Israel

[AlaCowboy]

Nov 16, 2024 11:53:12 GMT -5 Walter said:

Nov 16, 2024 10:03:03 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

So, neither side believes the other. As for keeping agreements, apparently you have forgotten there was a cease fire in place on Oct 7. The civilians are the ones paying the highest price, will agree there. Put that squarely on the shoulders of Hamas. Their goal all along has been the extermination of Israel.

Squarely on Hamas AND Israel.

Can you explain the 500+ deaths at the hands of Israeli settlers and soldiers on the West Bank during this war? The UN calls Israel's actions on the West Bank, "Lethal force as a first resort"; Israel has bombed and fired rockets in the West Bank and have killed 35 children. They shoot Palestinians in the street and then bar EMTs to tend to them.
Hamas has no control over that area...so...WTF?

news.un.org/en/story/2024/06/1150596#:~:text=Violence%20in%20the%20occupied%20West%20Bank%20linked%20to,Human%20Rights%20chief%20Volker%20T%C3%BCrk%20said%20on%20Tuesday.

Hezbollah had control of the West Bank and their leaders lived comfortably in Beirut until their beepers went off. Did Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza and working in Israel want their lives and jobs jeopardized by Hezbollah and Hamas leaders living in luxury abroad?

[nu5ncbigred]

Nov 16, 2024 10:39:23 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Nov 16, 2024 10:12:02 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Well said. The people of Gaza were free from 2007 to 2023 to make it whatever they wanted to. It became what Hamas made it. It could have become a wealthy place had they made other choices.

Wealthy?

Yeah, not really.

Actually yes. They could have built coastal resorts, hotels, and a casino. They could have become a routine cruise stop on Mediterranean cruise lines and built a mall to accommodate that. They could have not destroyed the greenhouses the Israelis left behind for them. They could have built light industry there with the foreign investment they received. They could have gone in with Israel and shared in the profits of shared waters natural gas fracking and LNG exports.

[trnyerheadncough]

Nov 16, 2024 15:24:28 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Nov 16, 2024 10:39:23 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Wealthy?

Yeah, not really.

Actually yes. They could have built coastal resorts, hotels, and a casino. They could have become a routine cruise stop on Mediterranean cruise lines and built a mall to accommodate that. They could have not destroyed the greenhouses the Israelis left behind for them. They could have built light industry there with the foreign investment they received. They could have gone in with Israel and shared in the profits of shared waters natural gas fracking and LNG exports.

Those things, even if I assume all of them are true, doesn’t make a country wealthy.

[nu5ncbigred]

Nov 16, 2024 15:35:09 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Nov 16, 2024 15:24:28 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Actually yes. They could have built coastal resorts, hotels, and a casino. They could have become a routine cruise stop on Mediterranean cruise lines and built a mall to accommodate that. They could have not destroyed the greenhouses the Israelis left behind for them. They could have built light industry there with the foreign investment they received. They could have gone in with Israel and shared in the profits of shared waters natural gas fracking and LNG exports.

Those things, even if I assume all of them are true, doesn’t make a country wealthy.

It’s what coukd have been had the population made other choices.

[trnyerheadncough]

Nov 16, 2024 15:41:13 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Nov 16, 2024 15:35:09 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Those things, even if I assume all of them are true, doesn’t make a country wealthy.

It’s what coukd have been had the population made other choices.

Great. It doesn’t make the country wealthy.

[nu5ncbigred]

Nov 16, 2024 15:44:58 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Nov 16, 2024 15:41:13 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

It’s what coukd have been had the population made other choices.

Great. It doesn’t make the country wealthy.

The relative wealth they could have developed with a Mediterranean cruise and tourist economy, natural gas, and generous foreign investment used wisely and stable agriculture would have matched or exceeded the per capita wealth of many nations. There were no limits to the potential of a politically and economically free people there could have achieved. A much better life than what Hamas delivered prior to October 7, 2023.

[AlaCowboy]

Nov 16, 2024 15:35:09 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Nov 16, 2024 15:24:28 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Actually yes. They could have built coastal resorts, hotels, and a casino. They could have become a routine cruise stop on Mediterranean cruise lines and built a mall to accommodate that. They could have not destroyed the greenhouses the Israelis left behind for them. They could have built light industry there with the foreign investment they received. They could have gone in with Israel and shared in the profits of shared waters natural gas fracking and LNG exports.

Those things, even if I assume all of them are true, doesn’t make a country wealthy.

Industry, tourism, and exports make for a strong economy. THAT makes a country wealthy.

[Walter]

Nov 16, 2024 12:47:16 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Nov 16, 2024 10:12:02 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Well said. The people of Gaza were free from 2007 to 2023 to make it whatever they wanted to. It became what Hamas made it. It could have become a wealthy place had they made other choices.

Israel voluntarily left Gaza in 2005, their army even forcibly removed Israeli citizens from their homes. Hamas won the elections in 2006, and that’s when things really started going to shit. Hasn’t been an election since then. Hamas leaders got rich, they have done shit for their people and of course it’s all Israel’s fault. SMH.

41,000 dead people, the majority of whom are women and children has nothing at all to do with anything Israel has done.
Got it.

[dilligaf]

Nov 16, 2024 8:38:44 GMT -5 Walter said:

Nov 16, 2024 1:19:03 GMT -5 dilligaf said:

Yeah that Chinese slave labor works well for them.

"Vintage" is the code word for "OLD and in need of constant maintenance."    It's what collectors use to drive up the prices of their run of the mill gear built in the 60's, to people who don't know better. A "vintage" guitar is not stored in a controlled environment like a vintage wine is.
Old "vintage" Vox amps spend more time in repair than they do working.
Probably true of those old Marshalls, too.

An old guitar is just an old guitar, unless it has some kind of "history."

Lennon's Casino, Clapton's "Fool" SG, a Hendrix Strat, something from Jeff Beck, etc.
A regular '65 Strat or SG is just an old guitar that may or may not be of special quality.
I have owned two '62 and one '65 SG Specials, and there was really nothing special about them, as far as feel, playability or sound.   The "Special" meant they were less fancy versions of the SG/LesPaul, with dot inlays, no neck binding, and P-90 pickups, which WERE special compared the humbuckers.
The Standards had trap inlays and neck binding, but they didn't play or sound any better then the Specials.

Fender never could make up their feeble minds about whether they wanted 21 or 22 frets on their necks.
The only Strat I ever really wanted was a 70's Strat with the large headstock, bullet trussrod nut, maple fretboard and neck, and a natural ash body tied together with the 3 bolt microtilt neck.   I wanted one because it was BLACKMORE's guitar, and Blackmore is THE Man in Black   (sorry Johnny Cash).
I had to settle for a Mexi-melt 70's reissue with the features I craved.   But those fiickin' beaners, shorted the neck by 1 fret, which actually matched Ritchie's neck.  I was NOT going to try to tackle scalloping the board like Ritchie did.   My fingering style is nothing like his, and I am not a pro player who afford to replace a ruined neck.can.
Putting in 2 Duncan Quarterpounds and killing the middle pickup like Ritchie did  gave me a pretty good replica of the Man's sound through a Marshall valve amp.

"Vintage" guitars are easy to counterfeit and fool people who are not certified guitar experts from a certain build era.

In 28 years, if I make it, I'll be 100 years old.    Will I give a shit if my guitar is "vintage?"
Hell, I am the SAME vintage as the Holy Grail ---- the 1952 Trapeze Bridge Les Paul.

"Vintage " is an ego trip, I have learned.   Buy what you can afford, and what you play WELL.
"Yeah man, this old Jazzmaster is pure vintage, but the action sucks and I can't play it worth shit."
"That's OK dog.   You spent 20 G's on that bad boy.   Be proud!!!"

I agree with you except for acoustics. I have heard a few really old Gibsons and Martins that are absolutely exquisite. Better wood, better luthier ..just a better guitar.

I'm not much of an acoustic guy, but I guess the sound of old acoustics is due to how the wood seasons over the years. 

Most acoustics have soundholes of some kind, which allows ambient air to affect the interior the same as it does the surface.  Probably the way they are stored or left out in the open has something to do with it as well.

I'd love to have a Gibson J-160E like the Beatles used, but they are way out of my price range, and I'm not sure how good the Epiphone copy would be.

[oujour76]

Nov 16, 2024 16:37:53 GMT -5 Walter said:

Nov 16, 2024 12:47:16 GMT -5 oujour76 said:

Israel voluntarily left Gaza in 2005, their army even forcibly removed Israeli citizens from their homes. Hamas won the elections in 2006, and that’s when things really started going to shit. Hasn’t been an election since then. Hamas leaders got rich, they have done shit for their people and of course it’s all Israel’s fault. SMH.

41,000 dead people, the majority of whom are women and children has nothing at all to do with anything Israel has done.
Got it.

Clearly you don’t. Get it, that is. Have told you several times it’s the civilian pawns who are paying the price. And Hamas “leaders” have intentionally put them in that position. Israel is far from perfect, I get that. And why you expect them to be is beyond me.

[Panama pfRedd]

Clearly trd is ALWAYS right. You guys don't know what you're talking about, wealthy, lol!

[trnyerheadncough]

Nov 16, 2024 16:22:14 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Nov 16, 2024 15:35:09 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Those things, even if I assume all of them are true, doesn’t make a country wealthy.

Industry, tourism, and exports make for a strong economy. THAT makes a country wealthy.

It can over time. It’s also an oversimplification. Which was my point.

[nu5ncbigred]

Nov 16, 2024 17:11:22 GMT -5 Panama pfRedd said:

Clearly trd is ALWAYS right. You guys don't know what you're talking about, wealthy, lol!

His attempt at playing word games with the term wealth was just another attempt to troll/ hijack a thread.

[trnyerheadncough]

Nov 16, 2024 18:15:35 GMT -5 nu5ncbigred said:

Nov 16, 2024 17:11:22 GMT -5 Panama pfRedd said:

Clearly trd is ALWAYS right. You guys don't know what you're talking about, wealthy, lol!

His attempt at playing word games with the term wealth was just another attempt to troll/ hijack a thread.

They’re your words. You constantly misrepresent things with the words you use. Don’t like it? Use different words that honestly represent a situation.

[nu5ncbigred]

Nov 16, 2024 18:10:11 GMT -5 trnyerheadncough said:

Nov 16, 2024 16:22:14 GMT -5 AlaCowboy said:

Industry, tourism, and exports make for a strong economy. THAT makes a country wealthy.

It can over time. It’s also an oversimplification. Which was my point.

Your only point was to troll over semantics and playing word games over prosperous or wealth could have been achieved there 2005-2024 had they made the choices I described.