Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them. They expel/kill/convert the Israeli citizens and declare Israel to be Palestine once again. How would the world's governments, geopolitics, and religions react to this?

Israel could wipe out Palestine in 3 days if they wanted too. There is no situation in which Palestine takes Israel.

Originally posted by Lestov16
Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them. They expel/kill/convert the Israeli citizens and declare Israel to be Palestine once again. How would the world's governments, geopolitics, and religions react to this?

The far right in the US would gain control of the government. I'm not sure what would happen next, but I'm convinced that there would no longer be a Palestine.

Hamas gets hold of a WMD and uses it? I would think any nation not "governed" by violent Islamic religionism would get extremely worried, wondering if this was an isolated situation, or if other groups, like ISIS and Al Qaeda, are similarly empowered and planning their own attacks.

I imagine that the US/NATO/whoever, would also attack Palestine, to show you can't destroy another country and get away with it. In effect: rapid escalation of hostilities would ensue, with Islamic religionism losing in the end, after many, many, many lives lost.

They would get the majority in a democratically elected government, and the policies certainly wouldn't favor the Jewish people lol

Originally posted by Lestov16
Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them. They expel/kill/convert the Israeli citizens and declare Israel to be Palestine once again. How would the world's governments, geopolitics, and religions react to this?

If the scenario is the US/west can't (or didn't want to) stop them for some unknown reason, then it'd probably only be a matter of time before Egpyt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon started vying for those lands the Jews turned from a desert to an oasis. ie the Palestinians would be ****ed again.

If Israel gets ****ed, one could hope that the US would immediately lose interest in the region and we'd stop spending money on preventing them from killing each other.

If we're very lucky. Palestine might even use their WMD on some of the other nations around it, assuming they didn't already expend their supply of it on Israel.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
If Israel gets ****ed, one could hope that the US would immediately lose interest in the region and we'd stop spending money on preventing them from killing each other.

If we're very lucky. Palestine might even use their WMD on some of the other nations around it, assuming they didn't already expend their supply of it on Israel.

There are too many people in the US that believe that Israel must exist for Jesus to return. Remember, we have our own bag of nuts.

But if Israel is already dead, as the scenario implies, Jesus is just ****ed for those people, lol.

And in that situation, while I think you'd have lots of angry Americans, you wouldn't have enough who are angry enough to push the Government into revenge-invading Palestine, or something.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
But if Israel is already dead, as the scenario implies, Jesus is just ****ed for those people, lol.

And in that situation, while I think you'd have lots of angry Americans, you wouldn't have enough who are angry enough to push the Government into revenge-invading Palestine, or something.

I'm not as optimistic as you.

Originally posted by Tzeentch
But if Israel is already dead, as the scenario implies, Jesus is just ****ed for those people, lol.

And in that situation, while I think you'd have lots of angry Americans, you wouldn't have enough who are angry enough to push the Government into revenge-invading Palestine, or something. Not right away. But it wouldn't be the end of their end-times beliefs. Give it a generation or two, and enough internal fear-mongering among the populace over the state of the nation and world, and another war to re-take the Holy Land--on the pretext of counter-terrorism, or whatever--could certainly happen.

Palestine wouldn't survive, that's for sure. Their ass'd be glass.

Does Israel not have nukes. I am under the impression they do have them.

It's just a what-if. Though if Israel magically died and Palestine got a hold of the nukes... then that'd be sick.

If Palestine over took Israel, WW3 would definitely ensue.

Originally posted by It's xyz!
If Palestine over took Israel, WW3 would definitely ensue. There's never gonna be a WW3.

The Upper Class has too much silver to want to **** up this dystopia they got going for them in the near future.

They control World Wars, among everything else.

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
Israel could wipe out Palestine in 3 days if they wanted too. There is no situation in which Palestine takes Israel.


Agreed. Not gonna happen.... Ever.

Originally posted by Oneness

The Upper Class has too much silver to want to **** up this dystopia they got going for them in the near future.

They control World Wars, among everything else.
Which was pretty much the same thing people were saying before WW1, albeit without your quasi-Anarchist tone.

Newspapers and academics and politicians were all in the business of trying to reassure the world during the tensions of the early teens that there was too much interlocking trade and too much amity between the royal families and governments of Europe to allow an actual war between Great Powers to happen.

