Google To Employees: 'We Are a Workplace' 260
Google, once known for its unconventional approach to business, has taken a decisive step towards becoming a more traditional company by firing 28 employees who participated in protests against a $1.2 billion contract with the Israeli government. The move comes after sit-in demonstrations on Tuesday at Google offices in Silicon Valley and New York City, where employees opposed the company's support for Project Nimbus, a cloud computing contract they argue harms Palestinians in Gaza. Nine employees were arrested during the protests.
In a note to employees, CEO Sundar Pichai said, "We have a culture of vibrant, open discussion... But ultimately we are a workplace and our policies and expectations are clear: this is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics."
Google also says that the Project Nimbus contract is "not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services."
Axios adds: Google prided itself from its early days on creating a university-like atmosphere for the elite engineers it hired. Dissent was encouraged in the belief that open discourse fostered innovation. "A lot of Google is organized around the fact that people still think they're in college when they work here," then-CEO Eric Schmidt told "In the Plex" author Steven Levy in the 2000s.
What worked for an organization with a few thousand employees is harder to maintain among nearly 200,000 workers. Generational shifts in political and social expectations also mean that Google's leadership and its rank-and-file aren't always aligned.
In a note to employees, CEO Sundar Pichai said, "We have a culture of vibrant, open discussion... But ultimately we are a workplace and our policies and expectations are clear: this is a business, and not a place to act in a way that disrupts coworkers or makes them feel unsafe, to attempt to use the company as a personal platform, or to fight over disruptive issues or debate politics."
Google also says that the Project Nimbus contract is "not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services."
Axios adds: Google prided itself from its early days on creating a university-like atmosphere for the elite engineers it hired. Dissent was encouraged in the belief that open discourse fostered innovation. "A lot of Google is organized around the fact that people still think they're in college when they work here," then-CEO Eric Schmidt told "In the Plex" author Steven Levy in the 2000s.
What worked for an organization with a few thousand employees is harder to maintain among nearly 200,000 workers. Generational shifts in political and social expectations also mean that Google's leadership and its rank-and-file aren't always aligned.
Welcome to the machine (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
PHB's are like prions.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem with profit driven is that it devalues humans in a quest for efficiency, and hence profit. I don't have a solution really, but you asked 'what's wrong'.
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I write pithy nonsensical things that don't actually mean anything too. Can I run the UK for 11 years? I couldn't possibly do worse than Thatcher.
Re: (Score:3)
I couldn't possibly do worse than Thatcher.
Depends. Is your name Liz Truss or David Cameron?
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I write pithy nonsensical things that don't actually mean anything too.
and I'd add that you have no credibility or standing to even be saying that much, either. Everyone knows you're a Communist idiot, even if they've only been on Slashdot a few days.
Re: (Score:2)
I couldn't possibly do worse than Thatcher.
LOL, you've clearly been in an 8 year coma. The only thing we have learnt about the UK in the past 8 years was that Thatcher for all her faults and horrendous policy was far from the low point.
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Insightful)
Pithy quotes prove nothing and often hide deception.
Margaret Thatcher said that while more or less giving away a ton of publicly owned stuff to indirectly buy votes. We now have a massive housing and water quality crisis (among other things) thanks to the conservatives running out of other people's money.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems like you are running out of housing and resources because the population has grown massively.
In 1980 the UK population was 50M, in 2024 it is 68M. That's 18M more people to house, food, water, educate, etc. A 36% increase!
Of that 9M were foreign born, so basically 1/2 of the growth was due to immigration. Probably a touch higher since it doesn't look at children of immigrants. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplep... [ons.gov.uk]
37% of London is foreign born. How would housing be in London with 1/3 less people?
Re: (Score:3)
It's all one big Uniparty
It is not.
There is not as much difference as I'd like, but to conflate the two is frankly stupid. Just because one is bad does not imply the other is not much much worse.
I have no love for Starmer, I think he's a cowardly shitheel, and yet he (and his party) is infinitely preferable to the narcissistic, incmpetent, crony capitalist and frankly mendacious lot currently in power. Yes I would like to see an opposition with some actual ideas rather than a less corrupt version of the sam
Re: (Score:2)
In 1982, Thatcher blocked the sales of arms to Israel.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem with Margaret Thatcher is that she eventually ran out of neurons.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Standing??
They're physically assaulting and pushing past armed US national guard to get in here!!! [youtube.com]
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Insightful)
The Chinese introduced Special Economic Zones that embrace Capitalist principles, to avoid the Soviet Union's fate. It worked, and those zones are funding their entire system.
