvet. 30,000BC (still astonishing)
It now looks like the builders of the Tas Tepeler were constructing highly complex, ritualized, multi-colored painted temple towns with dedicated water systems, auditoriums, shrine buildings, and much else BEFORE AGRICULTURE and with shared religious and artistic motifs, phallocratic rites, maybe even a particular style of chevronned clothing (or special forms of human sacrifice) and all BEFORE AGRICULTURE and these towns were spreads over hundreds of square km
That’s a civilisation. Buried and lost for 10,000 years. It just is
You know this as soon as you go to Gobekli Tepe, Karahan Tepe, and Sayburc and the other emerging Tas Tepeler, but of course none of you have, have you?
I have. The argument ends here. It was stupid anyway because it breaks the Law of Leon
If you find that you disagree with me, and you’re about to make a comment to that effect, have a word with yourself - and don’t write it
And yet I am continually talking to serious archaeologists working in Northern Syria and Turkey who completely disagree with you and think Hancock is a mendacious prick. You have visited and had drinks with people there. That doesn't make you an expert - as is shown by some of your comments on here about it.
So, for example, it is now thought that all GT shows is that the agricurltiral revolution and the start of the pre-ceramic Neolithic were not a uniform event in time across the region. No archaeologist seriously thinks either GT or any of the other sites are evidence of an advanced civilisation lost to knowledge. Nor do they now buy into the impact theory for the Younger Dryas cooling that Hancock and others keep talking about as 'evidence' of the lost civilisation. Why? because the Younger Dryas cooling is only the last of 26 similar events over a 120,000 year period and none of them need Hancock's cometary impact as a cause.
Hancock is a journalist who pretends there is some great archaeological conspiracy theory that we are all in on to hide evidence of a lost civilisation. He is a nutter and is as wrong on this as he has been on everything else he has ever written.
I’ve been there and seen it all. You haven’t. That’s all there is to it
Go there, go to Karahan Tepe, Sayburc and Gobekli Tepe, and maybe three others, and then get back to me
Until then, as I have said several times now, with underserved politesse, shut the fuck up you don’t know what you’re talking about
Contrary to what you might think, getting drunk and throwing up on an archaeological site does not yet count as research.
Seriously. What a privilege to see it in this slanted light
Looks as if will be pretty impressive when they finish it. Looks like all the workers are having a siesta in that image.
The poignant thing is that originally it would have been painted in really garish - to our eyes - colours. Vivid reds and blues and whites. Like a fairground attraction
But now the colour and polish is all gone and you’re left with the naked golden limestone - which looks so much better (especially to contemporary tastes) - and absolutely gorgeous in slanted October sun
So it’s good it was ruined
It now turns out that Gobekli Tepe was painted. They’ve found scarlet pigment. It would have been multicoloured. It is inexplicable. A painted sequence of temple towns buried 10,000 years ago. An utterly confounding civilisation, 6000 years before “civilisation”
Graham Hancock may have been right then
I hardly think paint is proof that Graham Hancock is right! We have cave paintings going back 64,000 years. Paintings, i.e. uses of paint. Something being painted a mere 6,000 years ago is interesting, but hardly groundbreaking.
Er, 12,000 years ago. Idiot
Still not 60,000 years. Graham Hancock has never knowingly been right on anything he has ever written on archaeology and I don't expect him to start now.
Er, Gobekli Tepe's heyday wasn't 60,000 years ago.
Nor did I say it was. But cave paintings were.
But the first serious cave paintings are Chauvet. 30,000BC (still astonishing)
It now looks like the builders of the Tas Tepeler were constructing highly complex, ritualized, multi-colored painted temple towns with dedicated water systems, auditoriums, shrine buildings, and much else BEFORE AGRICULTURE and with shared religious and artistic motifs, phallocratic rites, maybe even a particular style of chevronned clothing (or special forms of human sacrifice) and all BEFORE AGRICULTURE and these towns were spreads over hundreds of square km
That’s a civilisation. Buried and lost for 10,000 years. It just is
You know this as soon as you go to Gobekli Tepe, Karahan Tepe, and Sayburc and the other emerging Tas Tepeler, but of course none of you have, have you?