I do agree that a World War is very unlikely, but then I also fear it's never as far away as we might think, and when human emotions come into play no amount of 'control' can stop certain situations from erupting.

More likely than a world war of the kind seen in the 20th century between huge blocks of great powers is a major war between two or three powers. Russia and China for instance, despite being strategic partners, are unlikely to step in if one or the other gets in a war with the USA because most likely the war won't be an existential threat to either Russia or China but a dispute over something like Eastern Europe or Japan. Even so, if such a hypothetical war doesn't involve more than a handful of countries the effect on the world would still be disastrous.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Which was pretty much the same thing people were saying before WW1, albeit without your quasi-Anarchist tone.

Newspapers and academics and politicians were all in the business of trying to reassure the world during the tensions of the early teens that there was too much interlocking trade and too much amity between the royal families and governments of Europe to allow an actual war between Great Powers to happen.

I do agree that a World War is very unlikely, but then I also fear it's never as far away as we might think, and when human emotions come into play no amount of 'control' can stop certain situations from erupting.

More likely than a world war of the kind seen in the 20th century between huge blocks of great powers is a major war between two or three powers. Russia and China for instance, despite being strategic partners, are unlikely to step in if one or the other gets in a war with the USA because most likely the war won't be an existential threat to either Russia or China but a dispute over something like Eastern Europe or Japan. Even so, if such a hypothetical war doesn't involve more than a handful of countries the effect on the world would still be disastrous. But not existential, and that's my main point.

And I disagree in it even being likely that a small war will break out:

I would say the cohesiveness of the upper-class on a global scale has now surpassed nationality. Such is the power of greed, the power to make dystopia more of a likelihood than ruin.

We've had to have drawn out the destruction wrought by our intervention in Iraq for the purpose of profiteering from the lack of infrastructure, or the ruin of infrastructure our conflicts have produced. I say this because cohesive and organized strikes have worked every-time there and yet, that is the least practiced method throughout our tenure in the middle east.

Originally posted by Oneness
But not existential, and that's my main point.

And I disagree in it even being likely that a small war will break out:

I would say the cohesiveness of the upper-class on a global scale has now surpassed nationality. Such is the power of greed, the power to make dystopia more of a likelihood than ruin.
The current *** for tat exchange of economic sanctions between Russia and USA, two of the countries with the greatest wealth inequality and thus two of the countries that would most typify your view of global statescraft are now costing billions of dollars in lost trade and threatening the wealth of numerous oligarchs. If economic interests trumped all else as you assert, there wouldn't be the standoff there is now over Ukraine, a country that's of little economic worth and is actually an economic liability to anyone who tries to put it into its sphere of influence.

Right now, but for a few exceptions, the oligarchs in Ukraine have supported Ukraine against Russia while the Russian oligarchs have lined up behind Russia. This is despite the fact that most of the Ukrainian oligarchs are dependent on free and open trade with Russia.

How does your worldview explain what's going on in Ukraine?

Originally posted by Omega Vision
The current *** for tat exchange of economic sanctions between Russia and USA, two of the countries with the greatest wealth inequality and thus two of the countries that would most typify your view of global statescraft are now costing billions of dollars in lost trade and threatening the wealth of numerous oligarchs. If economic interests trumped all else as you assert, there wouldn't be the standoff there is now over Ukraine, a country that's of little economic worth and is actually an economic liability to anyone who tries to put it into its sphere of influence.

Right now, but for a few exceptions, the oligarchs in Ukraine have supported Ukraine against Russia while the Russian oligarchs have lined up behind Russia. This is despite the fact that most of the Ukrainian oligarchs are dependent on free and open trade with Russia.

Hold on a second I'm not talking about the nations I'm talking about individuals who have a lot of money in them. The nations can and are being eaten away to feed their greed.

It's a different situation than Iraq or Libya. It's just Vlad trying to showboat.

As for the Iraqi situation, war wears down infrastructure, creating oversea jobs and pumping wealth into the wealthy whom they pay for marketing and commercial industry that will pump wealth back into their pockets for resources to rebuild.

The only wars from here on out are profiteer wars, we learned from WWI.

Ukraine is no threat.

You're obsessed with nationalism, that was never the issue. It's a tool like "democracy". It's one big rigged game.

