Mr.TaterSalad

Of all the "big name" free agents Hunter is the one guy I think this team could and would pursue. My reasoning for that is because he isn't just a pass rush specialist type of DE. He also plays well against the run and is a 3-down lineman who offers some versatility, being able to slide along the defensive front. This coaching staff values 3-down lineman and values being able to play along the defensive front versus a guy who is a pure pass rush specialist and that's all they do. The other thing with Hunter is I don't think he will be commanding a 4-5-6 year contract with a team. At 29 years old, it seems more likely he will get a 1-2-3 year deal somewhere and I could see that having more appeal to this front office, versus having to sign a guy like Brian Burns who will likely want a 5-6 year deal. They won't have to commit a large percentage of their cap to Hunter as they would a Burns. So I could see Hunter being the one top-tier free agent they sign.

I think this is all true and even if one of Allen, Burns, Johnson, Snead wasn't franchised, I don't think this front offices approach is to go break the bank on signing high-dollar free agents to long term deals. I think this years free agent class we bring in will look similar to what we brought in last offseason. That's not a bad thing either. I would just caution anyone not to get their hopes up that we're going to be in on one of the top defensive free agents. I'm going to say this now in-regards to the draft too. Don't be surprised if they draft a guy at a position you the fan weren't expecting them to take. We're all screaming for a CB or DE/Edge and they could just as easily go out and take a Guard or WR if that's whose BPA on their board.

If by Maxx Crosby you mean a multi-tooled defensive lineman, acquired in the draft, that can play multiple positions along the defensive front and isn't solely a pass rush specialist, sure. If by shutdown corner you mean signing 33 year old Stephon Gilmore to a one year deal or signing one of Chidobe Awuzie, Kenny Moore or Adoree Jackson to a team-friendly, cap-friendly 2-3 year deal, sure. If by Maxx Crosby you actually mean Maxx Crosby or signing the likes of Brian Burns, Danielle Hunter, or Josh Allen, I don't think that's happening. If by shutdown corner you mean acquiring one of the premium players on the market like L'Jarius Sneed, Jaylon Johnson, or Kendall Fuller, that doesn't seem to be their plan either. They'd rather bring in two B-/B/B+ good free agents that they can get on a team-friendly, short term deal, than one A+ great free agent that they have to pay big money to on a long term contract. I hope to eat a whole bucket of my words when they sign one of the top free agents on the market, but I just don't think that's what Holmes' plan is.

It seems pointless to discuss at this point given Ottawa's GM came out and said they are keeping him and building around him. But if we could have had him for the price of only draft picks and a prospect I'd probably make the trade. It's the kind of move, as you said, that make you a contender.

Brady Tkachuk is not available for trade correct? Because I saw a rumor the other day that he was, then the Sens GM came out and shot it down. But like um, if he was, would you pay the piper and the very high cost it would take to get him?

No, not at all. I'm just wondering how it gets much worse than what McConnell has done. I mean, I guess he's been willing to not shut the government down and that's good. Whereas a Rand Paul or Mike Lee or Lyin' Ted would.

Mitch stole a Supreme Court and refused to do his Constitutional duties and allow a nomination for Supreme Court Justice to come up for a vote. I know it can get worse, but that usurping of his Constitutional responsibilities is pretty damn bad and egregious.

I think if you gave Brad Holmes the choice of spending money to add two good players, on team favorable deals versus one elite player, on a max contract, he's going to add good players. I think anyone expecting or hoping for an A-tier Chris Jones, L'Jarius Sneed, Brian Burns, Jaylon Johnson type player is just setting themselves up to be disappointed. I've come to the conclusion myself that it doesn't matter how close we are to a Super Bowl, Holmes is not deviating from the philosophy that brought him this far. We'll add a couple of nice players from the B-tier of free agency as we did last year and call it a day.

Damn, Richard Lewis died. Love him playing off Larry David in Curb and loved him in Robin Hood Men in Tights. RIP Richard Lewis.