I have. The argument ends here. It was stupid anyway because it breaks the Law of Leon
If you find that you disagree with me, and you’re about to make a comment to that effect, have a word with yourself - and don’t write it
And yet I am continually talking to serious archaeologists working in Northern Syria and Turkey who completely disagree with you and think Hancock is a mendacious prick. You have visited and had drinks with people there. That doesn't make you an expert - as is shown by some of your comments on here about it.
So, for example, it is now thought that all GT shows is that the agricurltiral revolution and the start of the pre-ceramic Neolithic were not a uniform event in time across the region. No archaeologist seriously thinks either GT or any of the other sites are evidence of an advanced civilisation lost to knowledge. Nor do they now buy into the impact theory for the Younger Dryas cooling that Hancock and others keep talking about as 'evidence' of the lost civilisation. Why? because the Younger Dryas cooling is only the last of 26 similar events over a 120,000 year period and none of them need Hancock's cometary impact as a cause.
Hancock is a journalist who pretends there is some great archaeological conspiracy theory that we are all in on to hide evidence of a lost civilisation. He is a nutter and is as wrong on this as he has been on everything else he has ever written.
I’ve been there and seen it all. You haven’t. That’s all there is to it
Go there, go to Karahan Tepe, Sayburc and Gobekli Tepe, and maybe three others, and then get back to me
Until then, as I have said several times now, with underserved politesse, shut the fuck up you don’t know what you’re talking about
Contrary to what you might think, getting drunk and throwing up on an archaeological site does not yet count as research.
Seriously. What a privilege to see it in this slanted light
Looks as if will be pretty impressive when they finish it. Looks like all the workers are having a siesta in that image.
The poignant thing is that originally it would have been painted in really garish - to our eyes - colours. Vivid reds and blues and whites. Like a fairground attraction
But now the colour and polish is all gone and you’re left with the naked golden limestone - which looks so much better (especially to contemporary tastes) - and absolutely gorgeous in slanted October sun
So it’s good it was ruined
It now turns out that Gobekli Tepe was painted. They’ve found scarlet pigment. It would have been multicoloured. It is inexplicable. A painted sequence of temple towns buried 10,000 years ago. An utterly confounding civilisation, 6000 years before “civilisation”
Graham Hancock may have been right then
I hardly think paint is proof that Graham Hancock is right! We have cave paintings going back 64,000 years. Paintings, i.e. uses of paint. Something being painted a mere 6,000 years ago is interesting, but hardly groundbreaking.
Er, 12,000 years ago. Idiot
Still not 60,000 years. Graham Hancock has never knowingly been right on anything he has ever written on archaeology and I don't expect him to start now.
Er, Gobekli Tepe's heyday wasn't 60,000 years ago.
Nor did I say it was. But cave paintings were.
But the first serious cave paintings are Chauvet. 30,000BC (still astonishing)
It now looks like the builders of the Tas Tepeler were constructing highly complex, ritualized, multi-colored painted temple towns with dedicated water systems, auditoriums, shrine buildings, and much else BEFORE AGRICULTURE and with shared religious and artistic motifs, phallocratic rites, maybe even a particular style of chevronned clothing (or special forms of human sacrifice) and all BEFORE AGRICULTURE and these towns were spreads over hundreds of square km
That’s a civilisation. Buried and lost for 10,000 years. It just is
You know this as soon as you go to Gobekli Tepe, Karahan Tepe, and Sayburc and the other emerging Tas Tepeler, but of course none of you have, have you?
I have. The argument ends here. It was stupid anyway because it breaks the Law of Leon
If you find that you disagree with me, and you’re about to make a comment to that effect, have a word with yourself - and don’t write it
And yet I am continually talking to serious archaeologists working in Northern Syria and Turkey who completely disagree with you and think Hancock is a mendacious prick. You have visited and had drinks with people there. That doesn't make you an expert - as is shown by some of your comments on here about it.
So, for example, it is now thought that all GT shows is that the agricurltiral revolution and the start of the pre-ceramic Neolithic were not a uniform event in time across the region. No archaeologist seriously thinks either GT or any of the other sites are evidence of an advanced civilisation lost to knowledge. Nor do they now buy into the impact theory for the Younger Dryas cooling that Hancock and others keep talking about as 'evidence' of the lost civilisation. Why? because the Younger Dryas cooling is only the last of 26 similar events over a 120,000 year period and none of them need Hancock's cometary impact as a cause.
Hancock is a journalist who pretends there is some great archaeological conspiracy theory that we are all in on to hide evidence of a lost civilisation. He is a nutter and is as wrong on this as he has been on everything else he has ever written.
I’ve been there and seen it all. You haven’t. That’s all there is to it
Go there, go to Karahan Tepe, Sayburc and Gobekli Tepe, and maybe three others, and then get back to me
Until then, as I have said several times now, with underserved politesse, shut the fuck up you don’t know what you’re talking about
Contrary to what you might think, getting drunk and throwing up on an archaeological site does not yet count as research.
Though I have been on geological field trips where that seems to have been the broad MO.
Interesting that Sam Coates takeaway from today's evidence is exactly what Cummings had been saying for years. That the Civil Service were and are unfit for purpose. This now seems so blatently obvious that it is amazing people still try to deny it.
The problem is that Big Dom solution is always shut it all down, sack everybody, put me in charge of it all and I will hire a small crack team of data scientists and ML engineers from industry and it will run itself in a few years...job done.....
Clearly not true given the praise he has continually heaped on a lot of those working at a lower level within the Civil Service. But of course you only hear the bits you want to hear.
I was being a bit hyperbolic, but it isn't a million miles away from what he advocated for. Remember the infamous call to hire the super talented weirdos to replace the broken civil service, particularly in Downing Street.
The irony is that Cummings was certainly right, but about 5 years premature
We could now replace 90% of the Civil Service (and quite soon we surely will) with AI, and the machines will do a much better job. How could they not? Who doubts that GPT4.5 would have made a better fist of HS2?
It’s very sad for the pathetic midwit quasi-Woke pen-pushing cretins that constitute much of the Civil Service, who have never had an original idea between them, but oh well. Them’s the breaks. Bye
Comments
Remember, I am not judging anything, I am not saying what is right or wrong, I am trying to put myself in the minds of the Israeli Cabinet first, then Israelis in general, then the diaspore - alarmed by this horrible surge in anti-Semitism
Further recall that this solution has to make Jews feel permanently safe in their Jewish homeland, and therefore be sellable to the Jewish electorate
I agree that Cairo won’t want 2m Gazans abruptly turfed into Sinai
Democrat Brandon Presley has found significant support with a populist message, while infighting and scandal surrounds Republican incumbent Tate Reeves. But pundits are unsure if that will drive voter turnout.
How likely is it that a Southern state governed by a supermajority of Republicans in the Legislature, a state where Donald Trump won 57% of the vote in 2020, would elect a Democratic governor just three years later? There’s a chance, some polls and pundits suggest, that Mississippi voters could do just that on Election Day Nov. 7.
Even though he is touting record low unemployment, improvements in student testing and a record high budget surplus, there’s just the right amount of scandal, disapproval and division surrounding incumbent Republican Governor Tate Reeves that some experts believe he can be defeated.
Democrats hope they have supported the right candidate in challenger Brandon Presley, a former mayor of the small town of Nettleton in the northeast corner of the state who since 2008 has served as a member of the Public Service Commission.
Presley announced his campaign in January and within weeks received endorsements from influential members of the state and national Democratic party. As he built momentum by the summer, campaign contributions began flooding in. A campaign finance report submitted Oct. 10 indicates Presley had raised nearly $7.9 million, with a balance of about $1.8 million in the final weeks of the campaign.
Reeves raised about $5.1 million over the same period, but he began with more cash on hand and filled a war chest with about $4.2 million entering October. In recent weeks, airwaves, billboards and other media in the state have been blanketed with ads for both candidates, as some polls indicated Presley is within the margin of error.
Presley, who is also a second cousin of Elvis, has painted Reeves as an elitist who doesn’t care about poor or struggling residents. He also highlights the governor’s ties to a $94 million welfare scandal which saw money steered toward lobbyists and political supporters, including former NFL quarterback Brett Favre and a nonprofit run by Reeves’ former personal trainer. . . .
https://www.courthousenews.com/as-election-day-looms-in-conservative-stronghold-of-mississippi-a-democrat-may-have-shot-at-governors-office/