Re: (Score:2)
The Chinese beg to differ with Ms. Thatcher. I would contrast their performance to Great Britain's.
Are you implying that China is more "socialist" than Britain?
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm not implying that they care more about the individual person than GB does, if that is what you mean, but the CCP has a more equitable distribution of salary and benefits than GB does. Really, the world is not the one of 1990 anymore and we have to get up to date with the increasing authoritarianism of the West and the economic improvements in Asia.
Both have a shit record. Wake up. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I once would have had a similar knee jerk response. No longer. You'll get there, or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Insightful)
Same story with other former communist countries like Vietnam which also instituted market reforms. Meanwhile countries that remained centrally planned (such as North Korea) have remained poor. Others such as Venezuela that went further down the path of Marxism have destroyed much of the wealth they previously had.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
China hasn't been fully socialist since Nixon went to China. You can actually look at their GDP over time and spot where on the graph they started to implement market results policies. They aren't a fully free market society, but if they were they'd easily be the world's largest economy today. The CCP being unwilling to give up control of the country is holding the Chinese citizens back more than anything outside of the country might be doing. Same story with other former communist countries like Vietnam which also instituted market reforms. Meanwhile countries that remained centrally planned (such as North Korea) have remained poor. Others such as Venezuela that went further down the path of Marxism have destroyed much of the wealth they previously had.
Imagine if mainland China was as free and productive as Taiwan, but with its size and population. I would have stuck with learning Mandarin in middle school instead of switching to German.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, exactly:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
China hasn't really been socialist in the way Margaret Thatcher meant since Mao died, and some of the modern special economic zones are about as capitalist as you can get.
The USSR also went through a similar process. E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Without some sort of heavy handed government, you can't force a company to give their money away to workers without them expecting the workers to do the work efficiently and cost effectively. You can't force companies to be charities. The most you can really do without going full on short-term doomed dictatorship is demand that they treat the workers well, follow rules, etc.
Even in the Soviet Socialist Republics (if that's not socialist then nothing is), companies were to an extent still profit driven. A l
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Interesting)
When I worked at Google for a few years over 15y ago, they were advertising pretty hard internally and externally that they are not just an other corporation (don't be evil, 20% time, etc...). Sure a few vest and resters played volley ball, swam in the infinity pools, while others actually worked. Overall this was pretty much just marketing for recruiting which lead some employees to feel bait and switched. I learned from my mistakes and moved on to better pastures.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was not commenting about the protests here, but about the fact that Google is indeed just another for profit corporation and has been for a long time even when they claimed to be different.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Or three [tampabay.com] bankrupt [forbes.com] casinos ("The money I took out of there was incredible."), failing golf courses [forbes.com], a failed airline [simpleflying.com], a failed "university" [nbcnews.com], and other businesses which never turned a profit. It's almost as if the point was not to generate a profit, but scam people out of their money.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> LA has: 5 Billion dollars missing in various "help the homeless" scan non profits.
Much of that is due to the ongoing power-struggle of local govt's versus county and state gov't (C/S). Local gov'ts don't like C/S telling them how to run things, making it hard to regulate monitor funds given to them to solve problems.
Local gov't is conservative mainstay, but when it backfires, they blame liberalism.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Interesting)
I mean, it's decades late to say this but inevitably any large company turns into the cliche machine-like corporate office. Too many executives grew up in these places so they tend to turn anything they touch into it these soul destroying, profit driven, amoral hellscapes.
Yes, but I trust you are not advocating for employees to take over because the company is doing something they don't like.
According to Chris Rackow writing in a companywide memo:
“They took over office spaces, defaced our property, and physically impeded the work of other Googlers,” Rackow wrote in the memo obtained by The Post. “Their behavior was unacceptable, extremely disruptive, and made co-workers feel threatened.”
Now we can say that these are pacifists of course, but other "sit ins" have occasionally involved kidnapping and death, and at least for my part, I have no plans of waiting for the first person to die before coming to the conclusion that fuckery is afoot.
I'm not at all wild about the centuries old fighting among the relatives there either, because much of the American support is based on religious fundamentalists working their prophecies, and greasing the skids for armageddon, but that ain't the way to do it.
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Informative)
California Labor Code 96(k) [ca.gov] would keep Google from firing them for "lawful conduct occurring during nonworking hours away from the employer's premises" -- but even if we assume the protest was lawful, they violated both the "nonworking hours" and "away from the employer's premises" parts.
Re: (Score:3)
Lack of Commitment (Score:2)
California Labor Code 96(k) [ca.gov] would keep Google from firing them for "lawful conduct occurring during nonworking hours away from the employer's premises"
Exactly how would this apply given that they were protesting _at_ the employer's premises and disrupting other employees who were trying to work there? It seems very reasonable to me that if you turn up at your place of employment and use your access to that place to disrupt the normal business of your employer by staging a sit-in that you should get fired for doing so.
After all, if these people really believed in what they were protesting then the honourable thing to do would be to resign from Google f
Re: (Score:2)
Er what? Staging a political protest at a workplace should be a common sense thing NOT to do as an employee
As an employee, or as a believer in their cause? If they are a believer in their cause, given the circumstances, this seems exactly what they SHOULD do as a human being. Their employer is, in their view, being immoral in a way they cannot abide. This sort of protest is exactly a reasonable course.
Losing their jobs should be considered a likely outcome, but given what Google is doing then they should be willing to pay that price for the sake of their cause. They might have preferred an outcome where Google
Re: (Score:3)
As of the 2020s, modern Google has become the hellscape you'd expect from old-school Microsoft, and long-term, it will lead to their undoing.
I have a problem with your use of the word "hellscape". What you describe is most companies these days. Working in a mine as slave labor might be a hellscape. Working in an office where employees should not stage a political protest is not a hellscape.
Re: (Score:2)
People who don't understand hyperbole should be strung up in the town square, publicly eviscerated, and garlands hung of their entrails.
They're saying it's a shitty company, OK? Are they not allowed to say that because Thames Water is LITERALLY a shitty company? And only companies spewing actual non metaphorical shit can be shitty?
Also taking on some equivalent of "staving children in North Korea have it worse" is just lame. We all know that. No one's saying that google is equivalent to slave labour or some
Re: (Score:2)
People who don't understand hyperbole should be strung up in the town square, publicly eviscerated, and garlands hung of their entrails.
I prefer honesty when discussing things. Apparently you do not.
They're saying it's a shitty company, OK? Are they not allowed to say that because Thames Water is LITERALLY a shitty company? And only companies spewing actual non metaphorical shit can be shitty?
Then SAY it is a shitty company. I don't have issues with saying Google and Microsoft are terrible companies.
Also taking on some equivalent of "staving children in North Korea have it worse" is just lame. We all know that. No one's saying that google is equivalent to slave labour or some shit.
So being precise in my words offends you then. Hellscape has a meaning. Working in an office is not that meaning.
Wondering if you inveterately work from home because you appear to have forgotten how normal conversation works.
I am wondering why you would assume something about someone you know nothing about. By your logic, I must assume you kick dogs for fun based on your response. #whataboutism
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Welcome to the machine (Score:3)
Itâ(TM)s not a paradox. Your boss does not have any authority over you - you are in a contractual relationship with your boss. With the government though, you do not have the right to contract out of certain things, hence why people get quite het up over liberty and freedom as it relates to government.
Re:Welcome to the machine (Score:5, Insightful)
If I pay a guy to come mow my lawn, and instead he comes and pickets my house because he disagrees with my political views, and doesn't mow my lawn, why would I pay him?
Now, if he does the work, and then pickets my house, I'd still be obligated to pay him, but I'd probably also not ask him to come back.
Google is no different. They pay people to do work for them. If those people spend their hours protesting instead of doing the work that Google is paying them for, and prevent others from doing the work Google is paying them for, why should Google be obligated to pay them?
It gets a little murkier if they protest on their own time, it gets a little murkier, but not much. If you are actively working against the interests of your employer, they do have the right to fire you. And there is no ethical issue.
Uri Berliner criticized NPR on his own time, publishing a scathing article in the Free Press. https://www.thefp.com/p/npr-ed... [thefp.com] NPR suspended him, then essentially forced him to resign. As a conservative, I support NPR's right to punish and even fire him, even though I happen to agree with his criticisms.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've heard a philosopher say somewhere that one of the great paradoxes of American society is that we demand liberty in the public sphere, but we demand authoritarian control in the workplace. No kings, no lords, but your boss deserves your submission.
Unfortunately what I see here in America is - people demand liberty in their own public sphere, but authoritarian control over that of others. At least for those who gravitate towards either end of the political spectrum.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, pretty much. An important step in the Enshittifcation process.
Re: (Score:2)
Being a workplace is a norm at... a workplace. You're not supposed to "become" a machine like corporate office. You're supposed to "start" and "remain" that when it comes to office work. Because that's what a productive office looks like.
