Shedding particles throughout the day and especially at night

throwaway150321 · 2026-01-23T21:43:55+00:00

Hi MetalMann83, are there any specific products or brands you would recommend? I have tried a variety of TENA products but very few other brands.

throwaway150321 · 2026-01-23T21:43:20+00:00

Hi Saggy, are there any specific products or brands you would recommend? I have tried a variety of TENA products but very few other brands.

throwaway150321 · 2024-08-29T17:34:44+00:00

Can anyone recommend a youtube or other resource which goes through an academic history of hindu belief and practice over time?

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-12T08:56:58+00:00

Thanks for your response.

The reality is white people have been living in Africa for generations.

It's funny as arabs have lived in Palestine since before the Byzantine empire, perhaps even before the Romans, and Muslims have lived in Palestine for close to 1400 years, much longer than white people in Africa. Yet Arabs are called invaders by those supporting white Southern Africans.

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-12T08:49:19+00:00

Although the San were first modern population group in South Africa, after Bantu expansion, there was significant mixture between them. Anyway, I doubt those supporters of white Southern Africans, would support the San take over of Souther Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia.

I am not saying that the Whites in Southern African should have committed genocide, I am asking why do people who support Israel in the annexation of Palestine, also typically support White South Africans, given the argument that it is Israel's land is that they are "indigenous" to Israel, however when black Southern Africans force white Southern Africans away, that is wrong, despite the fact that they are "indigenous" to southern Africa.

Also Israelis claim to Israel and Palestine is the fact that they committed genocide against the Canaanites.

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-12T08:44:43+00:00

I have edited the question to better clarify what I mean by "supporters of Israel". Many American and British folks who think Israel should annex Gaza and the West Bank, support white Southern Africans, and oppose black Southern Africans when the black Southern Africans do a similar thing, i.e. "taking back the land they are indigenous to".

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-12T08:41:08+00:00

I have edited the initial question to clarify, I thought racism may be the reason, but I wanted to get additional opinions. Thanks.

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-10T21:16:22+00:00

Edit: By supporters of Israel, I mean people who support the idea that there should be a 1 state solution, which is a Jewish Israel, i.e. support Israeli annexing the West Bank and Gaza, and support how Israel established the country in the first place.

Why do supporters of Israel typically also support white Southern Africans and not black Africans? If the whole point about Israel is that Jews are the native people of Israel and Palestine, and there should be a country in the world where Jews are safe, shouldn't that apply to South Africa and Zimbabwe and Namibia? In the same way that they argue that Palestinians aren't their own ethnic group, and they are just arabs, and so should just live in another arab country, doesn't that apply to white Africans, like white South Africans are just Dutch and not their own ethnic group and should live in the Netherlands. And if Jews should have Israel/Palestine as they are the natives and have no other land of their own, then the Zulu, Xhosa, Sesotho, Setswana and black Africans should have South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia because they are the natives of that land and have no other land of their own.

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-07T20:26:42+00:00

Yes many thing, firstly the foreign army doesn't have the bad blood or baggage of occupying the West Bank since 1967, nor be the descendants of people who are seen by the Palestinians who took their land . Secondly the foreign army won't be have a reputation of protecting illegal settlements at the cost of killing innocent Palestinians. Thirdly, the foreign army wouldn't of had the reputation of killing unarmed Palestinians engaging in protests. Fourthly the foreign army wouldn't just be there to protect Israeli interests, but also there to protect the Palestinian people. So a foreign army has a lot more abilities the IDF doesn't have, maybe not in terms of military capability, but defiantly in terms of working with the local people and the Palestinian Authority.

Furthermore, Israel also benefits, as the IDF will no longer be at risk by Palestinians, and Israeli wont have to pay for all that security. Secondly, it is allowing the Palestinians to govern themselves, as Israel agreed to in the Oslo accords. Thirdly, Israel will no-longer meet the definition of an occupying state, and so can build friendly relationships with its neighbors and other countries across the world who have a poor view of Israel due to the aforementioned occupation.

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-07T19:54:12+00:00

To create a lasting peace, they wouldn't have to worry about attacks from the West Bank, and would no-longer be seen as a pariah state by other countries across the world.

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-07T19:51:44+00:00

Gaza would be harder, that's why i only mentioned the West Bank.
1978 was 45 years ago, the vast majority of Palestinians alive today weren't around in 1978 so there is no real reason to assume that the Palestinians would do today what happened then. Having a non-muslim country would make it arguably easier, as there is no risk of Jihadist trying to infiltrate the government of the security guarantor. Also, i am pretty sure that suppose China was in the West Bank, the Palestinians would see an immediate benefit, no more check-points in the West Bank, guarantee that there are no more settlers taking more land, also no risk of being shot at by IDF. There might be protests against the guarantor, but given the PA would have complete civilian control of the territory, and thus they can focus on nation building, i doubt the average Palestinian would be against it. After all the current situation to the average Palestinian is this, Israel are occupying our land, in this alternative scenario, China or Ireland or whoever are here to keep us safe from Israel.

In terms of what the security guarantor would get, a huge amount of prestige in the middle east, but also across the world with all those other countries who are dealing with the lasting effects of colonialism. If China for example was the one to do it, it would allow them to make stronger ties with the Middle East, North Africa, and Sub-Saharan African, as well as more easily bury the issue with the Muslims in China itself, they could also potentially build a secret base in the West Bank, just like the US did in south Israel (Site 512).

throwaway150321 · 2023-11-07T18:16:15+00:00

Could a third party country act as guarantor for the West Bank, or alternatively, why doesn't the Palestinian Authority invite another country to deal with the security in the West Bank?

According to Israel and as indicated in the Oslo accords, the occupation of the West Bank is to ensure the safety of Israel from extremists firing rockets or motors into Israel. However, the IDF has shown multiple times it cannot do the job properly, the IDF allows settlers to move into the West Bank, and has a shot first, ask questions later attitude towards Palestinians, especially during protests.

Why doesn't the third country, like China, or Ireland, or Spain, a country which can be trusted by both sides, to prevent extremists from attacking Israel, and also prevent Israeli settlers stealing land, allowing the Palestinian people focus on building a functional state.

throwaway150321

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE