Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Poor shark, acid stomach! Biden, day after. N Carolina, "A day does not define a career."
Biden, day after. N Carolina, "A day does not define a career."
Just the facts, ma'am.
By 'think of the poor surface' i meant say, if grass it would be bruised and if concrete it could
be dented if Trump landed on his head. Could have made my personification clearer, i guess.
I thought Swalwell said it well in the Nicolle Wallace video, as he say does again here
Swalwell: One of my Republican colleagues just said the boxes containing national security secrets that were seized at Mar-a-Lago were stored in a safe manner. This is the bathroom at Mar-a-Lago with over a dozen boxes of national security secrets. You are living on Fantasy… pic.twitter.com/0oKvmcR9Yy
— Acyn (@Acyn) June 27, 2024
Super duper, young lady.
Oh noooo, that would be so sad. Think of the surface he would fall on to.
Lime Time, Some time ago you said this was a "dying board" and now you repeat it. On what basis do you say it.
The fact of the matter is that awhile back when this board was still seen as eligible for the most
posted upon in the last 24 hours on iHub we were often at the top or in the top half dozen.
What is your evidence this board is dying.
Next step is for you to offer some proof you are not projecting when you talk about nitwits and tiny brains.
Lime Time, He got it basically right. He does not lie as you obviously do.
You, yet again, and i really don't understand how you guys can be so silly to comment on something you don't have a fucking clue about are lying. Why most every one of you trolls do it really is beyond me.
Over the past few years there have been relatively few permanent bans from tins board. Our general habit is to use short term bans in an effort to maintain a diverse range of opinion here. Exactly the opposite of what you said, but then your opinion had no factual basis. Your opinion was simply what you felt like saying at the time. No more, no less than that. As Trump does in that, you do.
I figured you would be back, but not this quickly. Why did i figure you would be back, because what you said about this board on your way out was a lie and you know this is one board about on which you can spill your stupid vitriol. To some extent anyway. You know you are given some leeway on that here.
The fact you are back and still standing just adds to much other long-standing evidence that what i have just said to you to be seen as true. And further evidence to the fact that what you posted earlier here .. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174677219 .. was most all lies.
Nicolle Wallace presses House Democrat on President Biden’s debate performance
Off the botox, you're looking too much like the lizardman some
nutjobs say you are. Just grow old gracefully, Joe. Au naturale
Nicolle Wallace presses House Democrat on President Biden’s debate performance
Jon Stewart's Debate Analysis: Trump's Blatant Lies and Biden's Senior Moments | The Daily Show
Jon Stewart's Debate Analysis: Trump's Blatant Lies and Biden's Senior Moments | The Daily Show
Why would Trump agree to another debate. Oh, ego and the expectation of another bowl of nicecream? Maybe.
Lime Time, Good riddance. Oh, before you go could you give us a link to just one of the iHub boards you mention here
"There are other political discussion boards and much more active than
this one anymore that everyone goes to for a fun and active discussion."
A listless untruth from you on your way out is fitting. And one last for now:
Do America, yourself and your family a favor - do try to be better.
And when you are we'll look forward to another visit from a more honest, more positive you.
Lime Time, you want close minded, Trump says he won in 2020 and that he didn't call dead military men suckers and losers. The close mindedness of a goddamn cult that has nothing but projection as insult for those as we who see you for what you are. Outside your first sentence, there is not one ounce of truth in your,
"I wouldn't try to reason with these people here. They are the most closed minded individuals on the planet. They refuse to look at both sides to a topic. It's only one sided. There is no reason or logic allowed here. If you do, they sensor you and ban you from this board"
not one. You are obviously a liar, as is your enemy of America, cheating conman, abuser of women, cult shit-face ex-president.
And what of positive value have you contributed here. Nada.
Just know, lies from you as you put there will no longer be tolerated if repeated in any way shape or form by you.
Not one has ever been banned from this board for lack of reason or logic.
A number have been banned for repetition of crass, immature untrue insult as you posted there.
Vibrant Indonesian group. VOICE OF BACEPROT
Official Website
Young, Indonesian, hijab-wearing, female metal trio Voice Of Baceprot (VOB) firstly garnered prestigious global media attention when the video of the band, playing their own song "The Enemy Of Earth Is You" both in studio and local stages in Garut stormed the internet in 2017 when they were still in vocational school. Later in that year, the song have been played with a full orchestra (Erwin Gutawa Orchestra) in front of the audience in the capital city of Jakarta.
Consisting of Marsya (vocals and guitar), Widi (bass), and Siti (drums), the trio first met when they were still in Islamic Junior High School (Madrasah Tsanawiyah) students in their hometown of Singajaya, a small village two hours’ drive away from the city of Garut, West Java.
Their teacher Cep Ersa Ekasusila Satia (aka Abah Erza) who introduced & taught them musical instruments was also the one behind the name "Voice of Baceprot".
The word “Baceprot” comes from the Sundanese language meaning “Noisy”. It was chosen to represent the type of music that they play.
