sidis

i was being sarcastic about deej's post. i used the middle pic that actually is RJ.

Damnit, that's the one i used for my little RJ silly tune.

get it right...that idiotic mythology goes: "when asked what it is like to be the world's best guitarist...clapton said 'ask prince.'" list totally invalidated by not having @Goredho and @Celery Man in the top 50 imo.

you probably just need to check the manufacturer of your mixer to see if they have a driver update for osx sonoma. any time you do one of the major osx updates from one name to another, you are usually going to slightly jack with those. it usually takes all the plugin and hardware companies about a month to update their software to play nice...so it is a good idea to wait for a month or two before updating your mac to new osx version if you are using it heavily for music.

You knew it was coming...as will all the eye rolls of the lists' perceived slights and errors. But regardless... https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-lists/best-guitarists-1234814010/chuck-berry-14-1234814185/ getting the outrage controversy started...my submission is the notion of SRV at 20 behind some of the people in front of him is silly. i will go ahead and voice @BrickHorn's outrage of prince being 14 even thought it is one i'd probably agree with.

you do make a fair point that there are an infinite number of alternative realpolitik paths that...frankly, would end much better than the current path. the u.s., the e.u., and the gulf states could impose some good alternatives. but it would be necessary to engage at a rational and practical level for those and that's simply not realistic in the short-term unfortunately given the impassioned moral and ideological states of the belligerents. unfortunately, those are the choices once a direct response is executed. in any alternative you propose that isn't simply idealistic, there is certainly suffering.

of course it does. maybe brisket's hyper-emotional and dramatic language characterizing a revelations like battle for the soul of humankind confuses it, sure...but there remains a legitimate inquiry. you've been ruthlessly attacked by an aggressor. that aggressor strategically retreats behind civilians. you hold categorically that above all things, no civilians can be harmed. you're then faced with the inquiry...accept the violence perpetrated and say sorry as chainsaw has suggested or respond in-kind with violence knowing civilians will be inevitably harmed as brisket suggests?

hate getting dragged into this because there is no right and wrong on all of this unfortunately...just posturing (lots of it sanctimonious) from every angle from largely unaffected observers leveraging this for entertainment and to pass the time. however, to this specific point...germany and japan were brought to heel by annihilation with literally (not figuratively) the most destructive force the world has ever seen and the complete and utter slaughter of civilians to devastating effect and subsequently, were effectively neutered for half a century by the rest of the world imposing violent threat. at least 25,000 people were killed in dresden alone. across all the bombing campaigns, at least 350,000 german civilians. 200,000-300,000 people were killed in hiroshima and nagasaki alone. what the world was willing to do to "rehabilitate" germany and japan far exceeded the atrocities of anything ever since. and there is a very strong and persuasive argument that they were justified...as well as strong and persuasive arguments that they were not. but at the end of the day, their societal "evil" was snuffed out by learning in the grossest possible way that they could not impose violence as effectively as their adversaries...and it was their fault. but if you are going to point to germany and japan as wonderful test cases of rehabilitation, you cannot ignore the violence perpetrated on them to bring them there...which is what israel would absolutely love to do right now. just keep that in mind while waxing poetic about the nature of humanity...particularly when you have never been faced with legitimate threats to survival. @SydneyCarton's post above generally captures to reality here imo. brisket and others are acting emotionally. no doubt about it. but they do pose a realpolitik inquiry that is just being conveniently ignored by those who have the luxury of projecting self-righteousness on this message board and saying "well i don't need to answer your question because i can't." no rational person wants civilians to die, that's a given. note: when i say rational person, that does not include the many pieces of shit we have on this board that get off to the idea of palestinian genocide. but if one accepts that hamas is strategically utilizing civilians as shields and that hamas has acted belligerently in a barbaric way...and then impose the notion of "you are not allowed to have any civilian collateral damage under any circumstances," then one is truly at an impasse. and so what is israel to do if one believes they have a right to respond...when the only response inevitably includes collateral damage due to the tactics of the adversary? dispassionately stating categorically and unequivocally that israel should not kill palestinian civilians does not make you righteous, particularly from the comforts of the other side of the globe. it is a basic position of any decent person and it is what any reasonable person believes. but if one adopts that categorical imperative in a context in which hamas has demonstrated a willingness to strike at your civilians violently and then retreat behind the walls of hospitals to avoid reprisal, then one is faced with the question...what can israel reasonably do? don't hide behind not being a "military strategist." you have to confront that reality: either israel can do nothing in service of avoiding civilian casualties at all costs given hamas's strategy and must just absorb the violence as a reprisal for their past sins (which are many)...or you have to allow for some gross consequences that will undoubtedly be abused by an emotional aggressor that has just been severely hurt. and of course, EVERYTHING i just said can be reasonably flipped on the other side in this particular scenario. to huckleberry and wildcat's point...if you are a member of an oppressed and abused underclass of society and you unjustly exist in a prison-esque state of apartheid for generations, one is faced with the realpolitik inquiry of do you demonstrate a willingness to impose violence en masse to your oppressors to impose change and are your barbaric acts justified by that? strong and persuasive argument for. strong and persuasive argument that you should also not indiscriminately murder children. it's tragically why this is so nasty and has been for a very long time. it is one of the worst manifestations of humanity we have conjured in our time. and unfortunately, it will continue to be until i become king and euthanize everyone on the planet besides me and all the italian women that look like monica bellucci, the spanish women that look like penelope cruz, the south american women that look like ana de armas. tldr: i love hot mediterranean and south american women and everyone else should leave them and me alone.

it exists in order to utilize useful idiots like the poster here to sow discord and make people scared.

I volunteer to be responsible for assessing exacerbated cleavages.

cross posting this from the cr thread in response to your tweet. israel is faced with deciding whether it wants to buck the notion that there is no military solution to counterterrorism. it's not that there isn't a solution...it's just that it is not palatable to most of the western world. other parts of the world have less queasiness about it. ask the tamil tigers in sri lanka. but roughly 20k civilians were killed as a result. if israel goes this route, they are going to have to be ready to go full out war because such action will result in a full engagement of iran not only through hamas but also from the north through hezbollah who has a whole bunch (between 100k-150k) of long range missiles that can overwhelm the iron dome...as well as militants in the west bank engaging. with that type of three front situation, israel will be potentially forced into engaging iran directly in order for it to pressure iran to call off its henchmen. the magnitude of the civilian hostages that were seized makes the calculus much more complex in the near term. if third party back channels don't do a lot of work to get some resolution on this and finding some fall guy trophies, this is going to get even nastier. the u.s., gulf state, and iran unofficial lines of communication need to get something done.

i think this line appropriately applies to anyone trying to distill anything related to israel and palestine to anything simple and one-sided. just a reminder...

saudi arabia officially severed relations with hamas in 2007 and has not been friendly since. s.a. largely sees them as an arm of iran and the muslim brotherhood which they treat adversarial. that said, hamas has been making an effort to thaw relations with them for the last few months and they are both "sunni."

israel is faced with deciding whether it wants to buck the notion that there is no military solution to counterterrorism. it's not that there isn't a solution...it's just that it is not palatable to most of the western world. other parts of the world have less queasiness about it. ask the tamil tigers in sri lanka. but roughly 20k civilians were killed as a result. if israel goes this route, they are going to have to be ready to go full out war because such action will result in a full engagement of iran not only through hamas but also from the north through hezbollah who has a whole bunch (between 100k-150k) of long range missiles that can overwhelm the iron dome...as well as militants in the west bank engaging. with that type of three front situation, israel will be potentially forced into engaging iran directly in order for it to pressure iran to call off its henchmen. the magnitude of the civilian hostages that were seized makes the calculus much more complex in the near term. if third party back channels don't do a lot of work to get some resolution on this and finding some fall guy trophies, this is going to get even nastier. the u.s., gulf state, and iran unofficial lines of communication need to get something done.

you're right...campbell and alvarez look the same to me for some reason. /alittleracist

if you want to give me $150 million ameros, i will take them.

was screaming at the tv. but it was david alvarez's crew...the same crew that had the alabama game last year. quite literally, the worst of all time. someone in the booth should have been screaming to steve to go talk to the refs about starting the clock. that no one noticed or cared should be the end for someone.

it is 1,300 miles from austin to the whales vagina. a million a mile as the crow flies buys you to the eastern edge of yuma.

absolutely. probably the single largest variable of the last three minutes contributing to ou's win.

had the clock been moving, i suspect our behavior would have altered significantly. i think it was an enormous contributing variable to ou's win.

he didn't...which is weird because they had hit their stride other than one shit play.

it is not a straw man. i am just pointing out what i believe was going through steve's mind. best of all worlds is we don't stop the clock and get the first down. unfortunately, only one of the outcomes occurred (ou having to use its last timeout). at the end of the day, as i said, i am super frustrated that steve made the call he did. given their cb and bowman being out...and them doing the same stupid ass prevent stuff we lost the game with, there was an easy ten yards for 5, 13, 1...hell, anyone. i think a a johntay cook appearance there would have been perfect. it was there for the taking and we went conservative. there is a persuasive case to be made for it but in the moment, i wanted us to go for the first down through the air.

i was ready to drag dead ou fans and dillon gabriel through the street naked and spit on him on saturday at 3pm so... look, this is about as impossible as it gets. it really is unfortunately and i hate it. i used to spend a lot of time involved in advocacy related to israel/palestine and doing economic work to try and move the stakeholders forward. everyone who believes that israel is pure or even superior on this should read "fallen pillars." anyone that thinks that the palestinians are purely victims in this thing is delusional and unfamiliar with how the biggest political benefactors were trading on others' suffering. this whole thing would require abating the worst and most natural instincts of humankind. people acting like they can't possibly contemplate being so animal as to parade dead israelis through the streets have also never had their loved ones mercilessly and needlessly murdered in front of their eyes. you might be surprised what you are capable of in that scenario. which, of course, does not excuse acting as extremists in palestine have. the cycle is so fucking wretched and there is empathy for both positions from the outside. but from the inside, it is about hate and survival every single day. and over one of the ugliest and shittiest places ever. that's what makes the irrational religious element of it so crazy to me. that this all-time dispute exists over fucking israel and not over san diego or french polynesia is bizarre.

quinn was what he is...a mixed bag. first two ints were on him. first one was all-time horrible and looked like pure jittery nerves. second one was practically a half-hour late on the throw. the fumble was super bad because he never should have taken that hit like that given the location on the field. other than that, he actually played pretty well though we had to settle for a fg after the completed deep pass to xavier where if he throws a better pass, that's a td.

on third and 9, steve was playing for the same scenario as alabama. remember, on the key third and long driving at the end, we ran brooks up the middle and it worked and we all called it a genius move...because it worked. ou was ready for it and i think it was a mistake. the reason i thought it was a mistake was because the short passing game was there to be had. their best cb had to go out and two plays earlier on the first down, bowman idiotically targeted xavier and got hurt. don't know if anyone else noticed this but bowman going down had an enormous unintended impact. specifically, the officials never restarted the clock after he went down until we snapped the ball on first down. even though the clock should have obviously stopped for the first down, it would restart after the ball was set. but because of bowman's injury, they stopped the clock and they never restarted it on first down. had they, it would have put the clock at closer to 40 seconds at the time of the fg. the other thing is it should have been targeting and moved the ball downfield. but either way, bowman is their best player and he was out. we should have have tried to get that damned first down in the passing game imo regardless of 20/20 hindsight. biggest mistake on first and goal from the 1 imo (and i was screaming it as it happened) was the stupid decision to totally change the offense and sub everyone out for the heavy set. that was super fucking dumb. just get down there, go fast, line up, and run it in for the td. ou was fucking gassed at the end of the drive. because we subbed, ou was able to sub their entire defense and bow up on the line. also, running out a million huge guys meant we weren't multiple but totally predictable for three straight plays. that was some of the worst coaching i have seen from sark imo. they should have never subbed and given ou the opportunity to reset.