site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   30319 thread views

Israel-Gaza Megathread #2

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.

6
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As far as I am aware, there is still no evidence they beheaded any babies.

I said the same thing on an earlier thread and someone likened me to Alex Jones, lol.

No? I think that a claim circulating earlier that Hamas beheaded 40 babies was dubious. You know it’s possible to think that Hamas does bad things without uncritically accepting every claim that’s made by Hamas’s foes, right?

No. You questioned whether any babies were killed. And then I called you Alex Jones.

No? Read the thread instead of making things up.

Et tu

@zeke5123, maybe you're thinking of your conversation with @jfk. (https://www.themotte.org/post/716/israelgaza-megathread-2/150623?context=8#context) in which @jfk kinda sorta questions whether anyone was killed, and you called him Alex Jones rather than your conversation with @Tomato where he brought up a news article (https://www.themotte.org/post/716/israelgaza-megathread-2/149971?context=8#context) and you said that it's Alex Jones-level denial.

It looks like that story wasn't true or exaggerated. But considering the litany of atrocities they committed that same day and were proud of, acting like they wouldn't is ridiculous. There was a hyper focus on whether or not the babies were beheaded or not. It's like fine, they didn't behead the babies, they just did all these other things we know are true that are just as bad. People wanted to focus on that to cast doubt on the other things they did that day, which is absurd because they broadcasted it to the world. Whether or not they did it, that is a debate. What isn't up for debate is if they would kill children because they literally did it that same day and Islamists have done so for decades. And this is true regardless of what Israel did, didn't do, or will do in the future.

Why make a doubtful unverified story the first example of atrocities you cite?

A soldier said on camera that many children had been killed and they even saw a beheaded child. The i24 (Israeli news channel) reporter repeated that, jumbled it up, others jumbled it up further, military didn’t comment until it had verified the situation. It now turns out that up to 40 kids were killed (expected given demographics of kibbutzim, high fertility rates among even modern orthodox Jewry, and total population), including babies, and that one young child was seemingly beheaded.

Far from some deliberate propaganda effort, that’s exactly how things are supposed to work, the military didn’t officially confirm until they had the information.

IMO, the military could have immediately "debunked" the 40 beheaded babies story, but let it run wild for awhile anyways for obvious reasons.

Me or the Israelis? Because from what I saw that wasn't reported by the IDF but instead by some random Israeli and the news picked up on it uncritically.

The people I've seen focusing most on the beheaded babies are the ones claiming that there were beheaded babies. I think it's fair to point out that we don't actually know that they actually beheaded babies.

Indeed. Credibility matters. You don't get to push fake nonsense and expect people to believe you afterwards.

It makes me think of some US political spat I can barely remember. I think some congressman made an incondiary claim that was proven false, then responded by saying something like "yeah but they would if they could". Like, no dude, you don't get credit here. You lied.

No released photographic evidence, but officials have told us they have seen the photos.

I assume out of respect for the dead they're not being released. If my child were beheaded I wouldn't want those photos out on the Internet, either. I wouldn't really care if it assuaged conspiracy theorists, people would just say they're AI-generated anyway.

To be clear, what happened was: “interested party A claims their enemies committed particularly heinous act, source: trust me bro” and now you’re calling people who would like better evidence conspiracy theorists? Weird inversion of burden of proof particularly on a site like this.

Photos of the babies have been released. But as far as I know, none was beheaded.

I've seen a photo of two babies burned black. But no beheaded ones.

Yeah, I can't tell for sure (because of censorship/fire damage) but it doesn't look like it. And I doubt they have a secret stash of even more shocking images.

Then why did they release photos of other dead babies on Twitter?

What is this place?

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.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats