site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7mo ago (text post)   2180 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for October 8, 2023

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

2
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Is there any strategic long term benefit to what Hamas did? I really don't know much about it or follow that conflict because I find it to be boring at this point, but based off vibes I felt like Israel was really starting to lose support in the West. Reminding Westerners in France, US, UK etc how savage and violent Islamists can be seems like it was a huge mistake. People on the left will say white nationalists and right wing extremists are more violent than Islamists, but I really think this is obviously not true and they know it. Right wing terrorists that kill innocent people are usually lone wolf terrorists or in small cells. They also generally operate in their own countries. Islamist terrorists are like if thousands of these people got together in political organizations that have long term political goals. Reminding people that these are the kinds of people Israel has to deal with will garner them a lot of support and they also stupidly filmed their atrocities and put it on social media. I think people will generally support Israel here, at least for a little bit.

Some people are saying that this will kill other Arab countries recognizing Israel, but I think that will still happen anyway. Sometimes things are just inevitable, like the end of slavery or Jim Crow. I think this is a similar thing because it is in Saudi Arabia's long term interest to recognize Israel because they want to do business in the West and diversify away from oil. To do that, they need to be on somewhat decent terms with Israel. Plus, their country is rapidly modernizing and who knows if in 15 years young people in SA will even care that much.

It seems to me, Hamas just did a YOLO attack for really no long term gain. The only thing I can think of is they just want to cause chaos and see what happens because they have nothing to lose. Maybe they can shake things up and things turn out better for them.

Am I totally off here? I am woefully ignorant on this issue, but that's what I'm thinking.

I am far from qualified to comment on the intricacies of the long-term conflict.

But I can spitball a few motivations that make sense EVEN IF they knew or should have known that Israel would respond disproportionately.

  1. To spur further funding from their sponsors by demonstrating the ability to inflict real damage.

  2. To take advantage of the U.S. being distracted by Ukraine and generally less able to police the region (esp. after that horrendous Afghanistan withdrawal).

  3. Possible diversion for an ally's action. See what Iran might attempt in the coming days, for instance.

Sometimes things are just inevitable, like the end of slavery or Jim Crow.

Ironic to pull the 'end of slavery' as an example, given that slavery "ended" in the U.S. after a lengthy and extremely bloody war. Do you think the Slave states just "Yolo'd" against the forces of history, or did they have reason to fight over it and possibly believe they'd succeed?

And indeed, some people would count "the eventual annexation of Palestine into Israel" as one of those historical inevitabilities.

I actually do think there's nothing the South could have done to keep slavery in the long term and it was more or less a pointless YOLO. I think that even if they South won they would have gotten rid of slavery pretty quickly afterwards because it wasn't viable economically long term and they would have been a pariah state in the West after everyone else outlawed it.

So why would it be confusing that Hamas might YOLO in a similar situation where they are fighting against an inevitable outcome?

I think we agree? My question was if there is a strategic long term goal I'm missing because I have no clue what I am talking about on this issue. And I don't think a YOLO is irrational under certain circumstances, so maybe this attack by Hamas was rational even if it was barbaric and cruel.

It's about the best they can muster under current circumstances.

I would just wait to see if there is any indication of a phase 2 to the plan.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats