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 -
Iran - US - Israel War Flareup
“Israel says it has launched attack on Iran, as explosions reported in Tehran”
“The US has begun Major Combat Operations in Iran” - Donald Trump (headline flashed up just now on my phone, no link yet)
—-
More to follow but thought I’d post quickly for any commenting.
Isn't this just an admission of failure? Last summer we were told that the strikes on the Iranian nuclear facilities had solved the problem, or at least crippled the program to the point that there would be no way they could get a bomb in the foreseeable future. Now we apparently need to take out the regime, which isn't going to happen without a committed ground war. Trump says he wants a deal, but his deals tend to fall apart once he decides he doesn't like them, and he cancelled the last deal presumably because he didn't trust them to abide by the terms. This war is going nowhere.
It also proved that they no longer have any deterrent capabilities. The Israelis operated freely over the entire country, there is no Hezbollah or Hamas left to retaliate. Their entire ballistic missile attack on Israel killed, what, one person? Two people?
Last I checked they've been firing missiles and drones more or less nonstop almost immediately after they were hit. At the current rate they're going to exceed the total from the 12 Day War within a few days and that was sufficient to drain global interceptor stockpiles by a quarter.
Another way to look at the current situation is that Dubai, Doha, Kuwait and Bahrain invested billions in American hardware under the premise that it would protect them and instead Trump evacuated and parked all of his assets as far as possible, leaving his hapless clients to get smoked.
It actually seems impressive how many Iranian missiles the Gulf states have seemingly shot down. A few casualties here and there, but nothing crazy yet.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Maybe the plan is to bleed them a little (and get them afraid of being hung from lamp posts by their populace) so they'll be more amenable at the bargaining table? Art of the deal and all that.
What bargaining table? They had a deal yen years ago but Trump broke it. Trump can't stick to deals he makes; why would anyone trust him to hold up his end?
Well, the obvious answer would be that Trump wants a better deal.
More options
Context Copy link
Ten years ago (2016) Trump was still in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (a deal he did not make). Trump withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018 after Israel published evidence that Iran had not come clean about a past nuclear weapons program, as required by JCPOA. Therefore, unless either my (very surface-level) understanding of what JCPOA requires is incorrect or Israel's documents are fraudulent, it seems trivially true that Iran violated the deal and likely went into it under false pretenses.
This does not necessarily mean that withdrawing from the JCPOA was a good idea, but it also seems like perhaps, under the circumstances, skepticism about the ability to honor agreements might be better directed at Iran, which plausibly entered the deal with no intent to honor it.
That was my point. If the violations were immaterial, there was no reason to cancel the old deal. If the violations were material, then there's no reason to believe they would honor a new deal.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There were ongoing diplomatic negotiations in Geneva up until yesterday. The BBC reported yesterday that an observer claimed "significant progress" in the talks. Whether the US was negotiating in good faith is up for debate.
Negotiations require that both sides understand what the BATNA is.
...and peace requires both parties to be agreeable.
Iran was already on the back foot, if one is of the opinion that Iran was not trying to negotiate a peace but rather negotiate themselves sufficient breathing space to regroup and resume combat at a later date, it would be foolish not to press the attack while the regime is weak.
I think it's not just about being weak, but about accurately assessing your relative position.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link