Israel-Hamas War 2023

[Josquius]

If it's the same guy I remember him being very obnoxious and clearly implying Russia is within its natural right to do this.

That's not what he said, from everything I'm reading.

He said it was to be expected:

1) Ukraine had lost its nuclear weapons (he advocated against)
2) NATO and EU were expanding (he advocated against)
3) Russia considered western expansion a mortal danger

I disagree that Russia invaded Ukraine because of #2.  They would have invaded anyway, they invaded their other neighbours and set up sham governments in other places to make sure they remained allied.

But, it's clear that it was used as a pretext and not having #1 did not help.

I'd say there is something to #2.
If Ukraine had remained a Russian puppet they'd be happy to leave it be.
Maidan and the westward lurch did very much put ukraine in the crosshairs.
Of course this is less the west expanding as the nuts would claim and more ukraine seeing a better future for itself with the west. But western politicians reaching out to Ukraine didn't help Russias paranoia.
Of course this isn't to say we should have done what Russia wanted and kept out of Ukraine. It's what the Ukrainians want and it's right.
But if the sole goal was avoiding war then the two options would have been to let Ukraine sink back into the Russian orbit or do far more to integrate it faster on a level that beat Russias timelines.
In hindsight the war should have been far more expected.

[OttoVonBismarck]

Whining that the West does everything wrong isn't realism, it's attention seeking pessimism. That is most of Mearsheimer's output the last decade.

[Valmy]

I mean the West may not do everything ideally or perfectly and sometimes sure we do things disastrously. And we do need to be critical about our actions so we can do better, not so we can become self-loathing nihilists or whatever.

But who are the people making all the right calls? I don't see any.

[Valmy]

1) Ukraine had lost its nuclear weapons (he advocated against)

While I do think this situation is disastrous for the cause of nuclear proliferation, Ukraine was in a pretty tough spot regarding the nukes. Russia had all the codes and information about how to use them. Maintaining them was going to be a huge expense Ukraine couldn't afford. And even decommissioning them on their own was going to be very problematic.

[OttoVonBismarck]

A lot of Mearsheimer's criticisms of Western decision makers are somewhat boardgame-esque, he assumes Western leaders were unaware of the various implications Mearsheimer is talking about (varying on topic), when generally they were aware. He assumes they had no domestic or foreign political reasons for acting the way they did, when that way doesn't perfectly align with his realist "boardgame strategy", decisionmakers almost always have domestic and foreign political concerns.

It is easy to play the game differently as a boardgamer when you have none of the concerns or stakeholders actual decisionmakers do.

[Razgovory]

In a sense, the Palestinian conflict and the Ukrainian conflict are the same conflict.  It's all about removing US influence.  That's why the truly enlightened on both the left and right oppose Israel and Ukraine.  On the Paradox boards there are some who are fine with the rockets falling on Tel Aviv, but became anxious when the rockets fallen on fellow Europeans, but they are only clinging to their chains.  This is liberation!

[Barrister]

A lot of Mearsheimer's criticisms of Western decision makers are somewhat boardgame-esque, he assumes Western leaders were unaware of the various implications Mearsheimer is talking about (varying on topic), when generally they were aware. He assumes they had no domestic or foreign political reasons for acting the way they did, when that way doesn't perfectly align with his realist "boardgame strategy", decisionmakers almost always have domestic and foreign political concerns.

It is easy to play the game differently as a boardgamer when you have none of the concerns or stakeholders actual decisionmakers do.

Just because Mearsheimer (and others) call themselves "realists" it doesn't make them very realistic.

Mearsheimer states clearly that Ukraine was invaded because of encroaching western influence.  But Putin himself has made it very clear why he's going after Ukraine - because to him Ukraine doesn't exist as a nation.  That's a pretty obviously unrealistic assessment - but it's what Putin is doing anyways.