Google's problem is that they haven't hired people to work in a long time. Instead they hired for racial and sexual quotas and then selected from those candidates for with very specific extreme political opinions. And so they got exactly what they hired. Disruptive revoluti
Re: (Score:2)
I think many Google employees, especially those who've never worked anywhere else, treat Google like it as a university. And in the early days Google to promote this style of view. The main google buildings are clustered together and the employees treat the entire area as their own, including all the public streets which are NOT google property, which is why you see them not paying attention to stop signs or stop lights (drive extra slow if you're a visitor). They used to allow stude.. employees to work o
DUH (Score:5, Insightful)
Some people have a really warped perspective on what the 1st amendment actually entitles them to.
maybe the takeaway is smaller is better (Score:2)
perhaps having to give up what made your business worth existing is a sign that maybe you shouldn't be hundreds of thousands of employees big. maybe it would be better for everyone, including the competitive economy, if such large companies just weren't allowed.
IT IS ABOUT DAMN TIME! (Score:5, Insightful)
It is about time that Google stopped coddling its workers. You have a job, so do it. If your job includes protesting, then do THAT. It is doesn't, then STFU and GBTW.
Sorry 'whatever generation' this pisses off, but A:recognize how lucky you are to get those jobs and B: there are lots of people behind you that would snap them up in an instant if you keep playing games.
Re: (Score:3)
In this instance, I think the protesters were fools and they should have been fired and escorted out immediately.
However, "just shut up and be grateful you have work" is not a good attitude. That's how you get widespread abused of people who don't happen to be CEOs. And eventually violence.
Re: (Score:2)
Companies with that attitude aren't good to work for I avoid them. If I worked for Google I'd have left once the early days were over and it went corporate.
So take your pick. Be ethical and address employee concerns, or have more staff turnover and the good people with options leaving.
Re: (Score:2)
It's probably about time that Google stopped coddling profitable but questionable regimes. You seem to misunderstand that the people protesting were not worried about losing their job - they were worried about losing a good employer. To them, that employer is gone anyway.
Every regime is questionable ... when you look at them in certain ways ... and in this case apparently those ways are because they don't measure up to YOUR standards.
Personal standards are like butt cheeks ... everybody's got them and none of them look alike.
"Unconventional" (Score:2)
Sorry but this is just a load of horsecrap. At no point was Google ever some kind of altruistic company that would change massive and lucrative contracts on the basis of the whining of a couple of low level employees.
That Google never existed, even in the do no evil days. It was always a for profit enterprise and it always hired and fired employees who didn't perform like any other company.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, they put on a reasonable show about not being evil in the beginning when they needed to hire smart but clueless people. They clearly never believed any of that. I attended one of the Page/Brin recruitment shows way back and it gave me very strong cult vibes. That type of environment is not conductive to truth at all.
As citizens... (Score:2)
I bet Chase National Bank, Ford, & General Motors had similar attitudes to their workers whil
Re: (Score:2)
Please post citations regarding that right that you claim works have.
Go ahead, I'll wait ... I brought a book to help pass the time. /sarcasm
Re: (Score:2)
But what if Google's "job" IS social change? (Score:2)
There's a big disconnect here. OK, sure, Google is a "workplace", but a place for doing what kind of work? They talk about being on a mission of social change. Their list of Commitments [about.google] is long on sociology, but very short on engineering.
What normie Google consumers want is just solid products and services. There's a lot of excellent work in the Google product lineup, but there's still so much farther to go. Just yesterday I ran into another brain-dead limitation: regular expression replacement groups only
What is 'not evil' (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
If you believe the company you work for is doing something that qualifies as 'evil' you have some choices. Depending on the degree of evil the options range from 'look the other way' to 'sabotage'. In the middle are 'speak up' and 'quit'.
I can't imagine how anyone thinks a sit-in in the boss's office is anywhere on that spectrum. Google's certainly better off with those adult children off the payroll.
An expected outcome. (Score:3)
And yet, as an employee of a business, a fairly basic expectation is that you will not deliberately disrupt business operations. If these individuals went into this expecting to lose their job and did so anyway, that's commendable; they stood up for what they believed in at substantial personal cost, even if I think they may have an oversimplified and naive view of the situation. If they were expecting any other outcome than this, though... I don't know what to say besides "welcome to the real world."
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
My guess is that Pichai is more devoted to traditional Indian values than to traditional American ones. What that means for the future is hard to decipher: is it support for democratic values, or support for ethnic domination a la Modi.
