Israel declares war

[Phoenix_person]

20 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Back on topic, I see the Israelis have changed their tactics a bit, to effectively deal with Hamas leaders who surround themselves with innocent lives:

https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/hamas-says-it-fires-israeli-troops-pressing-gaza-ground-assault-2023-10-31/

200+ civilian casualties seems like a pretty steep price for one Hamas commander. Yes, it's horrible that Hamas uses civilians as human shields, but that doesn't excuse IDF disregard for innocent life. They're going to end up creating more extremists than they kill. 

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

They're going to end up creating more extremists than they kill. 

You can say the same thing about Hamas. I swing from “swords to plowshares I love peace” to “right wing warmonger” when Hamas beheads innocent people and drags them through the street. 

[Phoenix_person]

27 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

You can say the same thing about Hamas. I swing from “swords to plowshares I love peace” to “right wing warmonger” when Hamas beheads innocent people and drags them through the street. 

I get that. But the outrage against Hamas easily gets lost when you see images like this.

Hamas is a terrorist organization. Israel is a sovereign state and ally to the US and NATO. They should be expected to respect civilian life as much as possible in accordance with international law, even if their enemy does not. Eye-for-an-eye is a pretty terrible military strategy when your enemy is embedded among civilians. And this destruction was allegedly for one dude. What kind of "collateral damage" will the IDF deem acceptable if they have a chance to take out 20 Hamas leaders in one airstrike?

[LDSGator]

3 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I get that. But the outrage against Hamas easily gets lost when you see images like this.

Hamas is a terrorist organization. Israel is a sovereign state and ally to the US and NATO. They should be expected to respect civilian life as much as possible in accordance with international law, even if their enemy does not. Eye-for-an-eye is a pretty terrible military strategy when your enemy is embedded among civilians. And this destruction was allegedly for one dude. What kind of "collateral damage" will the IDF deem acceptable if they have a chance to take out 20 Hamas leaders in one airstrike?

And I get your points 100%. 
 

I never served so I have no right whatsoever to say this. But war is horrific. @Vort was exactly right when he said Satan and his minions rejoice when we kill one another. 

[NeuroTypical]

2 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

They're going to end up creating more extremists than they kill. 

I know that's the popular narrative, but history doesn't really play out that way.  

https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/bombing-civilians

It's absolutely horrible that human warfare always, without exception, results in civilian casualties.  Hats of to Israel for it's history of going to such extremes to avoid it in the past, that they basically gave up decades of opportunities to end their deadly enemies.  They haven't been perfect at it by any stretch of the imagination, but even America has been hard pressed to claim it always put as much effort into avoiding innocent death during wartime. 

If it happens a bunch more, do you think Hamas will change their tactics of surrounding themselves with innocent lives, sometimes at gunpoint?

 

[NeuroTypical]

12 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

I get that. But the outrage against Hamas easily gets lost when you see images like this.

The outrage only gets lost, when people only avail themselves of biased one-sided news.

Open challenge to you @Phoenix_person: Follow the IDF Twitter feed.  Read all their posts for three days straight.  See what images and stories are coming out of October 7th, the most deadly day for Jews since the Holocaust ended.  Then come back and tell me about how easily you lose outrage against Hamas when seeing Israel throw nasty punches of its own.  I think I've seen enough of you to know you are a good person, a moral person, and one who does not shy away from the possibility of learning things that might change previously held beliefs. 

https://twitter.com/IDF

Edited November 2, 2023 by NeuroTypical

[LDSGator]

20 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

know that's the popular narrative, but history doesn't really play out that way.  

I always thought it’s popular because it’s a good point in this case. The link you provided is making me second guess my own beliefs though. Thanks for sharing it my friend. 

[Traveler]

War is horrible.  Always has been horrible and always will be horrible.  I have contemplated that all war is an extension of the war of heaven started during our pre-existence.   However, I have not been able to reconcile my own experiences with war.  It is difficult for me to reconcile the deliberate killing of anyone – especially someone that has the opportunity to still repent – and we all have the opportunity to repent – even those not currently interested.

The greatest problem with war is the killing of those that are innocent but lets us not forget about the lives of those that fight in wars.  The engine of war is mostly in the leaders that direct the war efforts and the reasons for directing such efforts.  Two elements, anger and revenge are the most common outcomes of conflict that brings violence to the table that is the cause of all the sorrows of war.  I believe that anger and revenge are the elements that, while they exist will perpetrate and continue war until all that harbor such emotion are dead.

I have some experience with anger and revenge and have learned that such emotions can never be quenched.  The more one wins or looses the more pronounced such emotions will grow.  Of all the possible emotions a person can feed these are the most illogical and self-destructive.   Hate and anger will destroy those that allow such emotions long before (if ever) it will harm anyone that has overcome hate and anger.  The most just anger and revenge seems the more self-destructive it will be.

Of all the posters on this forum – I would consider @mirkwood  the most expert in dealing with violence fomented by anger and revenge.  I do not know but I would guess that he would say that an argument has gone too far when one person physically assaults (by touching) another.  In a society of free speech – what a person says is (for the most part) legal.  The first to shove or otherwise physically assault is the first guilty.  After the first act of violence, it becomes hard (perhaps impossible) to distinguish self-protection from attacking the other.   Some of this can be learned from raising you own children – but you must have more than one child to discover this problem.

I think both sides ought to make their concerns known here in the USA – because we believe in freedom of speech.  I am aware of an Islamic child killed by his landlord – I believe that to be sick and wrong and do not think that is an exercise of freedom of speech.  Likewise, I do not think posters of those harmed by violence is a violation of freedom of speech, but I do believe taking down such posters are.

It does appear to me that supporters of Hamas are more driven with heighten anger and revenge than supporters of Israel – outside of the conflict itself, considering what is happening at demonstrations and especially among those that are fearful to demonstrate.  I remember after 9/11 that many of my Muslem friends were afraid to even leave their homes.  Currently, it seems that my Jewish friends are the more afraid.

I would ask – which of the demonstrators nearest to you – if you are not Jewish or Islamic – would you fear to criticize for their anger and revenge?

 

The Traveler

[LDSGator]

4 minutes ago, Traveler said:

supporters of Hamas are more driven with heighten anger and revenge than supporters of Israel –

No. Supporters of Hamas are driven by the awful conditions they have to live in. I fully, completely understand their complaints. Until they go around murdering people. 

[NeuroTypical]

5 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I would ask – which of the demonstrators nearest to you – if you are not Jewish or Islamic – would you fear to criticize for their anger and revenge?

Here in happy peaceful Colorado Springs, the only demonstrators I know of, would be the BLM riots back in 2020.  I saw the ashes of the flipped car the next day, and around the corner I saw protestors who were smiling and waving with their signs.  Day and night make a big difference when it comes to protests and riots. 

After 9/11, a Mosque held an open house, and it was a friendly learning experience completely devoid of any hostility by the hosts.   Most notable was the very large, very loud black woman in a hijab, making the very energetic and unmistakable claim that no man has ever forced her to wear anything, and she pities the first man who tries.   I'm looking for the opportunity to refresh this experience if a similar opportunity opens up.  

None of the Jewish folk I know here are demonstrating or protesting or rioting - and it's funny to even think they would.  

 

But to your point, if there's a Jewish equivalent of stuff like Bin Laden's nasab/epistle, or the Fatwa against Salman Rushdie, or the chant "from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free", I'm not aware of it.   

[Traveler]

12 minutes ago, LDSGator said:

No. Supporters of Hamas are driven by the awful conditions they have to live in. I fully, completely understand their complaints. Until they go around murdering people. 

I disagree – I had a friend that was a POW in Vietnam (north).  His conditions were far more awful as a POW.  I recall being with him after his escape while the war was still going on.  He could not sleep at night and would dive to the ground if a muffler was too laude, but he had little desire for revenge of his captors.  Though life was still difficult for him, he had no desire for war or violence and would rather be abused than abuse.   It is wrong to be driven more by circumstance than what is just and true.

