I’m not saying Trump’s tariff proposal is a good idea (I don’t know enough relevant economics) but that article’s own chart shows that tariffs increased to Trump levels after the Great Depression started and then declined back to below Trump levels several years before the Great Depression ended. I don’t think the data in the article supports the article’s link of high tariffs and the Great Depression.

The Washington Free Beacon makes no attempt to present itself as non-partisan but does provide photos. I can’t verify that those photos are authentic but I assume that the NYT, CNN, etc. have verified them before publishing this story.

Edit: I also found this additional newspaper clipping, which appears to be the source for the following claim:

And a story published in another Nebraska paper on August 11 that year said he would “leave Sunday en route to China” after having “about given up participating [in WorldTeach] earlier this summer during the student revolts in parts of China.”

It’s pretty tame, and I wouldn’t even have been sure that it was meant to be critical of Trump rather than a misguided attempt to support him if the article hadn’t said so.

Doing things like this when you’re certainly being recorded is a great idea. Wait, hold on…

You’re right. I stand corrected.

the size/capability of violence

That’s, uh, not a small difference. Even if you’re saying that one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter, neither the terrorist nor the freedom fighter are comparable to a large, powerful country.

Edit: One more interesting difference is that because a country has a much greater capability to wage war, it also has much more to lose in war: it can lose that very capability. A small group of irregular fighters does not depend much on infrastructure, but a country has population centers, factories, military bases, the seat of government, etc. which are all vulnerable in a way that a hidden cave or tunnel isn’t. We’re seeing the effects of this distinction between Iran and its proxies play out right now.

Those don’t look like garlic flowers to me.

How do most people in Iran and among its allies perceive it? As a show of force or as a failure? (How did they perceive the similar April attack?)

The IDF is saying no Israelis were wounded. I’m seeing reports of explosions in populated areas, but the people there would have had time to get to shelters. I’m hoping that this has been like the April attack, but I think we can’t know with confidence until enough time has passed to see the full picture.

Well shit. Unless there has been another miracle interception, things are going to get a lot worse now.

Hah, I had such a huge crush on one of my sister’s friends when I was a teenager. I kept trying to hang out with her and my sister despite her polite, total disinterest. I miss feeling that sort of excitement.

I think people are generally slow to realize that they are in a life-or-death situation. I’m not talking about just the victims here, but rather about everyone accustomed to living in safety (including the bosses who told the victims to stay). We’re so used to making choices where death is not a potential outcome that we simply don’t take the possibility into account.

I was in downtown Manhattan on 9/11, close enough to the World Trade Center that I felt the building I was in shake when the towers were hit. The funny thing is that I wasn’t scared. I wasn’t even horrified. I couldn’t see the towers from my window but I watched the smoke rising and experienced only a strange excitement. I didn’t leave the area until they told us to, hours later. (I don’t blame them. They were as stunned as I was.) The whole thing didn’t feel real.

Now I know that I was in absolutely no danger (except from all the pollutants I ended up breathing after they eventually made us come back to the area before the air was clean) but I couldn’t have known that at the time.

Edit: The thing with the pollutants is a good example too. I could smell that the air wasn’t clean; everyone could. They told us that they were monitoring the air quality and I trusted them despite having my throat sore by the time I went home every day from the irritants in the dust I was breathing. Hell, I could see the dust rising nearby when cranes loaded debris from the towers onto barges and I still just did what I was told with no objections.

Are you implying that Israel’s much greater number of attacks are because they are doing really tiny attacks or something?

No, I’m just saying the graph is probably useless. Israel definitely is launching more and larger attacks, because that’s how you win a war. Ideally Hezbollah would be launching zero attacks because Israel launched the massive number of attacks necessary to cripple Hezbollah. A little red bar, then a big blue bar, and finally no red bar at all.

Israel is doing bigger strikes with less concern for civilian casualties.

Is this a joke? Hezbollah usually attacks with unguided rockets. This demonstrates zero concern for civilian casualties. Less than zero, actually, because the intent of the attacks is to cause civilian casualties. Relatively few Israeli civilians have died because Israel is successfully defending them, not because Hezbollah’s policy regarding Israeli civilians is different from that of Hamas.

A cease fire in Gaza would achieve this.

Even if that is true (and it would only be true in the short term) then Israel would still be foolish to make major concessions to its persistent enemies when it has the military power necessary not to. Meanwhile Hezbollah would be more inclined to launch future attacks because it would see that they worked.

I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make by counting the number of individual attacks. In a war, you want to be attacking the enemy while preventing the enemy from attacking you. To the extent that this chart is meaningful (and I’m not sure it is, given that it does not take the size of an attack into account) it’s just showing that Israel appears to be fighting Hezbollah effectively - Israeli victory would mean reducing the red bars to zero.

That’s what usually happens during a war… Hezbollah is effectively the army of Lebanon. The fact that Lebanon’s government does not officially call it that does not change the reality on the ground.

She’s single, you know…

You underestimate the power of the Dark Side.

Unfortunately it’s fake.

Meanwhile Simba has a perfectly good mother.

Let’s put the issue of Israel aside and consider slavery in the USA before the Civil War. There was plenty of oppression but effectively no resistance. The deadliest slave revolt (for white people) involved about 60 casualties before all the slaves involved were quickly captured and executed, and this revolt was so out of the ordinary that it shocked the nation. Almost all human beings do not in fact rise up against their oppressors when they think that doing so will just get them killed. When there’s no power vacuum left by a weak central government, an organized insurgency has no room to form and so people will tolerate anything.

The idea that human nature includes an unquenchable flame of defiance may be appealing but it is simply false. Otherwise we’d see insurgents in North Korea.