[Josquius]

In a sense, the Palestinian conflict and the Ukrainian conflict are the same conflict.  It's all about removing US influence.  That's why the truly enlightened on both the left and right oppose Israel and Ukraine.  On the Paradox boards there are some who are fine with the rockets falling on Tel Aviv, but became anxious when the rockets fallen on fellow Europeans, but they are only clinging to their chains.  This is liberation!

Far more on the left recognise the better analogy is between Russia and Israel.

A lot of Mearsheimer's criticisms of Western decision makers are somewhat boardgame-esque, he assumes Western leaders were unaware of the various implications Mearsheimer is talking about (varying on topic), when generally they were aware. He assumes they had no domestic or foreign political reasons for acting the way they did, when that way doesn't perfectly align with his realist "boardgame strategy", decisionmakers almost always have domestic and foreign political concerns.

It is easy to play the game differently as a boardgamer when you have none of the concerns or stakeholders actual decisionmakers do.

Just because Mearsheimer (and others) call themselves "realists" it doesn't make them very realistic.

Mearsheimer states clearly that Ukraine was invaded because of encroaching western influence.  But Putin himself has made it very clear why he's going after Ukraine - because to him Ukraine doesn't exist as a nation.  That's a pretty obviously unrealistic assessment - but it's what Putin is doing anyways.

Ukraine as a Russian puppet fits into the Russian world view with Ukraine as little Russia. With Ukraine as another Belarus Russia would not have invaded.
Ukraine becoming a full free European nation does not fit this worldview.

[The Minsky Moment]

We are a couple of days away from the 80th anniversary of the D-Day landings. During the Normandy campaign, US troops attacked St. Lo and allied troops attacked Caen, both with significant preparatory bombing. Both were inhabited towns, and both were pretty much bombed to cinders, with hundreds of civilian casualties in each.  There was nothing unusual about those operations; similar attacks happened many times during the war.

Under the standards being applied by critics of the Israeli operations in Gaza, the St Lo and Caen attacks, along with many others carried out by Anglo-American air operations, would have to be classified as war crimes (this is without even getting into the "strategic" attacks on German cities). One would have to conclude that notwithstanding the positive nostalgic haze that now surrounds the greatest generation in their most iconic moment, the Anglo-American liberators were in fact a pack of unrepentant, serial war criminals.

There are distinctions that can be made, distinctions of two different kinds. One is distinction in time - perhaps, following the general argument of Steven Pinker and the thrust of the development of the "common law" of the various Geneva accords, we have become more morally refined since 1944 and accordingly our understanding of international law more strict. On this argument, the 1944 Anglo-Americans were indeed war criminals by our advanced standards, but can be forgiven because of their crude and blunted moral sensitivities.  As you can guess from the rhetoric employed in this paragraph, I don't think much of that line of argument, at least as applied from 1944 to now.  For example, I think NATO would have done much the same if military warranted during a hypothetical mid-1980s Cold War gone hot, trading regrettable civilian casualties as a price of blunting Soviet armored spearheads or in service of a vital counterattack.

There are other distinctions that can be made, of capability or context, but that involves careful and detailed judgment based on specific facts.  And much of the rhetoric of the anti-Israel side has not followed that approach.

[viper37]

A lot of Mearsheimer's criticisms of Western decision makers are somewhat boardgame-esque, he assumes Western leaders were unaware of the various implications Mearsheimer is talking about (varying on topic), when generally they were aware. He assumes they had no domestic or foreign political reasons for acting the way they did, when that way doesn't perfectly align with his realist "boardgame strategy", decisionmakers almost always have domestic and foreign political concerns.

It is easy to play the game differently as a boardgamer when you have none of the concerns or stakeholders actual decisionmakers do.

Just because Mearsheimer (and others) call themselves "realists" it doesn't make them very realistic.

Mearsheimer states clearly that Ukraine was invaded because of encroaching western influence.  But Putin himself has made it very clear why he's going after Ukraine - because to him Ukraine doesn't exist as a nation.  That's a pretty obviously unrealistic assessment - but it's what Putin is doing anyways.

"Realist" seems to be the name of a political philosophy/current, rather than what we would usually define.  It has more to do with real politiks than anything else.

