naraburns nihil supernum
1yr ago
(text post)
30855 thread views
Israel-Gaza Megathread #2
This is a refreshed 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.
NEW: The Biden administration has privately been pressing Israel in recent days to flush out what its strategy is for the day after it completes its stated goal of eradicating Hamas in the ongoing Gaza war, a US and an Israeli official tell [The Times of Israel]
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his inner circle have indicated to their Biden counterparts that Israel has not yet come up with such a strategy and instead are more focused on the immediate goal of removing Hamas from power in Gaza, the US official says. (2/4)
But the US official cautions against this approach, saying that devoid a strategy for who will control the Strip if and when Hamas is removed, IDF is more likely to get bogged down in Gaza indefinitely, despite Israel insisting that it does not want to re-occupy the enclave (3/4)
[] National Unity chair Benny Gantz and fellow faction member Gadi Eisenkot demanded the creation of a Gaza exit strategy a upon their entry into the government and that they have tasked a committee with drawing one up. (4/4)
Speculation abounds that this indicates that US intelligence is finding out that things are much worse in Gaza than we realize. There is very little information coming out of Gaza right now. Journalism seems to be dead, it's a black box in there, and whatever reports we get later are going to be urban myths.
I wonder what all this will amount to. I doubt this will achieve any credibility with the Arab world for saving Arab lives, even if it works to do just that. If it doesn't work, no one in Israel will remember Blinken's advice when they're trapped in the quagmire.
I knew this shit would happen. The IDF took too long to put boots on the ground, and now the "international community" wants them to back off from destroying the open-air terrorist base within walking distance of Israeli population centers. Why on Earth is, "Hamas gets to keep launching rockets, stockpiling munitions, and planning the next ground assault," even on the table? Any sane country would give Palestine an ultimatum. They can choose between:
Total and complete disarmament, or
Total and complete annihilation.
If you let them chose "3. Build your military headquarters under a hospital and use your own populace as hostages," of course they're going to pick that.
If the United States thinks that the Palestinian authorities have a legitimate claim to Israeli territory, then why are we supporting Israel at all? If the United States thinks that they don't, then why aren't we bombing them back to the stone age as part of the war on terror?
How exactly do you propose they do this? Would they ask holocaust survivors to tell them about best practices for death-camps and genocides of problematic ethnic groups? There are serious ethical problems associated with just genociding the Palestinians and murdering all their women, children and elderly in cold blood. International Law might not really mean anything, but if the Israelis just dash all the muslim children against the rocks they'd invite far worse problems for themselves. Holocaust 2: Electric Boogaloo is just not a viable option in the modern day, and even suggesting it is usually enough to make non-partisan observers recoil in disgust and horror.
Of course, this also explains why they can't make the offer of total and complete disarmament - the Palestinians pay attention to the Israelis when they present funny maps at the UN and what those maps would imply for them. There's no way you'd be able to convince them that total disarmament was actually a step towards reconciliation rather than just an attempt to make their extermination easier.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
FirmWeird 1yr ago
How exactly do you propose they do this? Would they ask holocaust survivors to tell them about best practices for death-camps and genocides of problematic ethnic groups?
They have enough Haredim that can quote the required passages by heart:
But of the cities of these people, which the LORD thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth:
But thou shalt utterly destroy them; namely, the Hittites, and the Amorites, the Canaanites, and the Perizzites, the Hivites, and the Jebusites; as the LORD thy God hath commanded thee:
Or, more generously:
Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.
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 -
Reports emerging that the USA is "pressuring" Israel to have a fully developed exit plan before invading Gaza to which Netanyahu presumably replied "Leeeeeroooooy Jeeeeenkiiiiiiins."
Meanwhile Blinken has reportedly been meeting with the Israelis for 8 hours.
Speculation abounds that this indicates that US intelligence is finding out that things are much worse in Gaza than we realize. There is very little information coming out of Gaza right now. Journalism seems to be dead, it's a black box in there, and whatever reports we get later are going to be urban myths.
I wonder what all this will amount to. I doubt this will achieve any credibility with the Arab world for saving Arab lives, even if it works to do just that. If it doesn't work, no one in Israel will remember Blinken's advice when they're trapped in the quagmire.
I knew this shit would happen. The IDF took too long to put boots on the ground, and now the "international community" wants them to back off from destroying the open-air terrorist base within walking distance of Israeli population centers. Why on Earth is, "Hamas gets to keep launching rockets, stockpiling munitions, and planning the next ground assault," even on the table? Any sane country would give Palestine an ultimatum. They can choose between:
If you let them chose "3. Build your military headquarters under a hospital and use your own populace as hostages," of course they're going to pick that.
If the United States thinks that the Palestinian authorities have a legitimate claim to Israeli territory, then why are we supporting Israel at all? If the United States thinks that they don't, then why aren't we bombing them back to the stone age as part of the war on terror?
How exactly do you propose they do this? Would they ask holocaust survivors to tell them about best practices for death-camps and genocides of problematic ethnic groups? There are serious ethical problems associated with just genociding the Palestinians and murdering all their women, children and elderly in cold blood. International Law might not really mean anything, but if the Israelis just dash all the muslim children against the rocks they'd invite far worse problems for themselves. Holocaust 2: Electric Boogaloo is just not a viable option in the modern day, and even suggesting it is usually enough to make non-partisan observers recoil in disgust and horror.
Of course, this also explains why they can't make the offer of total and complete disarmament - the Palestinians pay attention to the Israelis when they present funny maps at the UN and what those maps would imply for them. There's no way you'd be able to convince them that total disarmament was actually a step towards reconciliation rather than just an attempt to make their extermination easier.
They have enough Haredim that can quote the required passages by heart:
Or, more generously:
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link