@yankel-berel
most of your above “questions” are just ad hominem attacks against me. This is (or at least should be) a Torah conversation, which is the domain I care to discuss exclusively.
I don’t want to, nor do I feel obliged to, distill sense out of your nonsense confused “questions”, so I can only ask you to do better at thinking and/or expressing coherent thoughts (I’m not sure where your failure comes from).
As a token of good faith, I’ve attempted to strip your above questions of ad hominem attacks and answer them point by point. since your “questions” are so malformed, I ask you to please continue the conversation by clarifying them as needed If you believe my answers are insufficient.
> you have never proved that your approach fits with sh’a YD 157
what is “my approach” and how is that approach in conflict with S”A?
> you have never proved that your wonderful, ‘running away’ from EY idea , is going to solve all p/n problems
I never claimed that “running away” will immediately bring moshiach.
> you have never owned up to the fact that you insinuated that rav chaim was a zuken mamre chvsh
I adamantly and explicitly did NOT insinuate that. I DID say that if you are foolish enough to call them, chas v’shulem, heretics/notzrim/reform/zionist/jewsforj, THEN one would be forced to say they are “zuken mamre” and would still not be allowed to abandon the Torah.
> you have never owned up to point that halacha everywhere is not decided by what would , could or should have been — only by what is …
I have no idea what you are talking about or asking
> you have never owned up to the fact that avnei nezer clearly says that the shavu’ot are … ‘not lehalacha’ [his language]
yes I did, I address this explicitly in comment: https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/coffeeroom/topic/matzav-article-about-golus-and-eretz-yisrael/page/3#post-2439476
> you have never owned up to the fact that the steipler clearly writes that the mere existence of the medina is not against the shavu’ot
I have no idea what you are talking about or asking. The only source I can think of the from the Steipler is about if voting in the Medina (may it be quickly, peacefully destroyed) is forbidden in light of the shevios after the Medina has already been established. So, what is your question?
> you have never owned up to the fact that avnei nezer clearly writes that haskamat ha’umot will negate the shavu’ot
I’ve never been asked this. where does the Avnei Nezer say this? (please quote exact line, as some of his tshivas are very long)