Sorry, I’m not sure how to bypass that. Maybe disable JavaScript or try Reading Mode?

It’s a good article. However, it has at least one massive oversight: the NYT should have included Trump’s promise to end the Russian invasion of #Ukraine “on day one”.

A chart showing the cumulative loss of life since then would be sobering indeed.

Thanks! Fediverse FTW!

Found a German store that ships them internationally.

Apparently, Stalux is a sub-brand of a German company called Eulit. AFAICT, Stalux specialises in stainless straps, whereas Eulit-branded straps tend to be other materials and made in Germany.

I haven’t yet found confirmation that Stalux straps specifically are German-made but please post a link if you have one. The product listings for that store say the Stalux straps are made in Germany. Great!

Hopefully I’ll find a UK seller, to avoid the Brexit surcharges.

I fear so, but I hope at least some are made in a democracy. Taiwan, for example.

Update: Likud rejected the plan.

it’d be like saying we should disarm Ukraine, 'cause then Russia doesn’t have a reason to invade them

Putin’s All-Russia People’s Front’s policies toward Ukraine have many similarities to Netanyahu’s Likud party’s policies toward Gaza. Both sets of policies are tragic, causing many innocent people’s deaths.

Nevertheless, Ukraine and Gaza are different enough for one to reasonably reach different conclusions about how best peace can be achieved in each place:

• Ukraine’s weapons are protecting Ukraine against Russian attacks and invasion attempts. Therefore, it is in Ukraine’s interests to have them. Hamas’s weapons are not protecting Gaza against Israeli attacks or invasion. There is no obvious benefit from Hamas having them.
• Servant of the People, and Ukraine, do recognise Russia, and have not seriously proposed eliminating it. Hamas does not officially recognise Israel, and has seriously proposed eliminating it.
• Argentina, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Paraguay, Philippines, Switzerland, Trinidad and Tobago, the UK, the USA, the EU, and the Organization of American States, all designate Hamas a terrorist organisation. This reduces the aid Gaza receives. They seem unlikely to reverse the designation unless Hamas disarms. None of them designate Servant of the People, or Ukraine, a terrorist organisation.

Those points lead me to believe Hamas should disarm.

I also believe countries giving aid to Israel should make it formally contingent on Israel withdrawing from Gaza and the West Bank, to pre-1967 borders, and recognising Palestinian statehood. However, it looks like the US is going to stop aid to Israel regardless.

Trust isn’t really the point. Everyone knows Israel and Hamas don’t trust each other. I’m more concerned with whether the violent conflict can be reduced, and a stable peace achieved.

Are Hamas’s arms doing Gaza any favours? Not that I can see.

AFAICT, if Hamas disarmed:

• Israel’s only(?) excuse for mass military action in Gaza would disappear.
• International support (already shaky) for Israeli military presence in Gaza would decrease.
• One or more of Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Honduras, Israel, Japan, New Zealand, Paraguay, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom, the United States, or the European Union might end their designation of Hamas as a terrorist organisation, which could in turn increase the aid and other international support available to Gaza.

If you think I’m wrong, I’d be glad to know why.

Terrorism arises in defense to oppression.

Technical point: that isn’t exhaustively true. Terrorism can be, and sometimes is, committed against vulnerable parties by more privileged ones.

Interesting point. Would realistic human-edited (“Photoshopped”) content have to be labelled? That could be a good thing!

(Might cause embarrassment for fashion magazines unless they stop doing it.)