 

The Traveler

[LDSGator]

10 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I disagree – I had a friend that was a POW in Vietnam (north).  His conditions were far more awful as a POW.  I recall being with him after his escape while the war was still going on.  He could not sleep at night and would dive to the ground if a muffler was too laude, but he had little desire for revenge of his captors.  Though life was still difficult for him, he had no desire for war or violence and would rather be abused than abuse.   It is wrong to be driven more by circumstance than what is just and true.

 

The Traveler

Okay. That has nothing at all to do with Hamas-Israel, but okay. 

[Phoenix_person]

32 minutes ago, Traveler said:

I disagree – I had a friend that was a POW in Vietnam (north).  His conditions were far more awful as a POW.  I recall being with him after his escape while the war was still going on.  He could not sleep at night and would dive to the ground if a muffler was too laude, but he had little desire for revenge of his captors.  Though life was still difficult for him, he had no desire for war or violence and would rather be abused than abuse.   It is wrong to be driven more by circumstance than what is just and true.

 

The Traveler

The psychological/emotional effects of war depend on perspective, to some extent. Your friend was a trained soldier who was sent thousands of miles from home to fight for land that had no significance to him or his family. I have no doubt that he suffered horrific experience as a POW, but that's part of war. And in the end he still got to go home while the people of Vietnam had to rebuild entire communities and bury dead children.

Iraq arguably wasn't nearly as bad as Vietnam, but I still have very vivid memories of it. Those memories include people throwing rocks at us as we drove through the smoking ruins that used to be their homes, friends of mine bleeding and scared in the aftermath of an RPG attack, a dog exploding a few yards away from our convoy, and AK47 fire coming from the perimeter and us not knowing whether it was Iraqis shooting from outside the base or Polish soldiers shooting from inside the base. I spent a total if 2 1/2 years in the Middle East, most of it in Iraq. It left me damaged in ways that still affect me almost 20 years after my first tour. I brought home demons so loud that I lit myself on fire to try to get rid of them. I don't blame the Iraqi people for that though. I was doing what I signed up to do. I didn't agree with the war, but I went there anyway. If anything, I resent Bush more than the Iraqi insurgents.

What about the perspective of the civilians in Vietnam, Iraq, and Gaza? They didn't sign up for the hell they're going through, and many of them have been entrenched in it for their entire lives. They don't get the luxury of being haunted by their trauma from the safety of an American suburb. Their trauma is inescapable and ongoing, and has been for years. THAT is what drives support for Hamas. People who have known nothing but heartbreak and oppression will sometimes go to extreme lengths to free themselves. We're not going to defeat Hamas until we understand that and try to find a way to give the Palestinian people a less toxic and more peaceful alternative. 

[LDSGator]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

The psychological/emotional effects of war depend on perspective, to some extent. Your friend was a trained soldier who was sent thousands of miles from home to fight for land that had no significance to him or his family. I have no doubt that he suffered horrific experience as a POW, but that's part of war. And in the end he still got to go home while the people of Vietnam had to rebuild entire communities and bury dead children.

Iraq arguably wasn't nearly as bad as Vietnam, but I still have very vivid memories of it. Those memories include people throwing rocks at us as we drove through the smoking ruins that used to be their homes, friends of mine bleeding and scared in the aftermath of an RPG attack, a dog exploding a few yards away from our convoy, and AK47 fire coming from the perimeter and us not knowing whether it was Iraqis shooting from outside the base or Polish soldiers shooting from inside the base. I spent a total if 2 1/2 years in the Middle East, most of it in Iraq. It left me damaged in ways that still affect me almost 20 years after my first tour. I brought home demons so loud that I lit myself on fire to try to get rid of them. I don't blame the Iraqi people for that though. I was doing what I signed up to do. I didn't agree with the war, but I went there anyway. If anything, I resent Bush more than the Iraqi insurgents.

