My local model gave me this, I’m gonna go with this.

"The statement you’ve shared expresses a strong viewpoint on a highly complex and deeply contentious issue. While it’s rooted in real events—such as the displacement of Palestinians and the loss of civilian life—the way it’s framed is not fully accurate or nuanced when examined from a factual and historical perspective. Here’s a breakdown:

What’s true:

1. Displacement and Land Loss:

In 1948, the creation of the state of Israel was followed by war and the displacement of approximately 700,000 Palestinians—this is known as the Nakba (“catastrophe” in Arabic).

Since then, Palestinians have lost significant territory, and many still live as refugees or under occupation in the West Bank and Gaza.

2. Civilian Deaths:

Thousands of Palestinian civilians have indeed been killed over decades, especially in Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.

Civilian casualties are a well-documented and tragic part of the conflict.

What’s oversimplified or inaccurate:

1. “Uncomplicated conflict”:

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is widely regarded by historians, diplomats, and political scientists as one of the most complex geopolitical conflicts in modern history, involving:

Colonial history (British Mandate)

Competing nationalisms

Religion

Refugee crises

International law

Military occupation and terrorism

Internal divisions within both Israeli and Palestinian societies

2. Moral Equivalence to the Holocaust:

Comparing the conflict to the Holocaust, where 6 million Jews were systematically murdered in a state-run genocide, is historically and morally problematic.

The Holocaust was a uniquely industrialized genocide driven by Nazi ideology. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, while tragic and violent, is not a genocide by definition, though some may argue aspects of it have genocidal characteristics.

The comparison risks minimizing the Holocaust and oversimplifying the current conflict.

3. Palestinians “fighting back” like Jews in WWII:

Jews under Nazi rule had almost no means of organized resistance, facing a totalitarian regime bent on extermination.

Palestinians, particularly groups like Hamas, do engage in armed resistance and terrorism, including rocket attacks and suicide bombings, which target civilians and are widely condemned internationally.

This is not morally or tactically equivalent to the Jewish resistance in WWII.

Conclusion:

Your statement reflects a valid emotional and moral reaction to real suffering and injustice. However, from a factual and historical standpoint, it oversimplifies a deeply complex situation and makes inappropriate historical analogies.

If you’re interested, I can offer a more balanced summary of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the key historical events."

Doesnt even kind of answer my question.

Can anyone tell me who’s actually right that GD conflict, at this point I think we’d be better off nuking the area and going on with life. Its been decades, time for actual resolution.

I used plex like a decade ago is it still the only decent option for gile share streaming?

Removed by mod

Selective destruction of establishments is next guys, keep it up!

Oh no! My feelings!

Tldr

Likely to get him to stay in the position because the board or whatever thinks he is worth that much to keep on. I’m not saying they got their moneys worth but they obviously thought so. They arent handing him a bonus as big as that as a pat on the back.

I didn’t read past the abject lie that is “A lot of Batistas work full the jobs actually”.

Sorry, I just assumed because you seemed to be at about that level.

Okay, you go do whatever you can to that face and come back and tell me what changed. The answer will be nothing.

By shit work i mean unskilled labour basically. It’s not worth much for a reason. I dont see why you would ask me that.

Some business operate on unskilled labour, it shouldnt be a surprise that its not paid well, just because something doesnt pay well doesnt mean the company shouldnt exist, and since when did anyone expect that a part time job at startbucks could or should be able to fully support a person? That’s fucking ludicrous. And before you start with people have to take what they can get, yes thats true and starbucks isnt responsible for that shortfall, in a real socialist democracy, that should be taken up by welfare if needed.

I understand the gut reaction to go after the CEO or board for making decisions that affect so many people, but it doesnt help, its misdirected energy that should go to the government.

We cant expect any company to do what in the interest of the workers, unless its financially beneficial. The best way to handle this is to use government to reign in corps to limits we can be happy with.

I stand by all I’ve said, but I respect your position, i just think it’s misguided.

Cyberpunk 2025

There’s a fucking recession coming you dolt, ofcourse large companies are going to dump people, and it doesnt take a psychopath to do it.

Your hearts in the right place, but if you cant be realistic about the why and how of running a business, i dont want your opinions.

Oh so that’s their reason is it, make number look good, company be strong.

It wouldnt be because of your idiot president causing a recession where more people wont be able to afford to buy coffee as often? You dont think that could be a contributing factor?

I don’t believe that, you’ve just attached that to my argument because you either can’t understand my point or don’t want to.

Why would I do that.

Lol, okay, blame starbucks all you want, it’s a faceless entity. You could be mad at the politicians who set you up to instantly fall into desperation the moment you lose a minimum wage job, but if you want to be mad and ineffectual at the same time, be my guest.

I don’t know why people think large companies aren’t allowed to get rid of people when they want to? And especially Starbucks, it’s shit-work, not a 20y long career maker.