The only solution, as I've said a gazillion times, is a classless, fully automatized infrastructure that is self-sufficient in its autonomy.

Seems like you forgot that Jews basically are the richest ethnic group in the USA, the most powerful nation in the world.
They won't let Palestine get away with something of this magnitude.

All the Christians and pro-Christians will never allow any other nation to occupy Jerusalem.
Their emotion of anger will be enough to persuade Christian nations to rally against the whole of Islam. And that will be an ugly sight.

A WW3 against Palestine will probably ensue. Palestinians will suffer a terrible fate.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
... Palestinians will suffer a terrible fate.

That is why peace with Israel is so important.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is why peace with Israel is so important.
There will be no peace until we eradicate ALL belief systems, or learn to accept that there is NO God/Heaven/Nirvana/etc.

The root causes for ALL wars are religion and money.

Originally posted by Oneness
Ukraine is no threat.

You're obsessed with nationalism, that was never the issue. It's a tool like "democracy". It's one big rigged game.

The only solution, as I've said a gazillion times, is a classless, fully automatized infrastructure that is self-sufficient in its autonomy.

So basically a robotic earth where humans are useless, sounds like the beginning of the matrix.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
There will be no peace until we eradicate ALL belief systems, or learn to accept that there is NO God/Heaven/Nirvana/etc.

The root causes for ALL wars are religion and money. Religion is but an apprentice in the craft of butchery compared to the artisan that is nationalism.

The root of all war is Human Nature.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
There will be no peace until we eradicate ALL belief systems, or learn to accept that there is NO God/Heaven/Nirvana/etc.

The root causes for ALL wars are religion and money.

So, you would get rid of the one thing that gave us an evolutionary advantage. I am afraid that you would doom our species.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
So, you would get rid of the one thing that gave us an evolutionary advantage. I am afraid that you would doom our species.
That's not what makes us above the rest of the creatures in Earth.

It's our intelligence.

Religion and money are, in fact, deterrents hampering advancements in man's quest for knowledge.
There is a price for knowledge. Because of man's greed, they built institutions and took advantage of knowledge to accumulate wealth (hence educational institutions that give the privilege only for people who can afford for that knowledge).

If knowledge was a free-for-all, these fairytale myths about gods and salvation wouldn't exist.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
That's not what makes us above the rest of the creatures in Earth.

It's our intelligence.

Religion and money are, in fact, deterrents hampering advancements in man's quest for knowledge.
There is a price for knowledge. Because of man's greed, they built institutions and took advantage of knowledge to accumulate wealth (hence educational institutions that give the privilege only for people who can afford for that knowledge).

If knowledge was a free-for-all, these fairytale myths about gods and salvation wouldn't exist. zEyUWKJFER8

Originally posted by Time Immemorial
So basically a robotic earth where humans are useless Humans still design the machines, they still invent.

But the only reason I'd think they'd do so would be either to cause terror or to counter it. We police, protect, and take care of ourselves or our direct inner circle in this newer, braver world.

I actually made a thread about it

Palestine would cease to exist, obviously. Though it has to be added that mere premise of this thread is highly implausible, not to mention that getting your hands on a WMD is one thing, and having the necessary know-how and tools to safely and properly handle said WMD, along with deploying capability, all the while avoiding Mossad surveillance(something which the Hamas have spectacularly failed at for the last few decades), is something else.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
That's not what makes us above the rest of the creatures in Earth.

It's our intelligence.

Religion and money are, in fact, deterrents hampering advancements in man's quest for knowledge.
There is a price for knowledge. Because of man's greed, they built institutions and took advantage of knowledge to accumulate wealth (hence educational institutions that give the privilege only for people who can afford for that knowledge).

If knowledge was a free-for-all, these fairytale myths about gods and salvation wouldn't exist.

I disagree, it was religion the brought people together into cities. And as far as silly beliefs, only the future can tell what silly things we believing now. Electrons and singularities could be just as much fantasy as "fairytale myths about gods and salvation".