What about the perspective of the civilians in Vietnam, Iraq, and Gaza? They didn't sign up for the hell they're going through, and many of them have been entrenched in it for their entire lives. They don't get the luxury of being haunted by their trauma from the safety of an American suburb. Their trauma is inescapable and ongoing, and has been for years. THAT is what drives support for Hamas. People who have known nothing but heartbreak and oppression will sometimes go to extreme lengths to free themselves. We're not going to defeat Hamas until we understand that and try to find a way to give the Palestinian people a less toxic and more peaceful alternative. 

I’m so sorry you had to see that. Awful. 

[mikbone]

Just watch the first 45 seconds of this clip.

 

[Vort]

3 minutes ago, mikbone said:

Just watch the first 45 seconds of this clip.

That doesn't count because they're oppressed. Get on board with the correct opinion, you ignorant ignoramus.

[Just_A_Guy]

6 hours ago, Phoenix_person said:

I get that. But the outrage against Hamas easily gets lost when you see images like this.

Hamas is a terrorist organization. Israel is a sovereign state and ally to the US and NATO. They should be expected to respect civilian life as much as possible in accordance with international law, even if their enemy does not. Eye-for-an-eye is a pretty terrible military strategy when your enemy is embedded among civilians. And this destruction was allegedly for one dude. What kind of "collateral damage" will the IDF deem acceptable if they have a chance to take out 20 Hamas leaders in one airstrike?

1.  IIRC, from that particular incident the dude was in a tunnel dozens of feet underground.  And I believe you say you’re ex-military; so maybe you can weigh in on what kind of ordinance it would take to make a crater like that and the pros and cons of using that kind of ordinance in a particular tactical situation.

Assuming that I’m right and the guy had indeed gone to the tunnels:  Are you suggesting that between option a) (destroy the threat even if doing so hurts the civilians that the threat is using to shield himself) and option b) (shrug, say “oh, well, he’s with/underneath civilians so we just have to let him go knowing he’ll kill more of our civilians in the future”), there exists some third option?  What, precisely, *is* that option?

2.  I’m not sure the proper jus in bellum calculus is dictated by the kill ratio of “enemy combatants to collateral civilians”.  The IDF’s main goal isn’t to kill bad guys; it’s to save Israeli civilians.  The IDF obviously shouldn’t be going out of its way to kill Palestinian civilians; but nor does it have an especial need to spare their lives at the expense of the Israeli civilians they are sworn to protect (and whose tortures and deaths, it should be noted, the vast majority of Palestinians—Hamas or not—unabashedly applaud).

3.  We often self-flagellate over how many terrorists-of-color are created through western-inflicted violence; but it seems no one ever talks much how many terrorists-of-pallor are created through eastern-inflicted violence.  Why is that?  Is the implication that light-skinned people, or cultural westerners, have a superior ability to control their emotions or to productively redirect their natural desire for revenge?  Is “we’re creating more terrorists than we can kill” really a manifestation of racial or cultural paternalism—a polite way of saying “those brown people just can’t help themselves, the poor little dears”?

And, these considerations aside—is there anyone left in Gaza who hasn’t been radicalized by the last couple of decades?  They sing songs about killing Jews, they listen to sermons about killing Jews, they send their kids to schools that teach the virtues of killing Jews, they vote for politicians who promise to kill Jews, and they take to the streets and celebrate when Jews are burned and baked and raped and ripped.  Just where are all these “moderate Palestinians” we’re supposed to be afraid of offending, who were horrified by the October 7 massacres and but for Israel’s response were on the cusp of standing up to Hamas and filling in the tunnels and making the rocket attacks stop?  

Edited November 2, 2023 by Just_A_Guy

[mikbone]

Remember this?

We have pretty much already agreed upon how many Palestinians are worth a single Israeli.

[mikbone]

 

[mirkwood]

21 hours ago, Traveler said:

Of all the posters on this forum – I would consider @mirkwood  the most expert in dealing with violence fomented by anger and revenge. 

 

I can certainly say that I have that experience.  I will also say that I have never served in the military and could not say it has very similar connections, though I expect to an extent it does.

[Traveler]

Things to know about our military and the Middle East that (in my opinion) are not correctly identified in US news organizations:

1.  Iran is not Arabic – it is Persian.   Within Islam is the idea that the Arabic language is divine, and the descendants of Abraham (Arabic) are essential to the connection of Islam to Allah and that the rest or the world (non-Arabic) is “dependent” on the leadership and spiritual enlightenment of a “True Arab” connection.

2. Iran is mostly Shia, and all of its leaders are Shia Muslims. Sauda Aribia is Sunni and controls most of the wealth and holy sites of Islam.  If the entire world were Muslims, the Shia and Sunni are such rivals that they would be at war against each other. 

3. The only prevention of full-blown conflict in Islam is the prophetic Jihad against the “Great Satan”, which Satan, by prophesy, is best identified by the infliction of economic captivity through the use of compound interest-based banking.  This goes much deeper but will for now suffice.

4. Hamas is a Sunni based organization.  There is no way that Iran can control all of Hamas’s strings.  They may offer some supplies but there is no way that Iran would trust them with their “best” armaments and no way the rest of the Sunni would allow Shia control of a Sunni organization.  Hamas is not an Iranian proxy.   At best Iran will see Hamas as disposable pawns in a much more important game strategy.

5.  Hezbollah, to the north of Israel, is Shia and is why they are better armed and controlled by Iran.  If and when Hezbollah becomes involved, we will know that Iran if fully committed and controlling.  As long as Hamas is the primary entity of the conflict someone other than Iran is pulling the primary proxy strings.

6.  It is my personal opinion that the military utilized by the current administration are incompetent or have designs contrary to our constitution.  Case in point is their insistence that prior to implantation of US exit strategies that they insisted that the Taliban were not strong enough to take over Afghanistan for months or even years.  They also insisted that Ukraine would fall to Russia with 72 hours.

7.  Something about military experts appearing on various US news outlets.  Individual accolades are worn on the left side of the military uniform.  Unit citations are worn on the right side and are much harder to come by.  It is rare for someone to be awarded even one unit citation.  Seldom will someone with more than 2 ever appear in public to offer opinions.  Yet these individuals are the most competent in analyzing intelligence and knowing the best responses – which is most likely why they have such citations.  None of the first line commanders that advise the President and the current administration have unit citations (with the possible exception of one that is rarely quoted or referenced).

 

The Traveler

[NeuroTypical]

On 11/2/2023 at 1:48 PM, Phoenix_person said:

Iraq arguably wasn't nearly as bad as Vietnam, but I still have very vivid memories of it.

Just wanted to say that I'm glad you're here PP.  (Both on this board, and in the world in general.)

I have a Vietnam war buddy with PTSD - pushing 80 now.  I wrote this thing about him:

Quote

"Only the good die young" - is a catchphrase of a good brother Vietnam war vet buddy in my ward.  We've known each other for 20 years, ever since I was assigned to go home teach him and his wife.  Back then he was defensively talking about his WoW abuses, blaming past negative experiences in Elder's quorum.  He had some good things to say about the one LDS person who had a good impact on his life, talked about all the changing he had done to do right by his wife.   He seemed like an overall good man, and I told him so.  My companion and I and his wife got him active again, and he did everything else himself.  Cleaned up his WoW addictions, and almost died in the hospital from withdrawal complications. Went back to fighting with the VA for the right PTSD treatment and meds, resulting in some life-threatening behavior as they tinkered with his prescriptions.  Took his wife to the temple, and did a stint as counselor in the High Priest's group.

He has many scars and failings, from his sordid past.  He shared all the things about his sins, which were all doings with women before the war, and how he fell even lower after the war as he blindly flailed about in sin trying desperately to deal with his mental state.  His PTSD will occasionally manifest itself after someone doesn't treat him right, he explodes and lashes out in anger, and then is so embarrassed and offended by his own behavior, he'll go inactive out of shame and a sense of duty to his fellow saints.  He has managed to keep his wife from leaving him by the skin of his teeth, I've never seen someone re-break his heart and re-contrite his spirit as deeply and as often as he. 