Since their formation, VOB have become a point of discussion for a host of renowned global media, including The New York Times, NPR, BBC, DW, Reuters and The Guardian, featuring them in the pages of their online publication. VOB were recently named by heavy metal and rock magazine Metal Hammer as “the Metal Band the World Needs Right Now”.
https://voiceofbaceprot.com/
Powerful video, yours repeat:
Israeli Intelligence Misses Again
"Israel Knew Hamas’s Attack Plan More Than a Year Ago
"Inside Israel’s war
"Witnesses of Aid Convoy Violence Describe Shooting, Panic and Desperation"""
Related:
""Once again it was proved that this isn’t how it is. A few hundred armed Palestinians breached the barrier and invaded Israel in a way no Israeli imagined was possible. A few hundred people proved that it’s impossible to imprison 2 million people forever without paying a cruel price. "
----------------
"On Saturday they were already talking about wiping out entire neighborhoods in Gaza, about occupying the Strip and punishing Gaza “as it has never been punished before.” But Israel hasn’t stopped punishing Gaza since 1948, not for a moment.""
---------------------------------------
Israelis Made to Suffer the Cruel Price for Oppression of Palestinians in Gaza
The threats of "flattening Gaza" prove only one thing: We haven’t learned a thing. The arrogance is here to stay, even though Israel is paying a high price once again.
Gideon Levy
Oct 10, 2023
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174391652
Emily Harding
Thursday, June 27, 2024, 1:49 PM
Revelations of Unit 8200’s failure to warn about the Oct. 7 attacks suggests that the Israeli intelligence apparatus is far weaker than its reputation.
Dr. Avishai Teicher (Pikiwiki Israel, CC BY 2.5 , https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PikiWiki_Israel_40574_IDF_headquarters_in_Tel_Aviv.JPG )
Emily Harding @EHarding_DC
Published by The Lawfare Institute
in Cooperation With
Brookings
Last week, Israeli news outlets reported shocking revelations .. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-06-18/ty-article/report-new-evidence-reveals-idf-had-detailed-prior-knowledge-of-hamas-plan-to-raid-israel/00000190-2afb-d2de-af9e-6ffbdf700000 .. that once again called into question the elite reputation of Israel’s intelligence services. According to the report, weeks before the Oct. 7 attacks, the Israel Defense Force’s (IDF’s) premier signals intelligence group, Unit 8200, collected detailed information about Hamas training to invade Israel and take up to 250 hostages. Yet they failed to warn Israeli officials effectively. This failure puts them in company with several other units who also collected indications of an impending attack and suggests the Israeli intelligence apparatus is far weaker than its reputation.
For an intelligence officer, providing strategic warning is the most important no-fail mission. It happens in two parts: First, a service must collect information that a plot is afoot. Second, analysts must recognize the “so what” of the information, interpret its severity correctly, and then package that information to adequately convey alarm. “Adequately” is a tricky word—analysts do not want to be hyperbolic, lest they become the intel service that cried wolf. Conversely, when the threat is real, analysts need to speak clearly, persistently, and bluntly—even when others disagree.
The Pieces
In this case, it seems Israeli intelligence had accomplished the first task: They had collected key pieces of information .. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-06-18/ty-article/report-new-evidence-reveals-idf-had-detailed-prior-knowledge-of-hamas-plan-to-raid-israel/00000190-2afb-d2de-af9e-6ffbdf700000 , and at least some analysts had identified the activity as a threat. Unit 8200 observed a Hamas training exercise that contained all the elements of Oct. 7. The unit’s report, titled “Detailed End-to-End Raid Training,” describes Hamas conducting drills simulating infiltration .. https://www.haaretz.com/haaretz-explains/2023-10-17/ty-article-magazine/.premium/the-first-hours-of-the-israel-hamas-war-what-actually-took-place/0000018b-38bc-d0ac-a39f-b9be58df0000 .. of a mock IDF outpost, including taking over on-base synagogues, communications headquarters, and soldiers’ quarters. The report contained warnings that Hamas was targeting kibbutzim .. https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-806754 .. and planned to take 200-250 hostages, alarmingly close to the 251 actually taken on Oct. 7.
The second piece—effectively communicating the threat—seems to be where things fell apart. Junior intelligence officials in Unit 8200 claim to have flagged the report for senior officers but say they were ignored .. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2024-06-18/ty-article/report-new-evidence-reveals-idf-had-detailed-prior-knowledge-of-hamas-plan-to-raid-israel/00000190-2afb-d2de-af9e-6ffbdf700000 .
