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 -
Operation Poseidon Archer
Reported by CNN:
I have mixed feelings about this. It is clearly the responsibility of the imperial hegemon to protect global shipping lanes. But by that same logic, it's time for the imperial hegemon to force a settlement onto the Israelis due to their never-ending destabilization of the region. That would entail the EU forcing a peace onto Israel, performing a Special Military Operation within Israel if necessary.
Bring back the 117 AD borders, with EU administration of Jerusalem. Jews may live in Jerusalem, wail at their wall and study Torah in peace, but it is utterly nonsensical for the West to continue to bear the burden of Israeli destabilization of the region.
This washy middle ground of appealing to imperial obligations when it comes to Middle Eastern intervention, without control of the "vassal" state destabilizing the region, is a never-ending pattern that has to stop. The US and EU has more than enough leverage to force a settlement onto Israel.
Can you explain to me how a 2-state solution would solve Israel’s issues in the Middle East. This all started because Palestine attacked Israel. Israel then counter-attacked. Iran wanted to mess with the Saudis and armed Houthis to attack Americans.
To be honest this war doesn’t even have anything to do with the Jews. It’s a Saudi-Iran proxy war.
And if we do a 2-state solution and Israel isn’t allowed to fight back what is your proposal?
I feel like you are not speaking clearly here since you completely ignored where should the Jews go if they aren’t allowed to defend themselves.
I don't understand why this framing would have more validity than the one that says that this all started because they colonized/set up shop in Palestine, then there were multiple iterations of attacks and counterattacks and we are here. In the same vein,
seems rather far-fetched (what percentage of combatants do you figure would say that they are doing this for the sake of the Saudis/Iranians?). This war has been going on since before the current Iranian political system existed.
Who is saying Israel isn't allowed to fight back in that scenario? If there is a two-state solution, and then the Palestinians cross the border to attack, then they should by all means fight back, and I'm even okay with us Europeans contributing material military help to make this happen. Conversely, though, if in that scenario some settlers with military backing still cross the border into the Palestinian state, then I think the same should apply for the other side.
The people who make the decision are Iran/Saudi.
The people who fire the guns are not. But Houthis can’t do anything without their Persian masters.
Why are the Houthis relevant to evaluating a two-state solution for Israel and Palestine? As I understand, they used the general atmosphere of chaos and anger to take a handful of potshots at Israel and adjacent shipping, but had negligible agency in bringing about that general atmosphere to begin with. Without the mutual slaughter preoccupying everyone, chances are they would not have stuck their necks out here.
Houthis are the only ones that have an effect on the globe and America.
If we are just talking might makes right Israel could just kick out the Palestinians and we solve the problem. As is this entire debate is the Israelis need to play nice with the Palestinians or America gets Arabs acting up in these other places. Since, Palestine can’t play nice with Israel I have no problem with Israelis removing them. Israel doesn’t need US guns to brute force the matter.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
That is a really gross oversimplification. Under a real two-state solution enforced by external parties, there would be no illegal blockades and settlements and Israeli expansionism. Yes, I do think that would go a long way in cooling tensions and setting the groundwork for long-term peace.
And if Hamas still attacked Israel you would agree Europe can (and preferebly you useful) would help to remove Hamas completely if they attacked again?
I feel like you should have skin in the game if you proposed this peace plan.
Also, you completely avoided the fact that the Houthis are being funded by Iran who don’t give two shits about Israel but are trying to hurt Arab interests. If Biden went to Iran tomorrow and told them No military weapons will be sold to the Saudis for the next ten years the Houthi issue would disappear tomorrow.
For that deal the Iranians would kick the Palestinians out of Israel for us and defeat the Houthis.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link