7 ms·

> If the reasons about killing each other were openly discussed in a logical way without the emotional overload, People wouldn’t bother to kill each other. That

by edanm 3y ago

> If the reasons about killing each other were openly discussed in a logical way without the emotional overload, People wouldn’t bother to kill each other. That’s something undesirable in the context of war. That's incredibly wrong. People are killing each other over disagreements, either about land, or about values, or about feeling of safety, etc. Everyone basically understands everyone else's position on most things - they just honestly want different things and are sometimes willing to use violence to get it.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
mrtksn 3y ago
That's true when you are directly going to gain something. People dying and killing on the front lines - the practitioners of taking lives - are not the same people who were going to gain something. That's why they need the "greater cause" to do it, even when they are directly paid mercenaries they still are called hero of this liberator of that and not just murderers or contract killers.
- edanm 3y ago
  If you're referring to the current Israel-Gaza conflict - this is basically not true. Israeli soldiers are fighting because they think that, if they don't, their friends and families will be killed. They might be right or wrong - but that's why they are fighting.
  - mrtksn 3y ago
    That one is a particularly complex conflict that didn't start on 7th of October and I'm sure they have more complex thoughts that include the illegal settlements and their religious rights to take that land and their political positions on these issues. They are conscripts, so I would imagine there's a range of positions when they are killing thousand of women and children alongside with combatants. I don't believe the premise that Israeli soldiers were concerned for the lives of their loved ones and killed that many civilians and ar OK with it. Unarmed women and children are not that dangerous, they must have range of thoughts when killing those. Some regret, some glee, some disgust, some joy I would imagine. I wouldn't put the relief of saving their own in the top 10 though. As for the Palestinian side of things, I'm sure its not simple too. Some would do it for revenge, some would do it for some ideological BS, some would do it for religious reasons. The terror attack they initiated on the 7th of October has quite a bit of footage and its very clear that they did not intend to survive the action. They were obviously doing it for "greater good", so to speak, without an expectation to personally gain anything by killing civilian Israelis. Very few will see direct gain from this conflict.
    - edanm 3y ago
      > They are conscripts, so I would imagine there's a range of positions when they are killing thousand of women and children alongside with combatants. Firstly, the majority of the IDF isn't active-duty conscripts, they're reservists. They're still conscripts, and they still have to serve, but it's not exactly difficult to not serve if you choose not to. Not sure this impacts anything else you say, but I thought it's worth mentioning. > I don't believe the premise that Israeli soldiers were concerned for the lives of their loved ones and killed that many civilians and ar OK with it. Almost all IDF soldiers are incredibly regretful that any civilians have to be killed. This is true of most armies most of the time, btw, not specifically Israeli soldiers. But they are absolutely fighting for the fate of their homeland. They might be wrong - but most Israelis believe that Hamas cannot be allowed to continue, because they have promised, multiple times, that they will repeat the October 7th attack again and again. They are literally an hour's drive from many people's homes. Two hours and they can reach the majority of Israel. Almost every Israeli knows someone, either directly or via one other person, that was killed or taken hostage. Without trying to hard, I can think of about 5 people I know who lost a loved one. In that way, this isn't similar to something like Iraq or Afghanistan, where for the most part, American soldiers were fighting a real, but vague, threat, which posed almost no immediate danger to anyone they knew. > Unarmed women and children are not that dangerous, they must have range of thoughts when killing those. Some regret, some glee, some disgust, some joy I would imagine. I wouldn't put the relief of saving their own in the top 10 though. Unarmed women and children are not targeted intentionally. There's great regret that anyone is killed, and probably majority happiness that the person targeted is killed, usually someone who is directly responsible for deaths. There's also a lot of mistakes, because it's war, and because Hamas tries hard to cause these mistakes to happen. It's sad, unfortunate, and I doubt anyone feels "glee" or "joy" that civilians ever are killed. I'm sure there's a few psycopaths like in any large group of people, but the IDF tries to weed these people out.
      - mrtksn 3y ago
        Half of the people they kill are women and children. That’s lots of regret they will have to go through the upcoming years. They won't be known as the "good guys", even if the Prime minister tries to frame this as a fight between good and evil most of the world isn't buying it.

