naraburns nihil supernum
6mo ago
(text post)
28875 thread views
Israel-Gaza Megathread #1
This is a megathread for any posts on the conflict between (so far, and so far as I know) Hamas and the Israeli government, as well as related geopolitics. Culture War thread rules apply.
With the reports of Egypt notifying Israel in advance of an impending attack, people here and elsewhere have wondered if Bibi maybe let the attack slip through on purpose to consolidate power. Overnight he went from dealing with protests against his judicial reforms and the draft to having those problems disappear and securing the full backing of a broad unity government with his former opposition.
An overwhelming majority of 86% of respondents, including 79% of coalition supporters, said the surprise attack from Gaza is a failure of the country's leadership...
Furthermore, almost all of the respondents (94%) believe the government has responsibility for the lack of security preparedness that led to the assault on the South, with over 75% saying the government holds most of the responsibility...
A slim majority of 56% said Netanyahu must resign at the end of the war, with 28% of coalition voters agreeing with this view.
In addition, 52% of respondents also expect Defense Minister Yoav Gallant to resign.
In addition, most respondents also noted that they do not trust the government to lead the war on Gaza, though the poll was held prior to former defense minister Benny Gantz joining an emergency unity government on Wednesday evening.
Is there any way for Bibi to hold onto power? If not, what might the future look like?
I think Netanyahu's going to retire or be shoved out of the public sphere regardless of what extent he 'knew' an attack was coming. The pre-October doctrine where Gaza was left to Hamas with business relations, a jobs program, and occasional missile exchanges and shooting atrocities was Netanyahu's brainchild, a major bet that no matter Hamas' public doctrine it wouldn't do anything as an organization outside of The Usual. It was a sad and bloody sort of 'deescalation', where a 'win' for Hamas was a gentleman's agreement for the Israeli's to not explode every member of Hamas' senior leadership, but they had eight years of that and it was a lot nicer for Hamas leadership than exploding, and the rule brought everyone to this.
((Separately, the emphasis on the failed judicial reform bill in a lot of these theories is kinda goofy. Netanyahu didn't win, but neither did Biden get a SCOTUS expansion. They gambled some political capital and lost; it's not the end of the world.))
((Separately, the emphasis on the failed judicial reform bill in a lot of these theories is kinda goofy. Netanyahu didn't win, but neither did Biden get a SCOTUS expansion. They gambled some political capital and lost; it's not the end of the world.))
I'm not sure what you mean by either of these, Netanyahu was successful in his judicial reform bill, pending SC review; Biden was against the SCOTUS expansion and never tried.
I think it's more the optics of six months of large scale protests disapearing overnight, but I agree that wouldn't have driven Bibi to do something so crazy. I think it might've been unclear, but part of why I made that post was to illustrate how unlikely it was that he let the attack go through given that polls show what many people would have suspected, that it was bad for his own own political future.
In a monumental, highly controversial decision, the High Court of Justice strikes down legislation passed earlier this year that curtailed judicial oversight of the government, annulling for the first time in Israel’s history an element of one of its quasi-constitutional Basic Laws.
The court split almost down the middle over the highly contentious legislation, which eliminated judicial use of the “reasonableness” standard — the only significant law from the government’s judicial overhaul agenda to have been passed so far. Eight justices vote in favor of striking down the law, while seven vote to uphold it.
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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
With the reports of Egypt notifying Israel in advance of an impending attack, people here and elsewhere have wondered if Bibi maybe let the attack slip through on purpose to consolidate power. Overnight he went from dealing with protests against his judicial reforms and the draft to having those problems disappear and securing the full backing of a broad unity government with his former opposition.
But Jerusalem Post just released a pretty damning poll:
Is there any way for Bibi to hold onto power? If not, what might the future look like?
I think Netanyahu's going to retire or be shoved out of the public sphere regardless of what extent he 'knew' an attack was coming. The pre-October doctrine where Gaza was left to Hamas with business relations, a jobs program, and occasional missile exchanges and shooting atrocities was Netanyahu's brainchild, a major bet that no matter Hamas' public doctrine it wouldn't do anything as an organization outside of The Usual. It was a sad and bloody sort of 'deescalation', where a 'win' for Hamas was a gentleman's agreement for the Israeli's to not explode every member of Hamas' senior leadership, but they had eight years of that and it was a lot nicer for Hamas leadership than exploding, and the rule brought everyone to this.
((Separately, the emphasis on the failed judicial reform bill in a lot of these theories is kinda goofy. Netanyahu didn't win, but neither did Biden get a SCOTUS expansion. They gambled some political capital and lost; it's not the end of the world.))
I'm not sure what you mean by either of these, Netanyahu was successful in his judicial reform bill, pending SC review; Biden was against the SCOTUS expansion and never tried.
I think it's more the optics of six months of large scale protests disapearing overnight, but I agree that wouldn't have driven Bibi to do something so crazy. I think it might've been unclear, but part of why I made that post was to illustrate how unlikely it was that he let the attack go through given that polls show what many people would have suspected, that it was bad for his own own political future.
Agreed with all the rest of your post.
Times of Israel reports
Two months after the claim I responded to but thank you for the update on the situation!
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