Whenever I think about enduring to the end, I think about this guy.  He reminds me of Nephi, after his dad dies and his brothers are inches away from trying to kill him so hard that he'll be forced to split up the family forever.  My buddy is the walking embodiment of 2 Nephi 4.

Quote

O wretched man that I am! Yea, my heart sorroweth because of my flesh; my soul grieveth because of mine iniquities. I am encompassed about, because of the temptations and the sins which do so easily abeset me. And when I desire to rejoice, my heart groaneth because of my sins; nevertheless, I know in whom I have trusted.

I wonder what sort of amazing person he would have been, absent the sin and PTSD.  Anyway, he's almost 80 now, and whenever we're catching up with each other, and he talks about his latest health and sin challenges, he'll wistfully relate that catchphrase to me. 

 

I'm not a fan of war and what it does to people.  But war doesn't seem to care much what I think of it.

[JohnsonJones]

On 11/2/2023 at 12:21 PM, LDSGator said:

No. Supporters of Hamas are driven by the awful conditions they have to live in. I fully, completely understand their complaints. Until they go around murdering people. 

Not all the supporters of Hamas are driven by that.  Many of the main monetary funders are actually living in luxury in other nations.

In Gaza it seems you are either for or against them.  If you are against them, expect that they and their supporters will take everything from you.

The Hospitals, for example, have enough to support themselves, or they DID.  Hamas stole fuel and supplies from them.  Even with the neutral medical parties (such as the UN medical staff) saying they were neutral and trying to say what Hamas told them to say, Hamas still stole all their stuff.

This is why Israel had the siege...because anything they sent to help people in Gaza would simply be taken (or given in many cases) from them to help Hamas.   Another hope was that those in Gaza would hear the appeals to take on Hamas and either convince them, or take the hostages and send them back to Israel.  The People of Gaza did not do this.

Gaza itself is on a beautiful area where if the people had actually CHOSEN to pursue making money and getting a better life, they had the prime area to do so.  Instead...well...we see where we are now. 

A LOT of what has happened in Gaza is by CHOICE of those who live there.  Hamas is only in power today because people choose to allow them to be in power.  The reason things are as they is because those in Gaza have managed to make everyone else in the region (including Israeli Palestinians and Arabs) from the surrounding nations (such as Jordan and Egypt) have no desire to deal with the ramifications of what the Palestinians do in their nations (aka...try to disrupt or overthrow their governments as well).

Even when they are given food, nice things, and helped in other nations, these attitudes to disrupt the other nations and local governments seem to erupt. 

This is also part of their problems and why Gaza is like it is.  No one wants to help out anymore there (or the help has been greatly reduced) due to them biting the hands that try to help...repeatedly.

However, it's gotten much worse as we saw with the recent incursion to Israel.  They have sworn to commit another holocaust and kill all the Jews  (and why people support such an idea is beyond me...Hamas preys on the idea that they are poor and downtrodden by Israel, but they are also perhaps some of the most ardent pushers of a Holocaust since the Nazi's...perhaps even more so), but HOW they would try to do such things were not so horrific in appearance (they appear to approve door to door and torture now) as they have become. 

It's not just the attack that is bad.  It's not just their doctrine which is bad.  (And both of those would be horrific in and of themselves).  It is also HOW they perpetrated that attack upon innocent civilians (and not just Jews in this case, and not just Israelis) and bragged about it.  It's HOW they seem to relish in it, and are proud of what they did and seemingly are supported by those around them as well.  They seem to have no regrets about what they did and if given the chance, have seemingly pointed that not only would they do it again, they'd do worse if they could.

This is why Israel is doing what they are doing. 

Is it self-defense?...I'd say so...but others may have different opinion.

[LDSGator]

4 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Not all the supporters of Hamas are driven by that.

Oh, agree fully. 

[Traveler]

8 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

Not all the supporters of Hamas are driven by that. .........

We could, perhaps, say the same of the Nazis and the SS and their supporters, in WWII.

 

The Traveler

Edited November 4, 2023 by Traveler