Seniors not taking juniors seriously was far from an isolated issue. Several other stories have emerged of junior people flagging worrying occurrences but being largely ignored at higher levels. For example, Israeli surveillance soldiers serving on the Gaza border said they had raised concerns .. https://www.timesofisrael.com/weeks-before-oct-7-idf-said-to-have-been-warned-of-hamas-plan-to-take-250-hostages/ .. about suspicious activity but were ignored. In July 2023, a young, female noncommissioned officer “provided a warning .. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-27/ty-article/.premium/chilling-warnings-picked-up-by-israeli-intelligence-months-before-october-7-massacre/0000018c-1261-dd2e-a5ae-d36ba6240000.. to her commanders that Hamas intended to carry out a massacre in the Gaza border communities.” Over six months, she wrote three warnings to her superiors about Hamas training exercises simulating raids on civilians and military targets. Separately, over the course of the year before Oct. 7, a group of female observers reported suspicious activity .. https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-11-20/ty-article-magazine/.premium/the-women-soldiers-who-warned-of-a-pending-hamas-attack-and-were-ignored/0000018b-ed76-d4f0-affb-eff740150000 .. to their superiors about Hamas activity near the fence—including efforts to knock out security cameras; use drones, vans, and motorcycles; as well as practice shelling tanks.
Sources within the IDF give a slightly different version of events that highlights a dark truth little discussed outside the world of intelligence: just how much responsibility rests with junior people. Kan News reported that Unit 8200 “failed to draw clear conclusions .. https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-806818 ,” according to IDF sources, and did not distribute the document to “the highest-ranking officials.” On Oct. 1 ..https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-798692 , a junior intelligence officer in the Gaza Division discovered the document and recognized its significance, but did not escalate it to seniors, discussing it with more junior people instead. It is the job of senior intelligence officials to mind the big picture and use their years of experience to put warnings in context. They are meant to know when a threat looks serious, or more serious than others that were safely ignored. But senior officials are human, busy and biased as all humans are. It often falls to junior officers to make them listen.
The Hubris
A thorough investigation is needed to determine what senior intelligence officials knew and when they knew it, but sufficient evidence suggests an anchoring bias led to the failure on Oct. 7. In other words, leaders did not take warnings seriously because they did not see the threat as real. Seniors interpreted signs of Hamas training as demonstrations of intent but not capability. As with so many intelligence failures, those to blame are fighting over the adequacy of warnings. Government and military leaders are contending that they did not receive warnings of an “imminent planned invasion .. https://www.timesofisrael.com/weeks-before-oct-7-idf-said-to-have-been-warned-of-hamas-plan-to-take-250-hostages/ .” This standard is impossibly high for any intelligence service, even one as determined as Israel’s.
Further, military officials in particular seem to have leaned heavily on technology and the strength of the border wall .. https://www.timesofisrael.com/weeks-before-oct-7-idf-said-to-have-been-warned-of-hamas-plan-to-take-250-hostages/ .. as both a protection and a warning mechanism. The cameras and high-tech sensors were meant to provide sufficient security and time to defend borders. But on Oct. 7, Hamas made quick work of the barrier with explosives and bulldozers, and they knocked out the surveillance with low-cost drones.
The Consequences
People have called drowning a silent tragedy—the victim does not scream, or yell for help, because they cannot. Intelligence work is much the same. The impending disaster whispers its warning. It does not announce its presence. People say the system is “blinking red,” but that is a poor metaphor. Rather, it is only one’s imagination that blinks. Even when intelligence officers believe something is truly amiss, it is tempting to believe that someone else will speak the uncomfortable truth. After the fact, the signs appear far clearer. Kan News, the Israeli public broadcaster that broke the story of Unit 8200’s report, also reported that “[o]ne of the soldiers involved in the report wrote after October 7, ‘I feel like crying, yelling and swearing .. https://www.timesofisrael.com/weeks-before-oct-7-idf-said-to-have-been-warned-of-hamas-plan-to-take-250-hostages/ .’”
Investigations are underway in Israel about what really happened in the run-up to Oct. 7. It is not yet clear whether these investigations will be public, but the reports will likely find that collection was stronger than initially expected. Unit 8200’s “Detailed End-to-End Raid Training Report” appears to be a fine example of tactical warning. The bigger gaps are far more likely to be analytical and structural.
On the analytical failure, investigators should ask what kinds of training the analysts had received in writing warning assessments: How were they evaluating what was and was not a serious threat? A former Unit 8200 official has suggested that the organization has strayed .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/14/us-israel-intelligence-cia-hostages/ .. from analysis altogether. Instead, it has prioritized developing new technology and contributing information to a joint pool of intelligence information. The Washington Post reported .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/14/us-israel-intelligence-cia-hostages/ .. that “other current and former officials echoed this critique, saying that Israel’s electronic spies forgot how to do basic intelligence functions.”
The structural challenge will be the most difficult to untangle and the hardest to fix. Entrenched mindsets are hard to untrain. The Post described the generally accepted view in Israeli intelligence that Hamas “was more interested in getting rich and ruling Gaza than attacking Israel.” This type of mindset, or “conceptzia .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/06/14/us-israel-intelligence-cia-hostages/ ,” hearkens back to the intelligence failure of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, when the security apparatus was similarly surprised by an opponent. As the Post’s Shane Harris notes, “Officials ignored what, in hindsight, seem like obvious warning signs[,] … dismissed because they didn’t comport to the overarching theory about the group’s intentions.”
Investigators have a hard and heartbreaking job ahead. Their days will be fraught with images of what might have been, had one or two things gone differently. If senior officers had listened to juniors’ concerns, if policymakers had taken warnings seriously, if reports had been worded more strongly—perhaps one of the worst tragedies the region has ever seen could have been averted.
Emily Harding
@EHarding_DC
Read More
Emily Harding is the director of the Intelligence, National Security, and Technology Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Previously, she served as an analyst at the Central Intelligence Agency, director for Iran at the National Security Council, and deputy staff director on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/israeli-intelligence-misses-again
As they walked into the jungle a thought appeared - guess in war a collective hate, otherwise
"I just did re-watch it a week ago, then this one; the equal of
it in every respect. And why not? Spielberg and Hanks, again."
a rejected negative in civilized people, must be positively incentivizing. The thought brought:
September 1, 2018
War Is Not Part of Human Nature
War may not be in our nature after all
By R. Brian Ferguson
Yuko Shimizu
Do people, or perhaps just males, have an evolved predisposition to kill members of other groups? Not just a capacity to kill but an innate propensity to take up arms, tilting us toward collective violence? The word “collective” is key. People fight and kill for personal reasons, but homicide is not war. War is social, with groups organized to kill people from other groups. Today controversy over the historical roots of warfare revolves around two polar positions. In one, war is an evolved propensity to eliminate any potential competitors. In this scenario, humans all the way back to our common ancestors with chimpanzees have always made war. The other position holds that armed conflict has only emerged over recent millennia, as changing social conditions provided the motivation and organization to collectively kill. The two sides separate into what the late anthropologist Keith Otterbein called hawks and doves. (This debate also ties into the question of whether instinctive, warlike tendencies can be detected in chimpanzees [see sidebar below].)
If war expresses an inborn tendency, then we should expect to find evidence of war in small-scale societies throughout the prehistoric record. The hawks claim that we have indeed found such evidence. “When there is a good archaeological picture of any society on Earth, there is almost always also evidence of warfare.... Twenty-five percent of deaths due to warfare may be a conservative estimate,” wrote archaeologist Steven A. LeBlanc and his co-author Katherine E. Register. With casualties of that magnitude, evolutionary psychologists argue, war has served as a mechanism of natural selection in which the fittest prevail to acquire both mates and resources.
This perspective has achieved broad influence. Political scientist Francis Fukuyama wrote that the roots of recent wars and genocide go back for tens or hundreds of thousands of years among our hunter-gatherer ancestors, even to our shared ancestor with chimpanzees. Bradley Thayer, a leading scholar of international relations, argues that evolutionary theory explains why the instinctual tendency to protect one's tribe morphed over time into group inclinations toward xenophobia and ethnocentrism in international relations. If wars are natural eruptions of instinctive hate, why look for other answers? If human nature leans toward collective killing of outsiders, how long can we avoid it?
The anthropologists and archaeologists in the dove camp challenge this view. Humans, they argue, have an obvious capacity to engage in warfare, but their brains are not hardwired to identify and kill outsiders involved in collective conflicts. Lethal group attacks, according to these arguments, emerged only when hunter-gatherer societies grew in size and complexity and later with the birth of agriculture. Archaeology, supplemented by observations of contemporary hunter-gatherer cultures, allows us to identify the times and, to some degree, the social circumstances that led to the origins and intensification of warfare.
When did it Begin?
In the search for the origins of war, archaeologists look for four kinds of evidence. The artwork on cave walls is exhibit one. Paleolithic cave paintings from Grottes de Cougnac, Pech Merle and Cosquer in France dating back approximately 25,000 years show what some scholars perceive to be spears penetrating people, suggesting that people were waging war as early as the late Paleolithic period. But this interpretation is contested. Other scientists point out that some of the incomplete figures in those cave paintings have tails, and they argue that the bent or wavy lines that intersect with them more likely represent forces of shamanic power, not spears. (In contrast, wall paintings on the eastern Iberian Peninsula, probably made by settled agriculturalists thousands of years later, clearly show battles and executions.)
Weapons are also evidence of war, but these artifacts may not be what they seem. I used to accept maces as representing proof of war, until I learned more about Near Eastern stone maces. Most have holes for handles so narrow they could not survive one blow in battle. Maces also symbolize authority, and established rule can provide a way to resolve conflict without resorting to war. On the other hand, it is perfectly possible to go to war without traditional weapons: in southern Germany around 5000 B.C., villagers were massacred with adzes that were also used to work wood.
Beyond art and weapons, archaeologists look to settlement remains for clues. People who fear attack usually take precautions. In the archaeological record, we sometimes see people who lived in scattered homes on low flatlands shifted to nucleated defendable villages. Villages across Neolithic Europe were surrounded by mounded enclosures. But not all these enclosures seem designed for defense. Some may mark off distinct social groups.
