5 ms·

Could you please more fully explain what you mean and how it relates to the parent comment? The parent and TFA offer examples of the conflicts of US vs. Vietnam

Could you please more fully explain what you mean and how it relates to the parent comment? The parent and TFA offer examples of the conflicts of US vs. Vietnam and Russia vs. Ukraine, which don't clearly involve Islamic beliefs, but otherwise appear to be similar enough to demonstrate the same principles/issues.

lazide 1y ago
[flagged]
- falcor84 1y ago
  Sorry if I was unclear, I was hoping for clarity about your argument and its relevance to urban warfare situations across different conflicts, not more detail about your take on Islam in general.
  - lazide 1y ago
    When two ideologically incompatible parties (as in what is good/bad, high ground or not) are fighting, it gets complicated and ruthless/very destructive. In large part because it’s about incompatible identities and trying to purge ‘the other’, rather than ‘mere’ control of a specific piece of land. It takes a potentially resolvable conflict (an area where there may be a stable compromise), and can turn it into an existential fight. This becomes especially destructive in very dense environments like urban centers, because the level of hiding that can happen becomes almost fractal. The fight in Gaza is one recent example, as are the others. I’m not surprised that Gaza has escalated to the point it has (total war, essentially), because Hamas can’t actually give up without losing their entire identity and reason for being, for example. And the factions in Israel can’t back down without winning or ‘it would have all been for nothing’. Or are you referring to tactics, because there are actual religions reasons/justifications for the nature of some specific tactics being used in Gaza.
- StopDisinfo910 1y ago
  > Islamic teachings actively call for believers to punish those that 1) challenge teachings of Mohammed, 2) stop believing in the teachings of Mohammed, 3) stray from the teachings of Mohammed. Often with literal proscribed death sentences. Utter non sense. You misunderstand both what Islam is about, the place it gives to the prophet and how sharia works. Sharia explicitly protects non believers. Did you fail to notice that Jews lived for ages in the various Islamic empires? As a non Muslim who has lived in majority Muslim countries multiple times, I’m shocked you can actually live in one and come out with such large misconceptions.
  - fluoridation 1y ago
    I don't know if Sharia law protects non-Muslims, but it most definitely prescribes the death penalty to apostates of Islam, which is what GP is saying.
- anigbrowl 1y ago
  Those are valid opinions (though I disagree with several of them), but what yo seem to be missing is that you barged into a general discussion in modern warfare to express your antipathy to Islam. Islam isn't a big factor in the Ukraine Russia conflict, it's not a big factor in US domestic politics (which are tilting toward military conflict), it's not a big factor in Asian geopolitics. IF you want to make a point about Islam that's one thing, but ignoring the larger context and harping on your pet issue is distracting and rude. You could at the very least acknowledge the existence of the bigger picture and situate your concerns as a specific part of it.
  - lazide 1y ago
    I don’t mind Islam at all actually. I’m pointing out that a discussion about ‘high ground’ that ignores that it’s a subjective discussion where there are numerous other factions with wildly conflicting views of it is not a useful discussion. And that the Islamic vs Western world split is a classic example where people seem to insist on projecting their western (often Christian derived if not strictly so) views onto a rather diametrically opposed set of values and then acting surprised when ‘the other side’ goes ‘WTF, no’ or even acts in ways that they consider abhorrent - but are not surprising if you actually know what is going on. That people even consider this a religious flamewar (apparently) is quite hilarious because if you actually read the Koran and Hadiths, or have spent much time around many Muslim societies these aren’t even (generally) contentious things I’m talking about! For example - you just don’t draw a picture of Mohammed. Especially not if it’s making fun of him, but even if it’s flattering, just don’t. If you’re in a culture that has major Muslim influences, this is very very obvious. It’s not a flamewar topic, but it doesn’t come up much - for the same reason most people don’t talk about slapping strangers in the face either. It’s still a thing. As are the calls to prayer. And not gooning on random Muslim women. And a hundred other things.
    - lupusreal 1y ago
      The janny smacked you but I thought you raised a valid point. The "moral high ground" is and has always been subjective. Do the ends justify the means? Depends on the ideology. Is a soldier surrendering a dishonorable act, or should he be treated with professional dignity? During WW2 the Japanese thought that surrender was dishonorable and treated POWs very poorly. They also deliberately shot at combat medics, they didn't have any sort of taboo against that. Nor did Europeans, until most of the way through the 19th century, think much about leaving wounded soldiers to lay dying in the field, or even casually murdering the wounded as they lay helpless after the battle was already decided (these sort of behaviors lead to the creation of the Red Cross.) In all of these cases it wasn't because those people were fundamentally evil. They were acting according to the norms and expectations of their culture. When two sides with radically different norms encounter each other in conflict, both can feel as though the other is depraved. But that's not necessarily an accurate reflection of the mental state of the other guys. American soldiers in the Pacific thought that the Japanese were savage animals, but with cooler hindsight we know that the Japanese had and still have a strong sense of honor. The catch is that it is, or at least then was, a very different sort of honor that held people to different expectations than Americans were accustomed to.

lazide 1y ago

[flagged]

falcor84 1y ago
Sorry if I was unclear, I was hoping for clarity about your argument and its relevance to urban warfare situations across different conflicts, not more detail about your take on Islam in general.
- lazide 1y ago
  When two ideologically incompatible parties (as in what is good/bad, high ground or not) are fighting, it gets complicated and ruthless/very destructive. In large part because it’s about incompatible identities and trying to purge ‘the other’, rather than ‘mere’ control of a specific piece of land. It takes a potentially resolvable conflict (an area where there may be a stable compromise), and can turn it into an existential fight. This becomes especially destructive in very dense environments like urban centers, because the level of hiding that can happen becomes almost fractal. The fight in Gaza is one recent example, as are the others. I’m not surprised that Gaza has escalated to the point it has (total war, essentially), because Hamas can’t actually give up without losing their entire identity and reason for being, for example. And the factions in Israel can’t back down without winning or ‘it would have all been for nothing’. Or are you referring to tactics, because there are actual religions reasons/justifications for the nature of some specific tactics being used in Gaza.
StopDisinfo910 1y ago
> Islamic teachings actively call for believers to punish those that 1) challenge teachings of Mohammed, 2) stop believing in the teachings of Mohammed, 3) stray from the teachings of Mohammed. Often with literal proscribed death sentences. Utter non sense. You misunderstand both what Islam is about, the place it gives to the prophet and how sharia works. Sharia explicitly protects non believers. Did you fail to notice that Jews lived for ages in the various Islamic empires? As a non Muslim who has lived in majority Muslim countries multiple times, I’m shocked you can actually live in one and come out with such large misconceptions.
- fluoridation 1y ago
  I don't know if Sharia law protects non-Muslims, but it most definitely prescribes the death penalty to apostates of Islam, which is what GP is saying.
anigbrowl 1y ago
Those are valid opinions (though I disagree with several of them), but what yo seem to be missing is that you barged into a general discussion in modern warfare to express your antipathy to Islam. Islam isn't a big factor in the Ukraine Russia conflict, it's not a big factor in US domestic politics (which are tilting toward military conflict), it's not a big factor in Asian geopolitics. IF you want to make a point about Islam that's one thing, but ignoring the larger context and harping on your pet issue is distracting and rude. You could at the very least acknowledge the existence of the bigger picture and situate your concerns as a specific part of it.
- lazide 1y ago
  I don’t mind Islam at all actually. I’m pointing out that a discussion about ‘high ground’ that ignores that it’s a subjective discussion where there are numerous other factions with wildly conflicting views of it is not a useful discussion. And that the Islamic vs Western world split is a classic example where people seem to insist on projecting their western (often Christian derived if not strictly so) views onto a rather diametrically opposed set of values and then acting surprised when ‘the other side’ goes ‘WTF, no’ or even acts in ways that they consider abhorrent - but are not surprising if you actually know what is going on. That people even consider this a religious flamewar (apparently) is quite hilarious because if you actually read the Koran and Hadiths, or have spent much time around many Muslim societies these aren’t even (generally) contentious things I’m talking about! For example - you just don’t draw a picture of Mohammed. Especially not if it’s making fun of him, but even if it’s flattering, just don’t. If you’re in a culture that has major Muslim influences, this is very very obvious. It’s not a flamewar topic, but it doesn’t come up much - for the same reason most people don’t talk about slapping strangers in the face either. It’s still a thing. As are the calls to prayer. And not gooning on random Muslim women. And a hundred other things.
  - lupusreal 1y ago
    The janny smacked you but I thought you raised a valid point. The "moral high ground" is and has always been subjective. Do the ends justify the means? Depends on the ideology. Is a soldier surrendering a dishonorable act, or should he be treated with professional dignity? During WW2 the Japanese thought that surrender was dishonorable and treated POWs very poorly. They also deliberately shot at combat medics, they didn't have any sort of taboo against that. Nor did Europeans, until most of the way through the 19th century, think much about leaving wounded soldiers to lay dying in the field, or even casually murdering the wounded as they lay helpless after the battle was already decided (these sort of behaviors lead to the creation of the Red Cross.) In all of these cases it wasn't because those people were fundamentally evil. They were acting according to the norms and expectations of their culture. When two sides with radically different norms encounter each other in conflict, both can feel as though the other is depraved. But that's not necessarily an accurate reflection of the mental state of the other guys. American soldiers in the Pacific thought that the Japanese were savage animals, but with cooler hindsight we know that the Japanese had and still have a strong sense of honor. The catch is that it is, or at least then was, a very different sort of honor that held people to different expectations than Americans were accustomed to.