Conflict between Palestine and Israel escalates

[Seanchaidh]

My argument didn't really hinge on any of this, & I've never worked for a travel agency (!?!).

I'm just waiting for the insistent misrepresentation to stop at this point.

Maybe you should summarize your argument instead of repeatedly disavowing what your argument (supposedly) isn't in a way that doesn't make it at all clear what your argument actually is. Honestly, right now I'm not even sure what your conclusion is, to say nothing of the premises.

Quick question: have you ever worked in a field dealing with travel or logistics etc? I have.

!?!

I think "travel agency experience (or whatever)" is a perfectly accurate (albeit dismissive-- deservedly so) way to summarize what you so vaguely described.

And if I suggested that because the capacity for something is 2k, therefore we can expect 2k every day consistently for 3 years, people would look at me like I'd lost my mind.

Are these people simpletons who don't understand that interpreting what a number means depends on context and assumptions?

until Senchaidh pointed out that the number was a political agreement, not an infrastructure project, and thus accomplishing 2000 a day would be extremely feasible. Now your argument is nothing, but you can't admit it.

I don't actually know what the 2000 number refers to. I'm morbidly curious to see something more substantive about it. I have lots of ideas of what it could be. I have trouble believing it's a physical limitation of a passageway; that seems like nonsense. Is it X number of rooms to work out the documentation of individuals every Y number of minutes? Is it in fact just a political limitation; "we'll send 2000 per day so as not to overburden you with paperwork"? These are questions, not answers.

In any case, I assume that the main limitation in practice is actually Palestinians resisting their expulsion. As it would be under any American president.

 

[Silvanus]

As soon as you stop misrepresenting your own arguments for the past few pages now that you've got egg on your face. It's very telling that you won't say what the argument is now

Because, as I told you, I really just want the discussion to end. I'm only responding to correct misrepresentations or personal smears, and waiting until you stop.

If you want to bow out, fine, but I'm going to leave this here as the statement

If it's misinterpretation, explain yourself better. This one statement is you contradicting yourself in one post.

That's not contradictory. One can have an undertaking that is massive, and a tool that's minuscule for the job-- even if said tool is technically capable of fulfilling it.

 

[Silvanus]

Maybe you should summarize your argument instead of repeatedly disavowing what your argument (supposedly) isn't in a way that doesn't make it at all clear what your argument actually is.

I've already summarised my argument numerous times over the past pages. I then wanted the discussion to end after we weren't making any headway, but crimson was unwilling to let it drop. As I've said I'm now responding solely to correct misrepresentations, waiting for you guys to stop.

Most of the rest of the post is just vague denigration, so we can skip that.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

I don't actually know what the 2000 number refers to. I'm morbidly curious to see something more substantive about it. I have lots of ideas of what it could be. I have trouble believing it's a physical limitation of a passageway; that seems like nonsense. Is it X number of rooms to work out the documentation of individuals every Y number of minutes? Is it in fact just a political limitation; "we'll send 2000 per day so as not to overburden you with paperwork"? These are questions, not answers.

In any case, I assume that the main limitation in practice is actually Palestinians resisting their expulsion. As it would be under any American president.

It came from a CNN article.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/11/politics/us-talks-safe-passage-gaza/index.html

The official with knowledge of the negotiations told CNN’s Matthew Chance Wednesday that under the proposal being discussed, all US citizens would be permitted to pass through the Rafah border crossing if they present their US passports, while the movement of other Palestinian civilians would be limited to 2,000 people a day.

Because, as I told you, I really just want the discussion to end. I'm only responding to correct misrepresentations or personal smears, and waiting until you stop.



That's not contradictory. One can have an undertaking that is massive, and a tool that's minuscule for the job-- even if said tool is technically capable of fulfilling it.

That is literally contradictory because those two statements are identical. 2.2 million in 3 years = 2000 a day.

 

[Silvanus]

That is literally contradictory because those two statements are identical. 2.2 million in 3 years = 2000 a day.

One is a description of the scope of the undertaking. The latter is a description of the tool.

Even if the tool is technically capable of fulfilling the undertaking, it is not 'contradictory' to refer to the undertaking as big and the tool as relatively small for the job.

OK? Can we drop this yet?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

One is a description of the scope of the undertaking. The latter is a description of the tool.

Even if the tool is technically capable of fulfilling the undertaking, it is not 'contradictory' to refer to the undertaking as big and the tool as relatively small for the job.

OK? Can we drop this yet?

How is it too small?

 

[Seanchaidh]

It came from a CNN article.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/10/11/politics/us-talks-safe-passage-gaza/index.html

" The official with knowledge of the negotiations told CNN’s Matthew Chance Wednesday that under the proposal being discussed, all US citizens would be permitted to pass through the Rafah border crossing if they present their US passports, while the movement of other Palestinian civilians would be limited to 2,000 people a day. "

Ok, yeah, that is very vague. Though it does sound more like a political limitation than one of infrastructure given that we're distinguishing a class of people to be limited to 2000 per day, while US citizens who present a passport can simply pass through without apparent limitation. It is conceivable that the reasoning is that Palestinians would need more time to be identified and documented or whatever-- that there would need to be infrastructure to accommodate that, but on the other hand such things don't have to be handled at a border crossing. You can literally just load people into buses and have them go elsewhere in the country for whatever paperwork and administration is deemed to be required.

 

[Silvanus]

How is it too small?

We've already gone over all this stuff a half dozen times from every angle. Let's let it drop.

 

[tstorm823]

We've already gone over all this stuff a half dozen times from every angle. Let's let it drop.

Not responding would be more effective than responding just to suggest stopping.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

We've already gone over all this stuff a half dozen times from every angle. Let's let it drop.

No we haven't. Not in any meaningful way. You can't describe in any sensible manner how it is too small. As I pointed out, delaying past 3 years isn't a big deal, because even 4 or 5 years is very reliable. You then said it would take 6 or 9 years based on "trust me bro".

 

[Seanchaidh]

 

[Seanchaidh]