Skeletal remains would seem ideal for determining when war began, but even these require careful assessment. Only one of three or four projectile wounds leaves a mark on bone. Shaped points made of stone or bone buried with a corpse are sometimes ceremonial, sometimes the cause of death. Unhealed wounds to a single buried corpse could be the result of an accident, an execution or a homicide. Indeed, homicide may have been fairly common in the prehistoric world—but homicide is not war. And not all fights were lethal. In some burial sites, archaeologists frequently find skulls with healed cranial depressions but few that caused death. The findings suggest fights with clubs or other nonlethal resolution of personal disputes, as is common in the ethnographic record. When the skulls are mostly from females, fractures may reflect domestic violence.
Related Stories
To Follow the Real Early Human Diet, Eat Everything
Kate Wong
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/to-follow-the-real-early-human-diet-eat-everything/
Cuckoos’ Evolutionary Arms Race Creates New Species
Naomi Langmore, Alicia Grealy, Clare Holleley, Iliana Medina & The Conversation US
https://www.scientificamerican.com/author/alicia-grealy/
The Cockroach’s Surprisingly Recent Path to Global Domination
Meghan Bartels
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-cockroachs-surprisingly-recent-path-to-global-domination/
Glow-in-the-Dark Animals May Have Been around for 540 Million Years
Meghan Bartels
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/glow-in-the-dark-animals-may-have-been-around-for-540-million-years/
How Humans Lost Their Tails
Sara Novak
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-humans-lost-their-tails/
The global archaeological evidence, then, is often ambiguous and difficult to interpret. Often different clues must be pieced together to produce a suspicion or probability of war. But dedicated archaeological work—multiple excavations with good material recovery—should be able to conclude that war is at least suspected.
TRACES of war more than 5,000 years ago appear in an enhanced image of rock-shelter art found on the Iberian Peninsula. Credit: “Identification of Plant Cells in Black Pigments of Prehistoric Spanish Levantine Rock Art by Means of a Multi-Analytical Approach: A New Method for Social Identity Materialization Using Chaîne Opératoire,” by Esther López-Montalvo et al., in PLOS ONE, Vol. 1, No. 2, Article No. E0172225; February 16, 2017
On balance, though, are there really indications that humans have been waging war for the entire history of the species? If your sample consists of cases known for high frequencies of perimortem wounds (those occurring at or near the time of death), the situation looks pretty bad. That is how figures such as 25 percent of deaths by violence are derived. Misconceptions result, however, because of cherry-picking by popular media. Any discovery of ancient killings grabs headlines. The news items ignore innumerable excavations that yield no signs of violence. And a comprehensive screening of reports from a particular area and time period, asking how many, if any, show even hints of war, paints an entirely different picture. War is hardly ubiquitous and does not go back endlessly in the archaeological record. Human warfare did indeed have a beginning.
The First Hostilities
Many archaeologists venture that war emerged in some areas during the Mesolithic period, which began after the last Ice Age ended around 9700 B.C., when European hunter-gatherers settled and developed more complex societies. But there really is no simple answer. War appeared at different times in different places. For half a century archaeologists have agreed that the multiple violent deaths at Jebel Sahaba along the Nile in northern Sudan occurred even earlier, around 12,000 B.C. There severe competition among settled hunter-gatherer groups in an area with once rich but declining food sources may have led to conflict.
At a slightly later time, settlements, weapons and burials in the northern Tigris suggest war involving settled villages of hunter-gatherers between 9750 and 8750 B.C. Nearby, the earliest known village fortifications occurred among farming people in the seventh millennium, and the first conquest of an urban center took place between 3800 and 3500 B.C. By that date, war was common across Anatolia, spread in part by conquering migrants from the northern Tigris.
In stark contrast, archaeologists have found no persuasive evidence in settlements, weapons or skeletal remains in the southern Levant (from Sinai to southern Lebanon and Syria) dating to before about 3200 B.C. In Japan, violent deaths from any cause are rare among hunter-gatherer groups from 13,000 to 800 B.C.
With the development of wet rice farming around 300 B.C., violent fatalities became apparent in more than one in 10 remains. In well-studied North American sites, some very early skeletal trauma seems the result of personal rather than collective conflicts. A site in Florida contained evidence of multiple killings about 5400 B.C. In parts of the Pacific Northwest, the same occurred by 2200 B.C., but in the southern Great Plains, only one violent death was recorded before A.D. 500.
Why did it Happen?
The preconditions that make war more likely include a shift to a more sedentary existence, a growing regional population, a concentration of valuable resources such as livestock, increasing social complexity and hierarchy, trade in high-value goods, and the establishment of group boundaries and collective identities. These conditions are sometimes combined with severe environmental changes. War at Jebel Sahaba, for one, may have been a response to an ecological crisis, as the Nile cut a gorge that eliminated productive marshlands, eventually leading to human abandonment of the area. Later, centuries after agriculture began, Neolithic Europe—to take one example—demonstrated that when people have more to fight over, their societies start to organize themselves in a manner that makes them more prepared to go ahead and embrace war.
There are limits, however, to what archaeology can show, and we must seek answers elsewhere. Ethnography—the study of different cultures, both living and past—illustrates these preconditions. A basic distinction is between “simple” and “complex” hunter-gatherer communities.