Downriver, Macomb, and Western Wayne are where he is going to have to make up his West Michigan decline. I don't think there are enough white votes in rural areas that he can turn out to make up for the losses in Ottawa and Kent County. White working class areas, that used to vote Democrat in large majorities, are where he's going to have to pull votes away from Biden and the Dems. He's going to have to try and increase whatever turnout and vote share he can in places like Allen Park, Garden City, Lincoln Park, Livonia, Macomb Township, Roseville, Shelby Township, Sterling Heights, Taylor, Trenton, etc. Communities with north of 80% white voters and median income levels in the $45,000-$75,000 range are going to be where he needs turnout increased. On top of that, he's going to need young voters and voters of color to stay home. He may have a more likely outcome there, with those voters staying home, than he will increasing his vote share or turnout numbers among white working class than he already has. It feels like in 2020 white working class turnout peaked and that it isn't going to go that much higher. So Trump will need voters to stay home as well on the Dem side.

I wouldn't draft Kyle McCord if I were the Lions. He's a worse version of my boy Connor Cook lol. FYI, I know the article is about Robinson, but McCord was the one prominently featured in the picture.

I believe Netanyahu supporting/propping up Hamas, through Qatar, backfired on him in the same we the US propping up Saddam against Iran backfired on us in the 1980s/1990s. I can't say for certain whether or not Rabin, Peres, or anyone else would have handled things completely differently than the way Bibi is leading the IDF now. It does feel like though, in the case of Rabin specifically, he may have taken a more tactful approach. Sure, Rabin dislike Arafat and the PLO, but he seemed more apt to work with them, knowing the extremism and radicals that were to the right of the PLO, i.e. Hamas or adjacent groups. Rabin was even assassinated because of his numerous attempts towards peace initiatives and being more conciliatory towards Arafat and the Palestinians. He wasn't hardline enough for the Israeli right wing. He was thought to have appeased the PLO/Palestinians too much with the Oslo Accords and so paid the ultimate price for it. Netanyahu was directly involved in helping to gin up that angst and anger towards Rabin on the far right in Israel. That doesn't mean the blood of Rabin's murder is fully on Bibi's hands, but Netanyahu inflamed a coalition of people that intern led to political violence. When I made the point earlier about Netanyahu using Hamas as his foil or political punching bag I should have extrapolated on that more. The far right of Israel, the Likud coalition that brought Bibi to power and has kept him in power, seems to vehemently oppose a two-state solution. Bibi helped with funding Hamas and keeping them in power in Gaza, partly through the Qatari money. By keeping Hamas in Gaza he thus divided the Palestinian leadership with different entities in charge in Gaza and the West Bank. By propping up Hamas in Gaza he has the foil he needs to speak out against and oppose a two-state solution. His base hates the idea of a Palestinian state and as long as a barbaric regime like Hamas controlled Gaza he can appease his base with his stance against a two-sate solution. How do you expect to have a two-state solution with these crazy terrorists in control in Gaza. Given the brutal actions of Hamas and the October 7th terrorist attack, I think all hope is lost getting Bibi or anyone of the far right coalition to support a two-state solution now. All this is not to say that Bibi could have gotten rid of Hamas from Gaza, no more than we could have gotten rid of Saddam in the 1980s by not funding him against Iran. It is to say though that Bibi didn't have to directly aid in propping them up and it seems like he used Hamas to his political benefit before October 7th. Who knows though. Maybe I'm a liar, maybe I'm wrong.

I don't give a rats about civilian casualties, so I'm just going to pretend that all Palestinian people are part of Hamas and that they had it coming.

NYT: ‘Buying Quiet’: Inside the Israeli Plan That Propped Up Hamas Looks like it was. So whose LYING now?

A right wing nut, with Bibi's backing, literally murdered Rabin because of his peace offerings towards the Palestinians.

This Vox article does as good a job as any that I've seen outlining what a reasonably appropriate, self defense response could be. One that works to respond to the threat of Hamas and limit civilian casualties. I'm no military expert and have never even so much as served our country, much less been a general, mapping out battle plans and a tactical effort. From the reading and research I have done, Vox article and otherwise, there are a few things that could be done differently. Not propping up Hamas with Qatari money and financing them as Netanyahu did in the years leading up to the situation is one thing. But I digress from that point. Not cutting off water and electricity to millions of people in Gaza would be another thing I wouldn't have done. Taking a more tactical approach, whatever that really looks like, and going more after Hamas leadership, funding, and weaponry than engaging in an all out, block by block assault on Gaza is yet another. I wouldn't have told people to go southern Gaza to seek refuge, only to then begin to shell and assault southern portions of Gaza. I would have also made sure I had Egypt on board, in some capacity, to take in some amount of refugees. How you get them on board, I'm not certain, but I would guess there is a financial price that could be paid by Israel and it's allies to do so. I'm ignorant though on the issues of war and tactical battle planning. I just know what I've read and researched. So I hold complete space that I could be naive and flat out wrong here.

