Live data from Hacker News

The pro-Israel information war

jackpoulson.substack.com

881–890 of 1001 posts

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Israel could remove Hamas without injuring any non-combatants I think they would. Surely you jest. How is this attack supposed to remove Hamas? It seems designed to strengthen Hamas, just as Israel has been supporting Hamas since their formation. The existence of Hamas prevents a united Palestinian people while simultaneously giving Israel the excuse to reject a 2-state solution. If Hamas didn't exist, Israel wo…

You seem to ignore the fact that Palestinians have rejected a 2-state solution and have elected hamas themselves.

In a democratic election held before around half it's current population was born. Not that the results would likely be much different today.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#882
post #7

Pro-Palestinian views outrank Pro-Israeli online by around 36 to 1 on TikTok and 8 to 1 on other online platforms. https://twitter.com/antgoldbloom/status/1721561226151612602 If anything the skew within the platforms is to prioritize pro-palestinian views https://twitter.com/committeeonccp/status/173279243496103143... It also seems like these platforms create (rather than support) anti-Israeli views: https://twitter.…

Anti-semitism in and of itself is unequivocally wrong. But conflating anti-Israeli views with anti-Semitic views does a disservice to Jews and Palestinians alike.

Yup, that's exactly the reason why I don't treat the term seriously any more. Same with "racist" or "nazi". If it means anything these days it's that those using the words disagree with someone.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#883
post #769

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There has never been a war in history where one side stops because they killed enough people. War ends when the enemy surrenders. The Japanese killed a few dozen civilians in Pearl Harbor. America killed 10,000x as many during their bombings of Japan. Had they not surrendered, they likely would have killed an order of magnitude more. The only alternative would have been for the US to completely blockade Japan indefin…

By most standards, what the US did to the civilian population of Japan was an atrocity. I don’t have easy answers here. But I think we’ve lost an important piece of the plot here if we can’t look at one terrible human tragedy, and then another, and then ask ourselves whether the first had to beget the second.

For sure we should ask the question, and it's totally valid to criticize Israel's actions. It's also totally in line to be in favor of Israel conducting a war against Hamas, but to be against specific ways in which it is fought.

I think a thing that should give you pause is if the conclusion to a train of thought is "and therefore, no war is ever justified". Some people think that's true! Some people think it's better for them and all their friends and family to die than to risk killing civilians. Most people (including me) disagree with that statement.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#884

Coming from Europe and living in the US for the last couple of years, I'm shocked at how society here is clearly pro-israel. It is very clear that in the US the life of an israel citizen is valued way above the one of a palestinian. It is sad to lose that level of humanity. all of the discourse also conveniently ignores that Israel created a large-scale open-air prison in Gaza and removed any hope left for people liv…

Israel is the United States' colonial outpost and our leaders know it. Our press knows it. That influences the public discourse, especially that which flows from official channels and major news outlets. And Israel has a huge lobby here to reinforce all that.

There's a religious dimension, too. Some kinds of Protestants see a modern Jewish state in Palestine as a precondition for the Second Coming of Christ, and actively want to urge that by supporting Israel. This is very common among religious fundamentalists in much of the US.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#885
post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take that logic further. Israel's enemies outnumber it by 10x or more and are more than ruthless enough to sacrifice as many as necessary*. There's no way ever that Israel could avoid having the other side having more casualties. The same would apply to every minority. If your suggested law of war isn't 'majority or ruthless minority, get to do everything they want because they have more causalties', than you need an…

I do recall opposition to America’s post 9-11 response based on the same arguments, oddly enough. The current laws of war do not allow, for instance, strikes at medical facilities: Israel’s argument is that they don’t have to follow the laws because Hamas is breaking them.

> The current laws of war do not allow, for instance, strikes at medical facilities: Israel’s argument is that they don’t have to follow the laws because Hamas is breaking them.

That is neither what the laws of war say, nor what the Israeli argument is (or at least, it's a misrepresentation).

The laws of war say that if a medical facility (or any other civilian infrastructure) is used by militants as part of the war effort, then it loses its protected status. Israel's argument, whether you agree or not, is that this occurred, thereby making those targets legal.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#886
post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Pro-Palestinian views outrank Pro-Israeli online by around 36 to 1 on TikTok and 8 to 1 on other online platforms. > If anything the skew within the platforms is to prioritize pro-palestinian views. That platforms prioritize one over the other is just one possible explanation. An alternative explanation is that more people already have those views. And it's dishonest to present one explanation and omit the other. N…

> An alternative explanation is that more people already have those views. Treading a fine line here between Bayesian priors and stereotypes, but the worldwide Muslim/Jewish population split is something like 112:1. Obviously that's not going to be the same proportion on a given media-service, but it should still inform our expectations of what is the "default" state before theorizing about platform algorithm-tweakin…

[flagged]

