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.
That's quite fucked up and I don't see how such policies would not deeply undermine the morale of IDF conscripts. Big difference in mindset between "no man left behind" versus having to worry about your own allies deliberately killing you if you get cut off and stranded, incapacitated by wounds or otherwise put at high risk of capture.
That's quite fucked up and I don't see how such policies would not deeply undermine the morale of IDF conscripts.
That's because they don't actually tell the conscripts this. From the link:
Two versions of the Hannibal Directive may have existed simultaneously at times: a written version, accessible only to the upper echelon of the IDF, and an "oral law" version for division commanders and lower levels. In the latter version, "by all means" was often interpreted literally, as in "an IDF soldier was 'better dead than abducted'". In 2011, IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz stated the directive does not permit killing IDF soldiers to prevent abduction.
“Solve for the equilibrium” as Tyler Cowen would say. If a single soldier getting captured alive means the undoing of literal decades of antiterrorism work, then you need to prevent troops from being captured by any means necessary.
Killing hostages is the rational response, if you're known for dropping one tom bombs into hideouts of hostage takers, no one's going to bother taking hostages anymore.
Israel seems to be in a weird half-hearted position on this. Given their position, anything but total Japan-like death eater approach seems counterproductive.
Wasn't some Israeli soldiers literally lynched and mutilated by a palestinian mob couple of years ago?
No man left behind means also coup de grace. With reports about mass rape, breasts cut off (thankfully the case I read about was post mortem) and people set on fire - if a hamas vehicle is taking hostages to gaza and you can lob a rocket into it - probably would be better for your people inside.
I'd take my chances as a POW over getting straight up merked by your own men. Color me skeptical that it is about sparing troops the risk of some mob violence versus a political consideration seeking to deny enemy forces POWs that could be used in negotiations and prisoner exchanges. Hamas, Hezbollah, etc aren't Chaos cultists from Warhammer 40k or Aztec raiders gathering human sacrifices and so on, however much the Israeli gov tries to portray them as such.
By the numbers, what IS the median experience of an Israeli taken hostage? What's the % on being released? The % on being tortured before being released? The % on just never being seen again? Honest question.
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 -
That's quite fucked up and I don't see how such policies would not deeply undermine the morale of IDF conscripts. Big difference in mindset between "no man left behind" versus having to worry about your own allies deliberately killing you if you get cut off and stranded, incapacitated by wounds or otherwise put at high risk of capture.
That's because they don't actually tell the conscripts this. From the link:
More options
Context Copy link
“Solve for the equilibrium” as Tyler Cowen would say. If a single soldier getting captured alive means the undoing of literal decades of antiterrorism work, then you need to prevent troops from being captured by any means necessary.
Killing hostages is the rational response, if you're known for dropping one tom bombs into hideouts of hostage takers, no one's going to bother taking hostages anymore.
Israel seems to be in a weird half-hearted position on this. Given their position, anything but total Japan-like death eater approach seems counterproductive.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Wasn't some Israeli soldiers literally lynched and mutilated by a palestinian mob couple of years ago?
No man left behind means also coup de grace. With reports about mass rape, breasts cut off (thankfully the case I read about was post mortem) and people set on fire - if a hamas vehicle is taking hostages to gaza and you can lob a rocket into it - probably would be better for your people inside.
This incident in 2000? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Ramallah_lynching
I'd take my chances as a POW over getting straight up merked by your own men. Color me skeptical that it is about sparing troops the risk of some mob violence versus a political consideration seeking to deny enemy forces POWs that could be used in negotiations and prisoner exchanges. Hamas, Hezbollah, etc aren't Chaos cultists from Warhammer 40k or Aztec raiders gathering human sacrifices and so on, however much the Israeli gov tries to portray them as such.
Yes, not even close.
More options
Context Copy link
By the numbers, what IS the median experience of an Israeli taken hostage? What's the % on being released? The % on being tortured before being released? The % on just never being seen again? Honest question.
Definitely a higher survival rate than being the recipient of intentional friendly fire.
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