I think a Yitzhak Rabin or a more mild-mannered leader, Labor or otherwise, would have handled this war differently and may not have acted with the unrestrained aggression that Bibi's IDF has acted with. Well, Sharon as a former military general, may have acted as aggressive as Bibi has. I don't think a different leader would use this war as a political, PR prop to keep themselves in power and rally support behind them. They also may not have funneled Qatari money to prop up Hamas in the first place as Netanyahu did. Netanyahu needs Hamas as a foil and political fodder to deflect from his authoritarian tendencies and from his attempted judicial coup. I don't think Meir, Rabin, Sharon, Peres, etc. would have propped Hamas up so they could look like a tough guy and use them as a political fodder the way Bibi has. None of those aforementioned Prime Ministers even attempted a judicial coup to install themselves as dictator of Israel and avoid criminal prosecution the way Bibi did either.

We don't talk about that. We don't talk about Qatari money that he allowed, and encouraged, to come through Israel and be funneled to Hamas.

They were a failed judicial coup away from being a dictatorship under Bibi. So if it's not an outright dictatorship, it's a democracy on life support. We'll see if Bibi resigns if the Likud coalition loses its majority. And in any case, I don't feel good about my tax dollars going up prop up a wannabe dictator whose the Isreali version of the man in your avatar photo.

I don't hold feel I hold Isreal to a higher standard. I have condemned on numerous occasions what Hamas did. Hell, I even believe Isreal has a right to respond and defend itself. I do have an issue though providing munitions and military aid to dictatorships in any country, be it Israel or Palestine. I'd prefer my tax dollars not help, in any way, shape, or form, prop up a dictatorship and an authoritarian leader using a war for his own PR and political gain. And yes, Netanyahu is an authoritarian and a wannabe dictator.

Of course I'd like for Hamas to surrender and for hostages to be released. I very well recognize who the aggressor is in this situation. Honest questions for you, all BS and hyperbole aside. Does proportionality of civilian deaths matter to you? Do you believe Israel has a right to do whatever it wants in response to October 7th, without regard to the mounting civilian death toll? Is there no line Israel can also cross? You know it is possible to hold space for believing that both what Hamas did was brutal and wrong, while also believing Israel response is getting out of hand itself and worsening a humanitarian crisis.

So how high does the death toll have to rise before you believe is enough is enough? And if there is no line for you that can be crossed, why not just use a nuclear weapon on Gaza? Nuking Gaza would be much faster if you don't have any regard for the civilian death toll.