Again, this is what I gather from a short reading.

[viper37]

Under the standards being applied by critics of the Israeli operations in Gaza, the St Lo and Caen attacks, along with many others carried out by Anglo-American air operations, would have to be classified as war crimes (this is without even getting into the "strategic" attacks on German cities). One would have to conclude that notwithstanding the positive nostalgic haze that now surrounds the greatest generation in their most iconic moment, the Anglo-American liberators were in fact a pack of unrepentant, serial war criminals.

2 Canadians attacked and freed a Dutch city, killing and taking prisoner an entire Waffen SS division, in the process, taking one casualty and killing no civilians.

Certainly, if 1 Canadian dude could do it during the night, Americans and Israeli could achieve something like that.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/L%C3%A9o_Major


Now, in Saint-Lô, there were 352 civilian casualties caused by the American bombardement of June 6th-7th.  Out of 3000 civilian dead total caused by the Germans during the entire battle.

And as you say, the context, is different.

Were the Americans trying to force the French out of their towns or where they trying to liberate them from the Germans?

Nobody would look at the casualties the sames if Israel was forcing the Hamas out of Palestine to give the land back to Palestinian Arabs.

But you know as well as I that it is something that is going to happen.  At best, part of this territory is going to become a no man's land.  The best places are going to be new colonies for settlers.

[Razgovory]

In a sense, the Palestinian conflict and the Ukrainian conflict are the same conflict.  It's all about removing US influence.  That's why the truly enlightened on both the left and right oppose Israel and Ukraine.  On the Paradox boards there are some who are fine with the rockets falling on Tel Aviv, but became anxious when the rockets fallen on fellow Europeans, but they are only clinging to their chains.  This is liberation!

Far more on the left recognise the better analogy is between Russia and Israel.

It's not an analogy.

[The Minsky Moment]

And as you say, the context, is different.

Were the Americans trying to force the French out of their towns or where they trying to liberate them from the Germans?

Nobody would look at the casualties the sames if Israel was forcing the Hamas out of Palestine to give the land back to Palestinian Arabs.

I don't think that distinction works that well - the Anglo-Americans were more harsh in dealing with German civilians who they were not trying to liberate.  I also have seen no indication that Israel wants to seize Gaza for itself; to the contrary, if the Israeli side agrees on anything, it is that they don't want stay in Gaza long term.

[viper37]

And as you say, the context, is different.

Were the Americans trying to force the French out of their towns or where they trying to liberate them from the Germans?

Nobody would look at the casualties the sames if Israel was forcing the Hamas out of Palestine to give the land back to Palestinian Arabs.

I don't think that distinction works that well - the Anglo-Americans were more harsh in dealing with German civilians who they were not trying to liberate.  I also have seen no indication that Israel wants to seize Gaza for itself; to the contrary, if the Israeli side agrees on anything, it is that they don't want stay in Gaza long term.

The plan has been leaked from the beginning to get rid of the Palestinians living there and corner them in a place where they can be "managed".

They don't want to deal with the Palestinians, as evidenced in the West Bank, but they want the territory, or a huge part of it.

Whether, in the end, there will be a no man's land with a reduced Palestinian State remains to be seen, but there will not be a return to the prewar situation with anyone else but Israel in control of Gaza and Israel is clear that it does not want to control Palestinians.  Way too much of a hassle for what it's worth.

[Josquius]

In a sense, the Palestinian conflict and the Ukrainian conflict are the same conflict.  It's all about removing US influence.  That's why the truly enlightened on both the left and right oppose Israel and Ukraine.  On the Paradox boards there are some who are fine with the rockets falling on Tel Aviv, but became anxious when the rockets fallen on fellow Europeans, but they are only clinging to their chains.  This is liberation!

Far more on the left recognise the better analogy is between Russia and Israel.

It's not an analogy.

Then its just wrong.
Russia is seeking to use Hamas to distract the west's attention (successfully) and Iran is of course keen for anything that hurts the US.
But everything in the world is related to some extent. This isn't the same as them being the same conflict.