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree, it was religion the brought people together into cities. And as far as silly beliefs, only the future can tell what silly things we believing now. Electrons and singularities could be just as much fantasy as "fairytale myths about gods and salvation".

wow. very true. we've spoken on here almost a year ago and I didn't see this coming from you. I concur

Originally posted by Raisen
wow. very true. we've spoken on here almost a year ago and I didn't see this coming from you. I concur

I'm a religious person. I am a Buddhist, and the thought of some 'idiot' wanting to get rid of my religion is disturbing. I may disagree with your beliefs, but that's as far as I go.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I'm a religious person. I am a Buddhist, and the thought of some 'idiot' wanting to get rid of my religion is disturbing. I may disagree with your beliefs, but that's as far as I go.
I'm not forcing you to be irreligious.

I just posted my worldview based on the facts that I have observed within the scope of my perception.

Originally posted by AsbestosFlaygon
There will be no peace until we eradicate ALL belief systems, or learn to accept that there is NO God/Heaven/Nirvana/etc.

The root causes for ALL wars are religion and money. How unimaginably simplistic.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
How unimaginably simplistic.
Yet impossible to accomplish.

I don't mind religion as it reinforces belief in a metaphysical entity/system, which I very much believe in, but there are many religious dogmas that cause horrible amounts of unnecessary conflict around the world.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree, it was religion the brought people together into cities.

Can you prove that?

Because as I recall the Neolithic Revolution and the agriculture it brought our species led to the first "cities" being built, allowing more people to live together in communities.

Religion has been used as a tool to inspire community among civilizations that already exist and I personally have no issues with the religious, but don't pretend it is imperative for religion to exist.

Oh, it's also not our sole evolutionary advantage. Our ability to walk for nigh-endless periods of time is.

Originally posted by Raisen
wow. very true. we've spoken on here almost a year ago and I didn't see this coming from you. I concur
Nah, he likely picked up that line from the last chapter of Michael Crichton's Lost World.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree, it was religion the brought people together into cities. And as far as silly beliefs, only the future can tell what silly things we believing now. Electrons and singularities could be just as much fantasy as "fairytale myths about gods and salvation".

How is there a possibility that electrons don't physically exist?

Originally posted by Lestov16
How is there a possibility that electrons don't physically exist? I think he's taking a trip down epistemology lane with that one.

i just hear about this. but i don't know more about it.

Originally posted by Lestov16
How is there a possibility that electrons don't physically exist?

An electron is part of a theory. We can never be 100% sure that this theory is correct. In the future they may look at our beliefs and laugh in the same way we are amused by beliefs of the past.

I hope you realize that my post had nothing to do with electrons. I was pointing out the arrogance of our current beliefs, and making a comparison to those beliefs of the past.

Either you don't know what a theory is, or you don't know what an electron is.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Either you don't know what a theory is, or you don't know what an electron is.
Wrong, as he might not know both.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Either you don't know what a theory is, or you don't know what an electron is.

Really? Do you have blind faith in the all mighty electron? Is there no room for science and change? You might as well be a religious fanatic.

As an Australian who's country just decided to help fund/support America in their Israel endeavours I just hope Palestine would be happy they got their territory back and leave it at that and world leaders would stop wanking over the Mid East. But lets be practical. Palestine after assuming control (like most countries who just have a victory) would put a corrupt power in charge and its gonna be Taliban all over again and we're gonna have to spend more money on it because its Israel. Notice our governments aren't nearly as keen to fund conflicts in Africa. American corporations are like: OIL! American Government goes: JESUS! And the Australian Government goes: (you know what I can't even think of a reason... wankers).

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Really? Do you have blind faith in the all mighty electron? Is there no room for science and change? You might as well be a religious fanatic. The problem I've always had with epistemology is the argument that one can't ever know anything 100% correctly, as the concept of knowledge could itself not even exist. What a useless philosophy, it leads nowhere. So... as far knowing whether an electron exists--yes. We KNOW. Without invoking Cartesian logic (which is truly pointless in determine the truth of things), we absolutely know 100% for sure that electrons exist.

Whether they're fundamental, or whether they're part of something greater or more complicated that we haven't recognized yet is still up for grabs. But within the confines of human experience (the only experience available to us without invoking religion or spiritualism ), it's an absolute certainty that they're there. Stating something known as fact as the fact it is, is not being closed to change, and it's pretty shitty of you to imply that I am. I have absolutely no clue why you tried to present them as "maybe" fairytale, other than perhaps you're trying to play a devil's advocate. If you are, then you're very poor at it.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
The problem I've always had with epistemology is the argument that one can't ever know anything 100% correctly, as the concept of knowledge could itself not even exist. What a useless philosophy, it leads nowhere. So... as far knowing whether an electron exists--yes. We KNOW. Without invoking Cartesian logic (which is truly pointless in determine the truth of things), we absolutely know 100% for sure that electrons exist.