I'm going to parse out my answers and responses below. What do I think Biden does? I think he, his administration, and Congress advocate for and send, unconditioned military aid to Israel for not only the Iron Dome missile defense system, but also for things like F-35 fighter jets, direct weapons and munitions. They send this aid to a to a corrupt, undemocratic, fascistic Israeli government lead by a to a corrupt, undemocratic, fascistic man in Benjamin Netanyahu. I think by sending military aid to Netanyahu's government he is not only supporting Bibi's war effort, but in part, also supporting Bibi's PR campaign to wage this war, make himself look good, and keep himself in power as dictator of Israel. Netanyahu is using this war to try and make himself look like a hero and to deflect from all of his legal problems, alleged criminality, and all of the civil unrest we saw prior to October 7th. The longer this war drags on the less attention paid to Netanyahu's legal issues and alleged criminality it seems. This Council on Foreign Relations report gives a fairly good breakdown of the military aid we send to Netanyahu's corrupt, undemocratic, fascistic Israeli government. I think his administration, and those before it, also potentially violate the so-called Leahy Law in the United States. Vox has a good explanation of the Leahy Law and why the US may be in violation of its own law. The Leahy Law is supposed to be used to ensure countries that receive aid and military aid from the US aren't using that aid to violate the human rights of others nor international law. Thanks to multiple, credible reports, from various agencies we already know that Israel is/was operating as an apartheid state with its treatment of people in Gaza and the West Bank prior to October 7th. Apartheid is a gross abuse of human rights and a violation of international law. It's not his ****ing war. He didn't start it. He's not fighting it. It is certainly true that he didn't start this war and that Hamas did and Israel responded. There have been broader historical factors at play that are far beyond and were well before Joe Biden's presidency and it is not fair at all to act as if he started it. In some small part though, it is a war he has chosen to get involved in it with the direct sale of munitions and supply of unconditioned military aid. So while it is not "his war", his administration and congress decided to involve themselves with direct arms sales and military aid to a corrupt, undemocratic, fascistic Israel government lead by Netanyahu. You act like he's wanting all of this to happen and finally changed his mind because 10,000 people said something to him. I certainly don't think Biden wanted any of this to happen. I would venture to guess most on the left don't either. But wanting it to happen and supporting it while it is happening are two different conversations we need to have. When this war started and through its first few months (November, December, January) the Biden Administration opposed a permanent ceasefire and even fought against it in the United Nations. They also opposed conditioning military aid or restricting it in any way. It seems to me, and maybe I am wrong here, that after months of mounting political pressure he is changing his tune. Political pressure coming from Arab-Americans, Muslim-Americans, the left in his own party, combined with a rising death toll in Gaza and a humanitarian disaster, has made Biden has come around to the idea of both conditioning military aid and having a permanent ceasefire adopted. This is a very good thing. Conditioning military aid and pausing the fighting is something many have wanted for months. Now, you can say that Hamas may well just violate a ceasefire resolution, making it a one-sided affair that only Israel holds itself too. That may end up being the case and **** Hamas for doing so. We will see if a negotiated ceasefire ends up in place next week as is rumored and if Hamas bothers to stick with it. Another point that I want to make is regarding our special relationship with Israel and the unwavering support we give to a country led by a man who is corrupt, undemocratic, fascistic man in Benjamin Netanyahu. There are few other dictatorial and authoritarian regimes and political parties that we would support in the way we support Benjamin Netanyahu and his Likud government. We don't support Hamas and the PLO in this wat in Palestine. We don't support Vladimir Putin this way in Russia. We don't support Aleksandr Lukashenko or Viktor Orban this way in Belarus or Hungary. Yet even when Benjamin Netanyahu uses his own countries judicial system to stage a coup we still have Democratic politicians in this country, like Joe Biden or Haley Stevens, falling all over themselves and trumpeting our special relationship with Israel. There is no other authoritarian, fascistic regime in this world that we would consider a special ally like we do Israel. Like it or not, admit it or not, right now, Israel is being led by a wannabe dictator and a wannabe fascist. Netanyahu is not Golda Meir, Yitzhak Rabin, nor Ariel Sharon. He is a corrupt man, with authoritarian tendencies, who was and still is actively trying to overthrow democracy in Israel to avoid criminal prosecution and keep himself in power for life. To pretend that the Israel of today that we are providing aid to and working with is the same Israel that Bill Clinton worked side-by-side with when Yitzhak Rabin was its Prime Minister or Jimmy Carter worked with when Menachem Begin was leading the nation is foolish. Benjamin Netanyahu is a bad leader and a bad man. The Israel of today is not the Israel we negotiated with and worked with over the past 6-7 decades. It is today a nation slipping more towards Hungary and Belarus than it is a free, fair democracy. What he is doing there sounds a heckuva a lot like what Donald Trump attempted here. I wouldn't want my tax dollars doing to aid Trump in a PR war that he was actively using to prop himself up politically and keep himself in power. I sure don't want them going to prop up Trump's just as corrupt, just as dictatorial counterpart in Israel in Netanyahu. Were Israel led by a decent person like Rabin or Sharon, I'd feel a lot better about supporting them. But they are not, they are led by a man whose trying to make himself Israel last Prime Minister and first dictator.

This is likely a sign that the political pressure is working and that watching a mounting death toll has probably weighed on him personally. Good to see it.