This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
So, in your view:
The IDF is just doing these photos with various JDAMs and whatnot linked in this article for pure propaganda? Why?
We know why Iran would lie about having shot down an F-35 or two. But why would Israel need to lie about dropping JDAMs vs. blasting things with ALBMs? They certainly were blowing things up.
You can argue that it doesn't prove the IAF did; you can't argue it proves they didn't. Elementary logic.
Here's a funny (bit)[https://defencesecurityasia.com/en/tensions-erupt-did-israel-use-azerbaijani-airspace-to-strike-deep-into-iran/]:
What was their goal this time? Was it the same as 2006? (No.)
For "exercises"? AYFKMRN? We know who the dead generals are.
Well at least you're willing to acknowledge one part of the Israeli government did a good job.
Because the Iranians got a lot more cautious about things. Obviously. Targeting people is hard when they know they're being actively targeted.
This is not what "spontaneously" means. Quite the opposite.
No reason? He has a whole wing of advisors who wanted the U.S. to take no part. As far as Trump is concerned, the nuclear program was bombed, so mission accomplished.
Those are not the same situations. (After all, you seem to believe Iran remains a significant threat to Israel right now.) Bibi will only test Trump so much.
The Iranians have formed a war council because they expect the war to recommence. Israel is, one presumes, presently plotting for such an eventuality. As they did that last time.
Trump is not a particularly rational actor. He is wildly inconsistent and easily influenced by his advisors; who often have conflicting views. Many people predict great catastrophe if the regime falls. So if it's defanged why not let it live. I think this is wrong, but I know why they think it.
Again, no truce was "cut." Nothing was negotiated. It's a de facto ceasefire.
Do you deny that Iran's economy was massively impacted during the conflict because of the reliance on the oil industry, or is that also propaganda?
Had the conflict continued roughly as it had, who was going to run out of money first?
Here's the core of the issue: you claim bombs were used, yet none of the strikes documented by satellite imagery are consistent with bombs, let alone the repeated bomb strikes one would expect if the IAF actually had total control of the skies. That being the case, it doesn't matter what Iran does or doesn't choose to dispute. If Hamas makes some outlandish claim and Israel doesn't directly dispute it are we supposed to automatically assume it to be true?
You're saying that Israel was not defeated, they just chose not to deliver further damage to Iran despite failing to have destroyed their nuclear program or their ballistic missile capabilities after securing total control of their airspace.
Again, the decisive factor here is the US. Iran doesn't want an existential fight against the global hegemon and Israel can't maintain an extended exchange if the US doesn't directly intervene. That's really the only explanation that covers why neither side has resumed fighting yet.
It was to force Hezbollah north of the Litani and to allow Israelis in the northern communities to return. The IAF is still bombing territory south of the Litani and somewhere between 20% and 50% of the former inhabitants of said communities have left permanently so that's a failure on two counts.
Israel has always been excellent at assassinations, the trouble is that assassinations don't win wars.
Yes, the Iranians were conducting missile exercises when Israel struck.
Yes, that explains why Trump would step out, but why would Israel? In your world they had Iran totally at their mercy yet they still had nuclear material and ballistic missile capabilities. Why would they step back and allow the Iranians to restock, resupply and rebuild their defenses moments after securing total control of their skies? They bomb Syria regularly (who hasn't fired a shot back in return), they even bombed Qatar, why did they stop bombing Iran?
He just bombed Qatar! How in the world would bombing supposedly defenseless and hostile Iran cause Trump to do anything that bombing one of his biggest financial backers wouldn't?!
Netanyahu would love to try again if he thought Trump could be dragged into doing the dirty work but there's little indication that Iran fears Israel on its own.
Massively impacted, sure. More massively impacted than the country that has been fighting multiple wars nonstop for two years using reservists? Probably not.
Israel has an unlimited line of credit with Uncle Sam so of course they're never running out of greenbacks but in an extended war of attrition the real question is who would run out of valuable infrastructure.
The entire country of Israel has just a few dozen major sites containing the critical national infrastructure: power plants, water desalinization, refineries, etc. The Iranians hitting the Bazan refinery alone stressed their entire supply chain; given a few months of daily strikes Israel would be unlivable, though the US would come to the rescue before then.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link