naraburns
nihil supernum
No bio...
User ID: 100
naraburns
nihil supernum
3d ago
Yeah, sadly I think this has become the new equilibrium in many contexts, including a lot of U.S. politics. Losers seek coexistence. Winners exterminate the opposition. The fact that this seems to inevitably descend into a cycle of conflict which both sides would be better off having never entered in the first place is simply shrugged off as a problem for some later generation. It's maddening.
naraburns
nihil supernum
3d ago
Okay, but it's not clear to me what I am supposed to conclude from all that.
I am trying to speak as descriptively as possible, here. If you think Israel should not exist (is that what you think?) then like--I don't have much to say about that. I'm not interested in (or, probably even very capable of) defending any particular Israeli action on the international stage. The country exists. Like all countries, I'm confident that they get up to some shady stuff. I don't know all the answers to your (rhetorical?) questions, but I don't think that any of them have any substantive bearing on my point.
If there were a group of oppressed Jews somewhere in the world, then Jewish communities worldwide would be pressuring their governments to intervene.
We do see some of that, though interestingly some American Jews seem to also be of the view that Israeli Jews should, ultimately, be subjected to mass migration or genocide (though they would not phrase it that way, it would be the result of their advocacy succeeding). Politics makes strange bedfellows! But one perhaps important difference between Middle Eastern Muslims and Middle Eastern Jews is that there are many Muslim countries, both in the Middle East and outside of it, and there is only one Jewish country. Strangely, very few Muslim countries are therefore willing to open their borders to Palestinians. Indeed, in many Muslim circles, Palestinians are scarcely better than Jews! Outside of Israel/Palestine, the Middle Eastern Muslim attitude toward Palestinians seems to be that they are useful idiots and foot soldiers, but you wouldn't want your daughter to bring one home for dinner.
If you're right that (A) Israel's nukes are what is substantially destabilizing the region and (B) Israel is safe because it has nukes then you are suggesting, deductively, that the stability of the region depends on Israel no longer being safe. I think that what I am doing here is agreeing with you, while pointing out that "therefore Israel should stop being safe" is neither a humane nor a plausible solution to the problem as you've described it. Indeed, it seems like your real argument boils down to something like "Israel's existence is what destabilizes the Middle East, so probably the rest of the world would be better off if Israel didn't exist."
I have my doubts about this--I think that the Middle East would be filled with different conflicts, absent Israel--but even if I'm wrong about that, I find myself quite unable to endorse "allow the expulsion and/or extermination of Middle Eastern Jews and Christians from Israel/Palestine" as a humane approach to the problem. YMMV! But that seems like one hell of a Danegeld.
naraburns
nihil supernum
3d ago
I do not think there is any country safer in the Middle East than Israel. They are nuclear-armed...
Sure, that clearly matters.
No single group is safer. I just do not see a reality in which Israel is threatened.
Perhaps not! And yet your own recommendation seems to have been in part--
we need to get rid of Israel’s nukes
By your own logic, Israel should give up (at least some portion of) their safety. And my response was, and is--that is not plausible, but even if it was, it seems very likely to end badly for them.
a significant percentage of Muslims will not be satisfied with anything less than the total annihilation of Israel
I’m not so sure.
I mean, sure, #notallMuslims, but as a rule a majority of Palestinians report that their preference is for Israel to cease to exist. (I believe that the reverse is now true as well, though my memory is that it did not used to be--most Israelis today apparently report a preference that e.g. all Palestinians be expelled from Gaza. I'm less sure about the West Bank.) Likewise, Egyptians do not seem to favor the existence of Israel. Other Muslims in the region seem to broadly follow this pattern. People want peace in theory, and favor de-escalation in principle, but are nevertheless comfortable with the proposition that Israel should not exist, that they should not do business with Israel, nor accept aid from Israel, nor come to Israel's aid in case of a natural disaster, etc.
Muslims are a diverse group, with a lot of factions and infighting, so there are always counterexamples, of course. Whether they should be required to coexist with Jews is an interesting question! But as things stand, I do not think there is very much likelihood of Muslims willingly coexisting with Jews anywhere Muslims wield significant political influence. I don't think it requires a person to be "pro-Israel" to observe the reality of public opinion among the Middle Eastern Muslim demographic clearly favoring the destruction of Israel. Realistically, I suspect that without the United States' continued involvement, we would eventually be looking at the genocide of Middle Eastern Jews as an inevitable historical outcome. Perhaps it is inevitable anyway. But certainly there is no Israeli capitulation beyond mass migration that I see the Muslim world accepting on a permanent basis, and I'm sure Israel knows that; certainly, they are beginning to behave as if they know it.
(But only beginning. If Israel still exists in 200 years, it may only be because they have, and perhaps will have used, nuclear weapons.)
naraburns
nihil supernum
3d ago
get them out of their occupied land
Which land is that, exactly? "From the river to the sea?"
I would not characterize myself as "pro-Israel" but it's weird to me that you (and many, many others) present anti-Israel as the neutral position. The fact is, a significant percentage of Muslims will not be satisfied with anything less than the total annihilation of Israel. If the Muslims and Arab colonists terrorizing the non-Muslims in the region stop fighting, there will be no more fighting. If Israel stops fighting, there will be no more Israel.
Of course, "no more Israel" is plausibly a more stable equilibrium than "some Israel remaining!" But I don't think one needs to be "pro Israel" to suspect that "just somehow convince all the Jews and Christians to vacate the region, or agree to be subjugated under under Islamic rule" is neither a humane nor a plausible position.
naraburns
nihil supernum
3d ago
Welcome to the Motte. There's enough Culture War content in this post that it probably belongs in the CW thread. Post removed.
Hello, welcome to the Motte!
These three short posts you've made at the top level are all a bit out of phase with community norms. They contain just enough "culture war" material that they should probably be posted as posts in the weekly CW thread. But also, maybe rate limit your posting--give people a chance to respond to one post before dropping another? These aren't exactly hard and fast rules, but basically, this site is not an LLM that you can just spam with shower thoughts. The goal is engagement with others, and that should be reflected in your posting behavior.
More options
Context Copy link