I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by counting the number of individual attacks. In a war, you want to be attacking the enemy while preventing the enemy from attacking you. To the extent that this chart is meaningful (and I'm not sure it is, given that it does not take the size of an attack into account) it's just showing that Israel appears to be fighting Hezbollah effectively - Israeli victory would mean reducing the red bars to zero.

That's what usually happens during a war... Hezbollah is effectively the army of Lebanon. The fact that Lebanon's government does not officially call it that does not change the reality on the ground.

She's single, you know...

You underestimate the power of the Dark Side.

The dark side of the Force is a pathway to many abilities... some consider to be unnatural.

Edit: unfortunately it's fake.

Meanwhile Simba has a perfectly good mother.

Let's put the issue of Israel aside and consider slavery in the USA before the Civil War. There was plenty of oppression but effectively no resistance. The deadliest slave revolt (for white people) involved about 60 casualties before all the slaves involved were quickly captured and executed, and this revolt was so out of the ordinary that it shocked the nation. Almost all human beings do not in fact rise up against their oppressors when they think that doing so will just get them killed. When there's no power vacuum left by a weak central government, an organized insurgency has no room to form and so people will tolerate anything.

The idea that human nature includes an unquenchable flame of defiance may be appealing but it is simply false. Otherwise we'd see insurgents in North Korea.

It's fine as long as you look around first and don't see any rotund, bald, and very angry men.

You hold the common belief that insurgency is motivated by revenge, but history does not support it. The historical record is full of extremely brutal conquerors who faced little to no sustained resistance after their initial invasion. It's harder to say what does lead to insurgency but it appears to be simply the weakness of the central government, regardless of its brutality or lack thereof. (Local cultural factors are also important but they are not decisive.) The example of the USA in Iraq is illustrative: the USA overthrew Saddam Hussein with relatively little loss of civilian life and ended his brutal practices. One might think that Americans really would have been greeted as liberators, but in fact they faced a far more persistent insurgency than Hussein ever did.

The American victories over Germany and Japan in the second world war involved massive civilian casualties, including from deliberate indiscriminate attacks against population centers. Despite this, American occupation of both countries had none of the problems that the occupation of Iraq did, and in fact the USA was able to turn both countries into strong allies during the lifetime of the people who had experienced the war. The difference seems to be that the USA co-opted existing power structures in Germany and Japan, whereas it dismantled Hussein's power structures and then failed to rebuild its own.

One relevant example of an invader actually triumphing over an insurgency is Russia in Chechnya, where Russia was extremely brutal. Israel faces a similar challenge but with far more restrictions on its treatment of the Palestinians (despite many critics' foolish use of the word "genocide"). I'm not sure that Israel will succeed, but if it fails then that would not be because of the reason you expect.

It disrupts the ability of Hezbollah and its allies to respond to an invasion, but it also might be enough on its own to convince Hezbollah to back down. A simple ceasefire would accomplish Israel's objective against Hezbollah (whereas it wouldn't against Hamas) so an invasion of Lebanon isn't inherently necessary.

It's good to see Israel's intelligence apparatus function effectively. I hope disrupting the chain of command starting from the top will make a ground invasion of Lebanon unnecessary. I also hope the conclusion that Iran's leadership comes to is that they are themselves personally quite vulnerable in the case of a direct conflict.

One of the key changes is that Recall will be strictly opt-in, as Microsoft had told us before, as opposed to the default-on approach that was taken when the feature was first unveiled.

Also all the computation is done locally, not in Microsoft's servers. I still think this is weird and I won't use it, but I'm no longer threatened by it.

It makes a lot more sense for society to rebuild quickly.

The Enclave had the desire to restore their control of the entire continent and a small army of supersoldiers. They may not have had the capability to manufacture more plasma rifles and power armor, but they had the recorded knowledge needed to restore that capability and they were up against small, disorganized, and poorly armed bands of survivors. Maybe they couldn't emerge from their bunkers right away because the surface was uninhabitably radioactive, but survival on the surface became possible long before 200 years had passed.

The games are much more about the rule of cool than realism and that's not a bad thing. I'm just being pedantic.

Every day I'm undlatin' undlatin', undlatin'

Hide and seek champion.

licensing issues

I understand that the buyer doesn't lose the de facto ability to install the game from a local copy of the installer, but is it possible to lose the de jure right to install the game in that way due to licensing issues on GOG's end? I'm not saying it is, I'm just curious.

The guy in the middle is holding a goedendag.

Must have been the wind.

The difficulty of restoring to life someone who is already alive is why such high-level magic is required.

In case you're curious, the one in the picture I posted is in the art nouveau style but the one in the comic looks more like arts-and-crafts.

Note the floral decorations versus the simple geometric shapes.