Whether they're fundamental, or whether they're part of something greater or more complicated that we haven't recognized yet is still up for grabs. But within the confines of human experience (the only experience available to us without invoking religion or spiritualism ), it's an absolute certainty that they're there. Stating something known as fact as the fact it is, is not being closed to change, and it's pretty shitty of you to imply that I am. I have absolutely no clue why you tried to present them as "maybe" fairytale, other than perhaps you're trying to play a devil's advocate. If you are, then you're very poor at it.

No real scientist would ever agree with you. 99.999%, but 100%. That wasn't even my point. The future will know better then we know. I for one hope that the electron doesn't exist. It would make the future far more exiting, but that's not what I was talking about. The future will look at us as if we were primitives, because we are. So, dismissing the past for the wisdom of the present is foolhardy, because we are subject to that same criticism. Do you see how that has nothing to do with the electron? Maybe what I am telling you is just way over your head. It's really simple: Something as real to us as an electron, for example, could be a fairytale to people of the future.

I am not going to talk to you any more. I will ignore you from now on. You are too pigheaded, and I don't like talking to you. Goodbye.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I am not going to talk to you any more. I will ignore you from now on. You are too pigheaded, and I don't like talking to you. Goodbye. I was on the verge of saying the exact same thing to you. If you want to make a point about future generations knowing better than us, fine. But do it without being an obtuse, condescending ass.

To be fair the comparison between fairy tales and electrons are very different from a metholodogical standpoint. While both play with the concept of passing information into future generations, fairy tales admit diverging ideologies and cultural changes over the passage of time. Scientific knowledge is structured in a different way. If you break an electron, in the other hand, we don't even call it an electron anymore.

So... Saying that the future generations will know better than us, and stating they'll threat two different structural bases of information as the same, only goes to say that future generations will not really know any better than us.

Which is fine, because culturally speaking we loss many levels of subtelty.

Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them. They expel/kill/convert the Israeli citizens and declare Israel to be Palestine once again. How would the world's governments, geopolitics, and religions react to this?

Originally posted by popoyez
Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them. They expel/kill/convert the Israeli citizens and declare Israel to be Palestine once again. How would the world's governments, geopolitics, and religions react to this?

All scenarios are implausible.

1) The US has more than enough weapons at its disposal to counter any WMD.
They wouldn't let any terrorist group take control of a concentrated WMD in the first place.

2) The Jewish majority in Israel will NEVER convert, even if it means mass genocide.
If Hitler couldn't exterminate them (and that was before US became a full ally of Israel), no terrorist group could.

3) The Jewish oligarchy in the US will persuade the US gov't to wage an all-out war to exterminate all Islamic terrorist groups, along with the entire genocide of the Palestinian people. It would be Holocaust 2, but more swift and destructive.

Originally posted by popoyez
Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them. They expel/kill/convert the Israeli citizens and declare Israel to be Palestine once again. How would the world's governments, geopolitics, and religions react to this?
Pointlessly hypothetical scenario.

You might as well put alien invaders in.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Really? Do you have blind faith in the all mighty electron? Is there no room for science and change? You might as well be a religious fanatic.
Nope, I have visual faith in the electron. Since, you know, we can actually see a huge ass swathe of electrons in an electric arc. Lol, science and change are the reason why the electron exists.

Originally posted by Omega Vision
Pointlessly hypothetical scenario.

You might as well put alien invaders in. Oooh let's do that. Mars Attacks! during the peace talks.

Originally posted by popoyez
Let's say in a hypothetical situation, Hamas got control of a concentrated WMD that allowed them to conquer the IDF with the U.S. having no effective weapons to stop them.
Unfeasible. For one, it ignores that Israel already has a sizable arsenal of WMDs(which have much better delivery systems and are more technologically sophisticated than any shoddy dirty bomb that the Hamas could ever lay their hands on).

Two, the US does have effective weapons to counter them. They're known as nukes.