Only major problem with this line of thought is it underestimates the challenges of teaching.

Teaching is about more than just providing the material, if that was enough we could have automated teaching a long time ago. A teacher has to be able to understand and diagnose the source of a students confusion, and compose a solution. This is a very complex problem, due to how much individual people vary in their thinking, experiences and knowledge base.

The word "eventually" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

Yeah I caught that when I reread your comment. I made an edit, just a little too slow.

Oh, I see. Still not seeing a big incentive for big tech, those meat bags are providing free labor. No strong need to replace them.

edit: Oh wait, you're talking about paid ones. Nevermind.

Why would big tech ever want to get rid of nasty meat bags when nasty meat bags drive much of their engagement and thus increase their advertising revenues? We can't escape the realities of how the human brain operates, how much it likes to be stimulated regardless of the qualities of the stimulus.

I think a much more logical goal would be to take just enough action to avoid most (but not all) legal consequences while otherwise encouraging as many nasty meat bags to encounter other nasty meat bags with opposing viewpoints as possible. That would maximize brain stimulation, increasing engagement and thus revenue. This improves the stock price and makes your boss happier with you.

I'm no expert on Midwestern cuisine, there could be other factors like some central European culinary traditions, maybe religious conservatism and a general distrust of new things more common to inland cultures.

So, a factor for sure, but it's probably complicated.

While this meme is suburb, I assume you're aware that the legacy of bland British food is heavily influenced by WW2 and post-war rationing. It had an impact even here in the US, but a much stronger one in the UK where they were rationing well into the 50s if I remember right.

Culinary history is a fun branch.

The Saudis barely participated in Yom Kippur, from some brief googling they deployed a single battalion that saw a little bit of fighting in the Golan Heights. I honestly wasn't even aware they had participated militarily.

Their much bigger impact was the oil embargo against the US, which caused rather famous gas shortages here and one of the most severe recessions we've ever had, during the Nixon years. Perhaps seeing the rest of the coalition demolished was enough? Though there were clear reasons for the Israeli victory that aren't that difficult to understand. It's far more specific than just Israel strong or something like that. That oil embargo ended up proving the power of OPEC though, dramatically strengthening the Saudi's position on the global stage, which persists to this day.

Regarding NG, the main pipeline through the area for exporting Egyptian NG actually takes some pains to go around Israel, rather than through it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Gas_Pipeline

This betrays a startling lack of awareness of just how extensive US partnerships are across the globe. The US has sent tens of billions of dollars in military and economic aid to Egypt. Close ties with Saudi Arabia. Close ties with Morocco. Most Mediterranean countries are in NATO, actually. This isn't even to speak of our own military bases littered throughout both Africa and the Middle East.

Does anything going from Asia to Africa even go through Israel? I'd think they'd usually take sea routes through the Indian Ocean. Do we really need some unsinkable aircraft carrier anymore when we have literally dozens of our own airstrips all over the region?

That said, I do agree with your first two points. Ukraine is a proxy war, and supporting Israel is the point. Not sure it's actually more important than any actual US territory though.

Yeah, maybe something obscure I guess. They're not exactly black or anything though.

Very underrated comment, that one got a snort out of me. lol

Well written answer. This actually gives me a fantastic chance to argue the pro-Palestinian side for a change, which deserves some nuance of its own that it doesn't get nearly enough of.

I would argue that the realpolitik stance of Netanyahu is grossly outdated. Before the events of Oct 7th, Israel was getting closer and closer to an agreement with Saudi Arabia, indicative of a growing perception that the days of fossil fuel profits running an economy are slowly coming to their end, and the need to transition towards a service sector economy based around tourism, the free flow of business and cultural and technological export. All of these are severely hampered by violence in a way that resource extraction is far less subject to. Because of this shifting economic climate over not just the region, but the whole globe, the days of sudden, large-scale Arab attacks into Israeli territory were growing more and more unlikely. This ultimately makes the wish to secure a greater strategic depth unnecessary.

While that would not remove the chances of terrorism, we can look to the end of The Troubles in Ireland and see that negotiation and autonomy can create a viable path forward for ending local sectarian hostilities. While this would no doubt be a difficult path, requiring significant investment and no small amount of vulnerability from Israel in the short term, it has the potential to secure a lasting peace in a way that bombs simply cannot. If a negotiated peace and independence for the Palestinian people can be achieved, then, further ties with the rest of their Arab neighbors become significantly easier, giving Israel a much better opportunity to rise to a status of acceptance and prominence within the broader Middle East community. This would in turn allow them to exploit the Sunni/Shiite and secular/religious divides within the Islamic world to align themselves with the majority against Iran, and give them much greater security in the long run.

This diplomatic and economic path to security is perhaps barely still possible, if Israel can throw out Netanyahu and change their direction, reversing their pattern of settlement in the West Bank and economically compensating the Palestinians for land already lost. A back-breaking property tax could perhaps be levied on all Israeli citizens living within the West Bank settlements, with the proceeds going to outreach, health and education programs for their neighbors, both Arab and Israeli. This could slowly lead to a sort of economic demilitarized zone, and be the first step towards co-existence.