He's a member of the ruling class (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:2)
Depending on the makeup of your population, democracy is just populism with a veneer of legitimacy. Sure, I'm talking about India here, but I'm not not talking about the US.
You're just using the word "populism" (Score:2)
I don't even know if you're aware you're doing it, but if not this is your signal to stop taking pot shots at Democracy.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Are Indian traditional values for "democratic values" or for "ethnic domination"? Hmm, I believe you meant "caste" which (maybe some Indian can chime in) is different than ethnic group (according to my understanding, though there might some overlap). Modi really doesn't seem to be for ethnic domination. India has 2000 ethnic groups, which ethnic group is he pushing for domination. Seems the 1,999 hasn't gotten wind of it because they seem to be voting for him. I doubt he is for caste domination because Ind
Re: (Score:3)
Try reading some real news.
Re: (Score:2)
Nowadays, university students chant ... "support Hamas"
Who is your favorite Corey? Corey Hamas or Corey Feldman?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re:Good for Sundar Pichai, good for America (Score:4, Interesting)
I asked them once "In terms of our political parties, who provided the greatest opposition to the Civil Rights era marches and the Civil Rights Act itself?" Their answer "Republicans of course!". I asked them which state probably had the most slaves. Their answer "Texas, of course!" I asked them "What is inflation" they answered "Prices going up". I asked what causes it and they said "Greedy corporations". I asked them how the Jews got to Israel and they answered "They took it away from the Arabs after WW2" I asked them "Did the Jews buy any of their land or live there before as far as you know?" Answer "No, they were invaders". I asked if the arabs fought for the Axis or the Allies (had to explain what that meant) they said "Allies". I asked about Freedom of Speech and they are mostly hostile "Free speech is used to bully minorities by old white men." I asked them what percentage they think old white guys are notably racist. Answer "99%". Okay what about Sexist? "95%". I asked how many are pedophiles. They answer "probably at least 50%" I asked if healthcare and education should be free. "Absolutely" I asked who should pay for it "Rich people." I asked how. "Income taxes and seizure of their assets" I asked if rich folks were better or worse than drug dealers "About the same"
There were only a few "bright" spots. I asked if the government is trustworthy. Answer "Hell, no." I asked if the government would do a good job of administering all the new benefits they want "No, they should give us money instead". I asked if censorship was a good thing "No, not really, not on music." I asked what about censoring medical information during covid "We didn't pay attention to any of it anyway" I asked if the government should take away freedom of movement for any disfavored group "Hell no." What about if the disfavored group was a bunch of old white Republicans "Okay then, yeah."
So, these days we skate and I don't talk to them about politics, history, or anything that would upset their fragile (and completely wrong) view of reality. It's okay, because they aren't that interested anyway (some small saving grace). However, if you think there are only seven (7) lefty idiots on campus chanting ridiculous counterproductive bullshit, you're just flat wrong. It's likely to be a very significant portion of the student body.
Re: (Score:3)
You got baited and then kept along.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I live in an urban area and they are all urban kids (I grew up with farm kids). Not a single one of them can see the American flag without making a derogatory comment. They automatically look down on folks wearing any type of red/white/blue or patriotic clothing or accessories.
I'm guessing that folks using the US flag as an accessory are generally pushing a fairly specific political belief.
I'm in Canada and a bunch of a-hole truckers and their followers blockaded the Capital and border crossings to try and blackmail the rest of the country. And of course they flew Canadian flags everywhere to pretend like they were being patriotic.
I love my country and my flag, but if I see some truck driving around with a Canadian flag I know it's probably some Fox-News watching Trump fanboy who
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Except when employees break the law and support a terrorist organization.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:open discussion? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, if they were *vaguely* protesting Israel's actions with respect to the Palestinians, maybe you have a point, though it's a good way to have your protests be utterly ignored and just be a "make yourself feel better" behavior rather than trying to encourage change.
But in this case, they were specifically protesting Google's direct involvement. So being deliberately disruptive at work would be pretty on point for such a protest. Now is Google within their reasonable rights to dismiss them? Sure, and i
Re:It's a place of business, not protest. (Score:4, Interesting)
This makes for a pretty effective protest, among a sea of protests that are pretty bad.
They didn't actually harm anyone or anything, they put something on the line (their jobs), they raised awareness of the situation *and* Google's role in it.
Contrast with stupid stuff like random looting or tossing food at unrelated art.
Re: (Score:3)
The voices in favor of the oppression of the ruling class and of genocide are misguided at best, and propagandists at worst.
History will look back at this and wonder what people were thinking. I already wasn't using Google for anything, so I can't get more against them than I am, but someone somewhere must be getting the message here.
Re: (Score:2)
Which is it? The 1940s or the 19th century?
Re:It's beyond blame (Score:5, Insightful)
Israel will never give that land back via negotiation. I'm stating bald fact. They know their long-term survival depends on a more-or-less ethnically and culturally monolithic state with defensible borders, and they'll do what they need to, to get that.
The quandary is that you have a nuclear armed regime prepared to commit literally any atrocities to get its way. The solution that doesn't involve many millions of deaths is beyond me.
Re: (Score:2)
Israel's leadership, sure. It seems like, on average, the citizens get along much better than that.
Re: (Score:2)
On average everyone gets along. But the world isn't run on averages. It's run on a vocal minority, as Yitzhak Rabin found out the hard way after supporting the Oslo Accords. He was "leadership" and he was "better". Unfortunately he got assassinated by a citizen of his who disagreed with his policy.
Don't pretend that this problem lies only at the leadership level. People elected these leaders, Benjamin Netanyahu is not a dictator.
Re: (Score:2)
The quandary is that you have a nuclear armed regime prepared to commit literally any atrocities to get its way.
That's pretty obviously false given that Israel has not used those nukes. They've had repeated opportunities to nuke targets in Gaza, or nuke targets in Syria and Iran and have not done so. That shows that your second half of your sentence is pretty obviously false.
Re: (Score:2)
> Israel will never give that land back via negotiation.
That's why outside pressure needs to be applied.
> They know their long-term survival depends on...
It also depends on peace. The Muslim/Arab world will never be happy if they keep the West Bank. Give them the West Bank back and they'll have only tiny gripes left and the next generation(s) may eventually get over it. Yes, I know that's idealistic, but it's also idealistic to believe constant warfare will solve it.
"If we just bonk the other guy hard
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree. I just didn't take it to the logical conclusion. It seems unpopular here to lead people to the end result. It's like recovery - before you are ready for the truth, that your views are wrong and you need to change, you are diametrically opposed it. In this way, arguing with people over this issue is like arguing with an alcoholic - pointless.
Re: (Score:3)
Israel will never give that land back via negotiation. I'm stating bald fact.
The problem is that there's currently a lot of Palestinians currently living on that land that Israel.
They know their long-term survival depends on a more-or-less ethnically and culturally monolithic state with defensible borders, and they'll do what they need to, to get that.
The best defended borders are border without enemies on the other side.
Israel's issue isn't that they need to take all the land "from the river to the sea" in order to have a defensible state. The issue is the conquest of land is really tempting (precisely the reason it's illegal) and Israel has found itself occupying a lot of land that a portion of their population really wants to keep.
The Settlers have fi
Re: (Score:2)
Both sides are bigly assholes. Any argument over who is the biggest a-hole is pointless, as they both exceeded their quota. Outsiders, including US, will need to pressure them into a two-state solution
if only the us weren't the even bigger asshole.
hamas (not palestinians) is a tiny bigly asshole that came into existence under ruthless oppression.
zionists (not jews, not israelis) are a small bigly asshole that came into existence as fallout from reckless colonialism.
us elite and the israely lobby are probably the biggest bigly asshole on the planet (i'm still wondering how that aberration came into existence) who is actually enabling this crap and keeps it going so that scores of regular people who (mostl
Re: (Score:2)
edit:
if only the us weren't the even bigger asshole.
hamas (not palestinians) is a tiny bigly asshole that came into existence under ruthless oppression.
zionists (not jews, not israelis) are a small bigly asshole that came into existence as fallout from reckless colonialism.
us elite and the israeli lobby (not the us) are probably the biggest bigly asshole on the planet (i'm still wondering how that aberration came into existence) who is actually enabling this crap and keeps it going so that scores of regular
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. War-criminals vs. terrorists? Really not much of a difference. Both like to kill larger numbers of unarmed civilians and the lie about it. You know, evil.
Hamas, a terrorist death cult (leadership exempt) (Score:2)
USA just vetoed statehood in UN security council.
Of course, The current government of Gaza is Hamas, a terroristic death cult. To be clear, the death cult aspect does not apply to Hamas leadership, only their minions and ordinary Palestinians need to sacrifice themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
Now can they start hunting down the woke employees destroying YouTube?
No need; the increasing percentages of unskippable ads will destroy it eventually, regardless of other factors.