I listen to a podcast (what's the Anabaptist perception of that?) that in normal times, is a neoconservative perspective on American politics hosted by 5 Jewish/Jewish-adjacent editors of the magazine. Since October 7th it has focused almost exclusively on Jewish and Israeli concerns both in the U.S. and in Israel, with an occasional sidebar on American political activities. The editor of Commentary is currently in Israel, reporting from there. There's much I disagree with when listening to the podcast; I don't like neoconservatism and I'm not a dogmatic Zionist. Nevertheless, I like to keep abreast of their ideas as I think they offer a unique and sane perspective on many items.
This then is what I hear from them with respect to your main question:
Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 8:18 am
My underlying question is, "Why is Israel willing to sacrifice soldiers in a ground invasion and is this necessary?"
If they don't sacrifice soldiers now, they will invariably have to sacrifice civilians in the future as Hamas has declared as recently as a few weeks ago, that they will continue to seek the eradication of Israel and Jews. Israel invested an enormous amount of money and resources in the building of a "high-tech fence" so that they could avoid the sacrifice of soldiers' lives. For many reasons, that strategy failed; Israel thinks this is the only solution going forward if they want to prevent another October 7th massacre.
Ernie wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 8:18 am
My underlying question is, "Why is Israel willing to sacrifice soldiers in a ground invasion and is this necessary?"
If a baby was taken by a bear and you had the possibility of saving the baby would you not go after the bear?
It’s easy with rifles of course but the scenario is slightly relatable.
Does that actually improve the odds for the hostages?
Well you could try negotiating with the bear but if after a laying down of your gun he claims to have misplaced the baby and then attacks you...
Josh wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 9:37 am
Politically, a lot of voters expect/want an invasion, even if it's a bad idea (particularly the extreme right-wing coalition that helped form Netanyahu's government). You could see a similar scenario after 9/11 in America when many Americans wanted us to go to war with... basically anybody.
It's my understanding that support for a ground invasion spans the political spectrum from the tech-bros of Tel Aviv to the Haredi who have heretofore refused to participate in the military or even recognize that Israel qua the State of Israel exists.
Soloist wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 8:42 amIf a baby was taken by a bear and you had the possibility of saving the baby would you not go after the bear?
It’s easy with rifles of course but the scenario is slightly relatable.
Does that actually improve the odds for the hostages?
Well you could try negotiating with the bear but if after a laying down of your gun he claims to have misplaced the baby and then attacks you...
I'm wondering if they are likely to just kill the hostages if they are attacked. And I really wouldn't "go after the bear" if I thought that meant the bear would just kill the baby. If I did go after the bear, I would want a clear strategy.
I'm skeptical of the "more violence solves everything" philosophy. You know, "the real problem with the world is that people are too timid to use more violence, which would solve everything". Often, that violence just makes things worse. How likely is a surgical rescue of all the hostages? I think that blind faith in violence is often naive.
They seemed to be getting hostages back via negotiation. I don't actually know what approach has the best odds for the hostages, at what cost for everyone else, but I do think the question is worth asking.
Last edited by Bootstrap on Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Does that actually improve the odds for the hostages?
Well you could try negotiating with the bear but if after a laying down of your gun he claims to have misplaced the baby and then attacks you...
I'm wondering if they are likely to just kill the hostages if they are attacked.
I'm skeptical of the "violence solves everything" philosophy. You know, "the real problem with the world is that people are too timid to use more violence, which would solve everything". Often, that violence just makes things worse. How likely is a surgical rescue of all the hostages?
Well they haven't yet. Do you have thoughts on how else to rescue the remaining 137 hostages beyond a nebulous "find a negotiating partner that isn't Hamas"?
I don't subscribe to that policy either. (Was that your attempt to summarize my thoughts?)
I am skeptical of negotiating with baby-stealing bears.
HondurasKeiser wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:16 am
Well they haven't yet. Do you have thoughts on how else to rescue the remaining 137 hostages beyond a nebulous "find a negotiating partner that isn't Hamas"?
I don't subscribe to that policy either.
I am skeptical of negotiating with baby-stealing bears.
OK, but you are saying you know the answer, and mocking me for having a question. Mocking is not an answer. And you are not accurately portraying me, either.
So please tell me what your answer is - how are you going to get the hostages back? How will you make sure they aren't killed when you try to invade? How do you know where they are? I mean, bears and babies are great for a children's book, but they don't answer all the questions here.
HondurasKeiser wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:16 am
Well they haven't yet. Do you have thoughts on how else to rescue the remaining 137 hostages beyond a nebulous "find a negotiating partner that isn't Hamas"?
I don't subscribe to that policy either.
I am skeptical of negotiating with baby-stealing bears.
OK, but you are saying you know the answer, and mocking me for having a question. Mocking is not an answer. And you are not accurately portraying me, either.
So please tell me what your answer is - how are you going to get the hostages back? How will you make sure they aren't killed when you try to invade? How do you know where they are? I mean, bears and babies are great for a children's book, but they don't answer all the questions here.
Where did I say I knew the answer?
And how is this:
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Dec 05, 2023 5:54 pm
You are assuming that the negotiations would be with Hamas.
I doubt that they would. Finding or developing a negotiating partner is hard. But I'm not sure the alternative is any easier - or exactly what it is.
Substantively different from this:
Do you have thoughts on how else to rescue the remaining 137 hostages beyond a nebulous "find a negotiating partner that isn't Hamas"?
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:07 am
I'm skeptical of the "violence solves everything" philosophy. You know, "the real problem with the world is that people are too timid to use more violence, which would solve everything". Often, that violence just makes things worse. How likely is a surgical rescue of all the hostages?
!!! SNIP !!!
I don't subscribe to that policy either. (Was that your attempt to summarize my thoughts?)
No, this was not a comment on your thoughts. But I think this runs deep in our culture. And I think you can see that in movies and TV shows. Heroes are smart, violent people who can win every fight. Fighting is the way to solve problems. Within 30 minutes or 90 minutes, depending on whether it's a TV show or a movie. Of course, in a series it can take much longer ....
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 11:07 am
I'm skeptical of the "violence solves everything" philosophy. You know, "the real problem with the world is that people are too timid to use more violence, which would solve everything". Often, that violence just makes things worse. How likely is a surgical rescue of all the hostages?
!!! SNIP !!!
I don't subscribe to that policy either. (Was that your attempt to summarize my thoughts?)
No, this was not a comment on your thoughts. But I think this runs deep in our culture. And I think you can see that in movies and TV shows. Heroes are smart, violent people who can win every fight. Fighting is the way to solve problems. Within 30 minutes or 90 minutes, depending on whether it's a TV show or a movie. Of course, in a series it can take much longer ....
Soloist wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 8:42 am
If a baby was taken by a bear and you had the possibility of saving the baby would you not go after the bear?
It’s easy with rifles of course but the scenario is slightly relatable.
Does that actually improve the odds for the hostages?
Well you could try negotiating with the bear but if after a laying down of your gun he claims to have misplaced the baby and then attacks you...
If we care about the hostages at all, I think this is an important question. By mocking it, you avoid providing an answer or seriously discussing the question.
I can tell you would like to shoot a bear and save a baby. But I don't know how that answers my question.