Simple hunting and gathering characterized human societies during most of humanity's existence dating back more than 200,000 years. Broadly, these groups cooperate with one another and live in small, mobile, egalitarian bands, exploiting large areas with low population density and few possessions.
Complex hunter-gatherers, in contrast, live in fixed settlements with populations in the hundreds. They maintain social rankings of kin groups and individuals, restrict access to food resources by lines of descent and have more developed political leadership. Signs of such social complexity first appeared during the Mesolithic. The appearance of complex hunter-gatherers can sometimes but not always mark a transitional stage to agriculture, the basis for the development of political states. These groups, moreover, often waged war.
Insert: [...] While the start and end dates of the Mesolithic Period vary by geographical region, it dated approximately from 10,000 BCE to 8,000 BCE.
P - The Paleolithic was an age of purely hunting and gathering, but toward the Mesolithic period the development of agriculture contributed to the rise of permanent settlements.
https://human.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Art/Art_History_(Boundless)/02%3A_Prehistoric_Art/2.03%3A_The_Mesolithic_Period ]
The preconditions for war are only part of the story, however, and by themselves, they may not suffice to predict outbreaks of collective conflicts. In the Southern Levant, for instance, those preconditions existed for thousands of years without evidence of war.
Why, though, was there an absence of conflict? It turns out that many societies also have distinct preconditions for peace. Many social arrangements impede war, such as cross-group ties of kinship and marriage; cooperation in hunting, agriculture or food sharing; flexibility in social arrangements that allow individuals to move to other groups; norms that value peace and stigmatize killing; and recognized means for conflict resolution. These mechanisms do not eliminate serious conflict, but they do channel it in ways that either prevent killing or keep it confined among a limited number of individuals.
If this is so, why then are later archaeological findings, along with explorers' and anthropologists' reports, so full of deadly warfare? Over millennia preconditions of war became more common in more places. Once established, war has a tendency to spread, with violent peoples replacing less violent ones. States evolved around the world, and states are capable of militarizing peoples on their peripheries and trade routes. Environmental upheavals such as frequent droughts aggravate and sometimes generate conditions that lead to war, and peace may not return when conditions ease. Particularly notable was the intensification of the Medieval Warm period, from roughly A.D. 950 to 1250, and its rapid transformation into the Little Ice Age beginning around A.D. 1300. In that period war increased in areas across the Americas, the Pacific and elsewhere. In most of the world, war was long established, but conflicts worsened, with mounting casualties tallied.
Then came European global expansion, which transformed, intensified and sometimes generated indigenous war around the world. These confrontations were not just driven by conquest and resistance. Local peoples began to make war on one another, drawn into new hostilities by colonial powers and the commodities they provided.
[And the earlier mention of more possessions more war comes wandering back into mind. ]
Interaction between ancient and recent expanding states, and the ensuing conflicts, encouraged formation of distinctive tribal identities and divisions. Areas still beyond colonial control underwent changes impelled by longer-distance effects of trade, disease and population displacement—all of which led to wars. States also stirred up conflict among local peoples by imposing political institutions with clear boundaries rather than the amorphous local identities and limited authorities they often encountered in their colonial forays.
Scholars often seek support for the idea that human willingness to engage in deadly group hostilities predated the rise of the state by looking for evidence of hostilities in “tribal zones,” where “savage” warfare seems endemic and is often seen as an expression of human nature. But a careful examination of ethnographically known violence among local peoples in the historical record provides an alternative perspective.
Hunter-gatherers of northwestern Alaska from the late 18th through the 19th centuries demonstrate the fallacy of projecting ethnography of contemporary peoples into humanity's distant past. Intense war involving village massacres lingers in detailed oral traditions. This deadly violence is cited as evidence of war by hunter-gatherers before disruption by expanding states.
Archaeology, however, combined with the history of the region, provides a very different assessment. There are no hints of war in early archaeological remains in the simple cultures of Alaskan hunter-gatherers. The first signs of war appear between A.D. 400 to 700, and they are probably the result of contact with immigrants from Asia or southern Alaska, where war was already established. But these conflicts were limited in size and probably intensity.
With favorable climatic conditions by A.D. 1200, a growing social complexity developed among these whale hunters, with denser, more settled populations and expanding long-distance trade. After a couple of centuries, war became common. War in the 19th century, however, was much worse, so severe that it caused decline of the regional population. These later conflicts—the ones that show up in oral histories—were associated with state expansion as a massive trade network developed out of new Russian entrepôts in Siberia, and they led to extreme territoriality and centralization of complex tribal groups across the Bering Strait.
Not a Fact of Life
Debate over war and human nature will not soon be resolved. The idea that intensive, high-casualty violence was ubiquitous throughout prehistory has many backers. It has cultural resonance for those who are sure that we as a species naturally tilt toward war. As my mother would say: “Just look at history!” But doves have the upper hand when all the evidence is considered. Broadly, early finds provide little if any evidence suggesting war was a fact of life.
