There are exceptions to that, anything fairly novel will drive a spike in interest, and answer-seeking behavior. I'm really on the fence with this one.

I'm not sure I agree, I think 4 months is enough time. It would hinge on her though, and how effectively she can be genuine and communicate.

I suppose I wish that destroying western goodwill was a viable way to halt a genocide.

Most people just don't know that much about Kamala, she's fairly new to politics and hasn't been in the limelight very often.

Usually just a small handful of speeches and interviews, maybe. She's largely an unknown though. A Presidential race would change that quickly, though its hard to predict exactly how.

Notably, the right has used her largely unknown status to smear her for years now, not too different from how they got an early start smearing Hilary.

The results are exactly what I'm concerned with. As I said, I think the result for the Palestinian people is going to be a worsening of the situation for Palestinians. Not a bettering. More dead and less rights. Not more rights and freedoms.

That said, I do not have any ideas for how to actually accomplish a two state solution.

I also don't see how engaging in good faith negotiations automatically makes them working for a good cause. Anyone can engage in negotiations any time it benefits them to do so.

Yeah, it'll be important to check the work.

I think there are other possible conclusions that are less about anything good and more about destroying perceived enemies.

When I say we, I'm speaking as an American, and more generally talking about the broader world. We stepped in in Kosovo, we stepped in with the Yazidis. Far more often, though, the world does not police genocide attempts. It protests them, tries to apply the international justice system to the perpetrators, but does not take strong measures to halt the killing.

Here's a list for the past 24 years:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history_(21st_century)

Generally speaking, we do not police the world, and instead leave local affairs in the hands of whatever country they are happening in, for the vast, vast majority of countries. This makes any strategy to try to halt a genocide by appealing to the world unlikely to succeed. Netanyahu knows this, and is probably counting on it. While I support a Two State Solution, I don't think this is good strategy for accomplishing it, and is far more likely to accelerate the destruction of the Palestinian people.

I don't see hamas as freedom fighters at all. I see them as misguided jihadists with an effective propaganda wing and a savvy sense for politics.

I appreciate the sentiment, but somebody should've pointed out to them how many genocides we've stopped vs how many we've allowed to happen over the past half century.

I don't think Oct 7th was about Palestinian freedom, at any rate. I don't think hamas leaders living in the UAE give a rats ass about the survival of Gazan citizens. They're just another tool to be taken advantage of. If hamas was really interested in Palestinian freedom, they would have granted elections in the region they controlled.

These kinds of projects are good for crowd sourcing. Nobody has read all 900 pages, and watched all the speeches and read all the articles, etc etc. But the community taken together, can. Or at least come much closer anyway.

They were proud of it up until not long ago, trusting to the ignorance of the "average American" about policy details. Then the Supreme Court ruling came.

Whoever added the citations to this is doing extremely important work. It needs to be finished though.

That doesn't even look poured, haven't they ever seen a grout line? It looks like a shaped piece, where you're not quite able to get it completely perfect, just really close.