by edanm 3y ago

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

mrtksn 3y ago

That's true when you are directly going to gain something. People dying and killing on the front lines - the practitioners of taking lives - are not the same people who were going to gain something. That's why they need the "greater cause" to do it, even when they are directly paid mercenaries they still are called hero of this liberator of that and not just murderers or contract killers.

edanm 3y ago
If you're referring to the current Israel-Gaza conflict - this is basically not true. Israeli soldiers are fighting because they think that, if they don't, their friends and families will be killed. They might be right or wrong - but that's why they are fighting.
- mrtksn 3y ago
  That one is a particularly complex conflict that didn't start on 7th of October and I'm sure they have more complex thoughts that include the illegal settlements and their religious rights to take that land and their political positions on these issues. They are conscripts, so I would imagine there's a range of positions when they are killing thousand of women and children alongside with combatants. I don't believe the premise that Israeli soldiers were concerned for the lives of their loved ones and killed that many civilians and ar OK with it. Unarmed women and children are not that dangerous, they must have range of thoughts when killing those. Some regret, some glee, some disgust, some joy I would imagine. I wouldn't put the relief of saving their own in the top 10 though. As for the Palestinian side of things, I'm sure its not simple too. Some would do it for revenge, some would do it for some ideological BS, some would do it for religious reasons. The terror attack they initiated on the 7th of October has quite a bit of footage and its very clear that they did not intend to survive the action. They were obviously doing it for "greater good", so to speak, without an expectation to personally gain anything by killing civilian Israelis. Very few will see direct gain from this conflict.
  - edanm 3y ago
    > They are conscripts, so I would imagine there's a range of positions when they are killing thousand of women and children alongside with combatants. Firstly, the majority of the IDF isn't active-duty conscripts, they're reservists. They're still conscripts, and they still have to serve, but it's not exactly difficult to not serve if you choose not to. Not sure this impacts anything else you say, but I thought it's worth mentioning. > I don't believe the premise that Israeli soldiers were concerned for the lives of their loved ones and killed that many civilians and ar OK with it. Almost all IDF soldiers are incredibly regretful that any civilians have to be killed. This is true of most armies most of the time, btw, not specifically Israeli soldiers. But they are absolutely fighting for the fate of their homeland. They might be wrong - but most Israelis believe that Hamas cannot be allowed to continue, because they have promised, multiple times, that they will repeat the October 7th attack again and again. They are literally an hour's drive from many people's homes. Two hours and they can reach the majority of Israel. Almost every Israeli knows someone, either directly or via one other person, that was killed or taken hostage. Without trying to hard, I can think of about 5 people I know who lost a loved one. In that way, this isn't similar to something like Iraq or Afghanistan, where for the most part, American soldiers were fighting a real, but vague, threat, which posed almost no immediate danger to anyone they knew. > Unarmed women and children are not that dangerous, they must have range of thoughts when killing those. Some regret, some glee, some disgust, some joy I would imagine. I wouldn't put the relief of saving their own in the top 10 though. Unarmed women and children are not targeted intentionally. There's great regret that anyone is killed, and probably majority happiness that the person targeted is killed, usually someone who is directly responsible for deaths. There's also a lot of mistakes, because it's war, and because Hamas tries hard to cause these mistakes to happen. It's sad, unfortunate, and I doubt anyone feels "glee" or "joy" that civilians ever are killed. I'm sure there's a few psycopaths like in any large group of people, but the IDF tries to weed these people out.
    - mrtksn 3y ago
      Half of the people they kill are women and children. That’s lots of regret they will have to go through the upcoming years. They won't be known as the "good guys", even if the Prime minister tries to frame this as a fight between good and evil most of the world isn't buying it.