[ Good. It's always been the feeling. ]
People are people. They fight and sometimes kill. Humans have always had a capacity to make war, if conditions and culture so dictate. But those conditions and the warlike cultures they generate became common only over the past 10,000 years—and, in most places, much more recently than that. The high level of killing often reported in history, ethnography or later archaeology is contradicted in the earliest archaeological findings around the globe. The most ancient bones and artifacts are consistent with the title of Margaret Mead's 1940 article: “Warfare Is Only an Invention—Not a Biological Necessity.”
What about Our Chimp Cousins?
Anthropologists are looking at whether closely related primates show an instinctive propensity toward group killing
Delving into the question of human predisposition to war often involves looking beyond our species to examine the experiences of our chimpanzee relatives. This is a topic I have been studying for many years, and I am now finishing the writing of a book about it, Chimpanzees, “War,” and History. I put quotes around “war” because intergroup conflict among chimps, though sometimes collective and deadly, lacks the social and cognitive dimensions essential to human war.
Human warfare involves opponents that often include multiple local groups that may be unified by widely varying forms of political organization. War is fostered by culturally specific systems of knowledge and values that generate powerful meanings of “us versus them.” These social constructs have no primate analogies. Despite these distinctions, some scientists have argued that chimpanzees demonstrate an innate propensity to kill outsiders, inherited from the last common ancestor of chimps and people—an impulse that still subliminally pushes humans as well into deadly conflicts with those outside their communities.
My work disputes the claim that chimpanzee males have an innate tendency to kill outsiders, arguing instead that their most extreme violence can be tied to specific circumstances that result from disruption of their lives by contact with humans. Making that case has required my going through every reported chimpanzee killing. From this, a simple point can be made. Critical examination of a recent compilation of killings from 18 chimpanzee research sites—together amounting to 426 years of field observations—reveals that of 27 observed or inferred intergroup killings of adults and adolescents, 15 come from just two highly conflicted situations, which occurred at two sites in 1974–1977 and 2002–2006, respectively.
The two situations amount to nine years of observation, tallying a kill rate of 1.67 annually for those years. The remaining 417 years of observation average just 0.03 annually. The question is whether the outlier cases are better explained as evolved, adaptive behavior or as a result of human disruption. And whereas some evolutionary biologists propose that killings are explained as attempts to diminish the number of males in rival groups, those same data show that subtracting internal from external killings of males produces a reduction of outside males of only one every 47 years, fewer than once in a chimpanzee's lifetime.
From comparative case studies, I conclude that “war” among chimpanzees is not an evolved evolutionary strategy but an induced response to human disturbance. Case-by-case analyses will show that chimps, as a species, are not “killer apes.” This research calls into question as well the idea that any human tendency toward bellicosity might be driven by an ancient genetic legacy from a distant ancestor of chimpanzees and humans. —R.B.F.
Rights & Permissions
MORE TO EXPLORE
War in the Tribal Zone: Expanding States and Indigenous Warfare. Edited by R. Brian Ferguson and Neil L. Whitehead. School of American Research Press, 1992.
Beyond War: The Human Potential for Peace. Douglas P. Fry. Oxford University Press, 2007.
FROM OUR ARCHIVES
Tribal Warfare. R. Brian Ferguson; January 1992.
R. Brian Ferguson is a professor of anthropology at Rutgers University–Newark.
His academic career has been devoted to explaining why war happens.
More by R. Brian Ferguson
Scientific American Magazine Vol 319 Issue 3
This article was originally published with the title “Why We Fight” in Scientific American Magazine Vol. 319 No. 3 (September 2018), p. 76
https://www.democraticunderground.com/emoticons/hippie.gif
So it's not so much about hate per se but more about saving, protecting, preserving what one group has from encroachment threatening behavior by a 2nd group. Then both groups use hate as an incentivizing technique. As Trump and his people do.
Ok. Back to The Pacific and "Band of Brothers is the best WWII series ever, IMHO" .. https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174668555 , two now (both via San Fran VPN to your Netflix) to encourage me to be more housebound this weekend than not.
As if war isn't sobering enough, watching them while dwelling on the one above adds a bit more sobering other.
Related:
The Specter of Nationalism
"Att: B402 - Understanding Today’s Populism as Ethnic Nationalism
"Far-Right Extremism Is a Global Problem
'What’s New About the New Authoritarianism?"
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=174642887
Am leaving him in, hope he does well but doesn't catch Bhatia.
Yikes Yikes Yikes Yikes Yikes -- heartbreaking.
That's one helluva life. 99. Good on him. .
LOL Jon gets it right, too.
Agree, he's right. It hurts sometimes, but in the long run truth is the best road.
Bone Spurs Putin's friend fail, 2020 - Biden is ‘tougher’ on China than Trump, says former Morgan Stanley chair in Asia
[...]
“If anything, he’s been tougher,” Roach said of Biden. The Yale University faculty member and former chairman of Morgan Stanley .. https://fortune.com/company/morgan-stanley/ .. Asia spoke to Bloomberg TV in an interview this week.
[...]
The US and China could take resolving their conflicts “very seriously and adopt a new approach rather than clinging to the old approach,” he said.
China could also re-examine its stance to addressing structural issues within its economy.
