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 -
Russia has been intensively bombing Ukraine with thousands of missiles for several years and they have not yet broken a country of 30-40 million. Iran is twice as populous. There is nothing that Israel can do to greatly harm Iran short of a nuclear strike or a US invasion, at which point we may learn how well developed the Iranian nuclear program really is. Assassinating leaders does not matter, it's totally irrelevant.
Meanwhile, Iran can fire off hundreds or thousands of missiles in a non-telegraphed attack for a change, overwhelm the Iron Dome and demolish Israel's first-world high-tech economy. Israel is a small country, it is inherently easier to bomb and wreck than Iran. Nobody is going to build chip factories in a warzone. Oil is stuck in the ground, laptop workers and tech companies can leave for safer climates.
Does Iran want to get into a massive painful struggle with Israel and presumably the US? No. But their patience is not unlimited. It's not 2003 anymore, Americans have gotten a little less gullible about these Middle Eastern wars. It's not 2003 anymore, Western firepower apparently can't deal with little countries like Yemen. Times have changed and Israel should adjust its tactics to meet the new situation.
Russia isn't waging a total war of destruction with Ukraine. It would be extremely easy for them to destroy power delivery infrastructure and this water supply if they wanted to.
If anything, despite what western propaganda would tell you, they've tried to minimize civilian casualties. Meanwhile the Ukrainians are using civilian housing, hospitals, schools, what have you
They have not tried to maximally maximize it, and they are not yet fully on Syrian bombing strategy but... They have not exactly tried to minimize them
We know that it is not extremely easy because they tried and succeeded only partially, that is why they now switched mostly to destruction of power stations. It is not clear how well they succeed but it seems to be going better for Russia. Still, far from "extremely easy".
(unless you claim that they kept attacking power infrastructure because they had too many rockets and no good use for them or something)
One notable reason is that it is hard for them to escalate further without use of nuclear weapons. They already using nearly full available resources (OK, not all forces were pulled from NATO and Chinese border - though very significant part was).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link