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#887

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does the scale matter? In the legal codes with which I am familiar mens rea matters. Murder is not just worse than manslaughter it is on a different level. Western criminal codes generally allow for no punishment, perhaps even no guilt, for a manslaughter. If Israel could remove Hamas without injuring any non-combatants I think they would. It makes a difference. Almost by definition suggesting that scale is a fac…

> If Israel could remove Hamas without injuring any non-combatants I think they would. Surely you jest. How is this attack supposed to remove Hamas? It seems designed to strengthen Hamas, just as Israel has been supporting Hamas since their formation. The existence of Hamas prevents a united Palestinian people while simultaneously giving Israel the excuse to reject a 2-state solution. If Hamas didn't exist, Israel wo…

> Surely you jest. How is this attack supposed to remove Hamas? It seems designed to strengthen Hamas, just as Israel has been supporting Hamas since their formation.

This attack is supposed to remove Hamas by killing them, or forcing them to surrender. There's a lot of legit criticism of what Israel is doing, but if you think it's designed to bolster Hamas, then you're really misunderstanding what's happening.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro-Ukraine viewd also outnumber pro-Russia views on twitter or facebook. Are the conclusions you draw from this fact the same? Why/why not?

With Ukraine there’s a clear victim and clear aggressor. Textbook good vs evil.

> aggressor

You mean NATO with its orders of magnitude power encroaching East despite their empty promises in 90s?

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#889
post #738

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take that logic further. Israel's enemies outnumber it by 10x or more and are more than ruthless enough to sacrifice as many as necessary*. There's no way ever that Israel could avoid having the other side having more casualties. The same would apply to every minority. If your suggested law of war isn't 'majority or ruthless minority, get to do everything they want because they have more causalties', than you need an…

I don’t think the majority of people killed so far in this conflict have been enemies of Israel per se, in the same way that most (nearly all?) of the people who died on October 7 were not enemies of Palestine. Even in the most hardened, cynical, irredentist view this wouldn’t be true. “Collateral damage” is one of those bloodless wartime euphemisms for killing innocent men, women, and children. It’s a dirty, unavoid…

> “Collateral damage” is one of those bloodless wartime euphemisms for killing innocent men, women, and children.

It's not a just a euphemism, because there really is a difference. Justified or not, Dresden wasn't collateral damage - it was directly targeting and killing innocent civilians. Collateral damage really is something different.

> But I don’t believe for one second that Israel’s hands are so sufficiently constrained that the current degree of civilian death is necessary.

(For the record, I'm Israeli)

This is a hard question to answer. No one actually knows, because given fog of war and given the incentives of both sides, it's hard to get real numbers for what's going on. Not to mention that what even counts as "necessary"? Obviously zero civilian deaths is the only legitimate goal, but just as obviously this is impossible to achieve in practice. (I'd also add that zero deaths of militants is the goal, if possible - anyone that can be stopped by arresting them or causing them to surrender should be dealt with that way - though obviously this is even harder to achieve.)

Given all that, I think a few points I'll say, again speaking as an Israeli citizen with my own particular biases:

1. While I highly mistrust our current government (like many Israelis), I certainly don't think most of our government would condone killing civilians completely unnecessarily. At least not the ones in charge, mostly.

2. More importantly, I trust the IDF a lot (and this is probably a big difference between me and most non-Israelis). While I'm sure that not literally every civilian death is legitimate, I do trust that the IDF is only attacking valid targets given reasonable intelligence, and that it's not knowingly targeting civilians for the most part.

3. Most importantly - taking the outside view - the IDF estimates that it's killing roughly 2 civilians for 1 militant killed. If you believe that number - it's roughly in line with similar wars fought by Western countries.

Note: While I talk about civilian deaths here as a "statistic", every death is a horrible tragedy. In a good world, no one would ever have to die of violence, and good people should mourn the deaths of any person on any side of this horrible situation.

Re: The pro-Israel information war

#890

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't support how civilians are being treated in Palestine whatsoever, but: >while condemning the massacre of civilians under the orders of Likud (and other far right parties) When has Likud ordered massacres of civilians? Or when has any modern Israeli party? I also don't believe Likud is considered far-right in Israel; just "right". There are parties far to the right of them. Not that that's necessarily a good th…

> When has Likud ordered massacres of civilians? Considering that they killed 15K+ civilians in various ways in just a couple of weeks , and bombed two thirds of the buildings in north gaza including hospitals, refugee camps, they were certainly not trying very hard not to kill them. So practically, this doesn't make a big difference. It seems the order were "bomb anything that may have a hamas member nearby, and don…

I don't think you can possibly know that they killed 15k civilians. Those numbers are reported by Hamas and don't contain a breakdown of civilian vs. militant.

That doesn't change the tragedy of innocents being killed - that's still a horrible tragedy. But Israel is not going around just killing civilians for no reason, as that number makes it seem.

Post reply on HN