“The need to shift from the structure from exports and investment to internal private consumption is vital,” he said, adding that the government needs to invest in social safety nets and pensions to give workers more confidence.
https://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=171481395
Good read. Two faces of future America - ‘The Justins’ Follow a Legacy of Resistance in Tennessee
The young Black Democrats expelled from the legislature bring an activist approach, and model themselves after civil rights leaders of the past.
[...]
Mr. Jones marched with supporters after the Metro Council voted to appoint him back to the legislature.
[...]
Mr. Pearson once lobbied his high school for more books.
[...]
On Thursday morning, after Mr. Pearson was reinstated, the pair embraced in the chamber. Mr. Pearson held his fist up high after retaking his oath of office. Almost immediately, the two men plunged into a heated debate with Republicans over an education bill they warned would stifle efforts to teach about racism and sexism in the United States. Republicans abruptly cut off debate over the bill, over the objections of Democrats.
“They really tried to silence those two young men like they have the rest of us, but they have a different way,” Mr. McKenzie said. “It’s just a different generation. They have a different way of communication. They have a different tolerance level. They’re more immediate, ‘I want my say right now.’”
Your -- https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/14/us/justin-pearson-justin-jones-tennessee.html
It's gonna be a tough fight with much to enjoy for them.
She said 2y-olds -- Our ruling: False
We rate this claim as FALSE, based on our research. Nickelodeon has made public service messages in support of the Black Lives Matter movement and the LGBT community. But the network says it does not target them to programs intended for children under the age of 6.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/07/30/fact-check-nickelodeon-didnt-aim-blm-lgbqt-spots-toddlers/5541777002/
Trump lies. If you believe he believes all he says then you are saying he is far too stupid to be president.
Lime Time, Yours there is a lie. The advice was the vaccine would in most all cases deter serious illness and hospitalization. No vaccine is perfect. Your comment is misinformation and a guy who continuously put vaccination misinformation here has been banned. You should note that.
Lime Time, The biggest fact you ignore is that Trump does little but lie to you.
Lime Time, Your disregard for the truth in your support of a guy
who just lied continuously to you is nothing to be proud of.
It was terrible. Trump lied continuously, Joe was weak but told the truth. Joe clobbered him on substance, but how many would see that as most important. Your support of an habitual liar, again confirmed, is nothing to be proud of. Unfortunately for America more watching it would not have recognized Trump's lies, more might believe he was telling the truth. That's the sad thing about the situation.
Weak support, but if you had included it the post would have been left.
How could you believe anything from Veritas was actually from the diary.
hap0206, Making good policy and getting legislation through has nothing to do with
stage play. If a charade of lies is good for a president of yours then shame on you.
Agree.
rooster, Definitely in need of a supportive link, and none, so gone.
Encyclopedic. And that's no exaggeration.
Lies beginning to end. And i wish Joe did not feel he has to talk so fast. Some of the worst whack-jobs i know are the fastest talkers i know. Joe should speak at a rate comfortable to him. Re one of the lies you mentioned:
Anatomy of a Conspiracy Theory and a Smear: Still, No Evidence of Trump Order for 10,000 Guard on January 6th
by Tom Joscelyn
March 12, 2024
Full disclosure: The author served as a senior professional staff member on the January 6th Committee. In that capacity, he worked with former Rep. Liz Cheney, whom he has known for more than two decades and continues to advise. In addition, the author was a principal drafter of the committee’s final report.
Former President Donald Trump and his loyalists have long claimed that he “ordered” the National Guard to be ready for deployment on Jan. 6, 2021. “As many as 10,000 National Guard troops were told to be on the ready by the secretary of defense,” Mark Meadows, Trump’s White House Chief of Staff, claimed during a Fox News interview just one month after the attack. “That was a direct order from President Trump,” Meadows said .. https://www.foxnews.com/transcript/mark-meadows-biden-administration-policies-put-america-last . The implication was clear: President Trump did not deserve blame for the violence that unfolded at the U.S. Capitol because he wanted the National Guard to keep the peace.
There’s just one problem: The claim is not true .. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/15/no-trump-did-not-order-10000-troops-secure-capitol-jan-6/ .
The House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the U.S. Capitol thoroughly investigated this issue — questioning multiple witnesses about it and reviewing countless documents. The committee could not find any evidence to support Meadows’ claim. Indeed, Trump’s Acting Secretary of Defense at the time, Chris Miller, directly refuted ..
.. it in his testimony .. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-TRANSCRIPT-CTRL0000062444/pdf/GPO-J6-TRANSCRIPT-CTRL0000062444.pdf .. under oath– explaining that the president did not issue any such order.To remove any doubt: Not only did Donald Trump fail to contact his Secretary of Defense on January 6th (as shown in our hearing), Trump also failed to give any order prior to January 6 to deploy the military to protect the Capitol.
— January 6th Committee (@January6thCmte) July 26, 2022
Here is Secretary Miller’s testimony— pic.twitter.com/joucnUHvBB
It was covered by all media comprehensibly.