LaxPower Back-Up Stick

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:34 pm Interesting. Didn't think about this.

I find that take hard to buy. This attack was way too large, way too coordinated, way too many access points, way too many targets, to only be hoping for two hostages.

I don’t buy it. I think they were looking to do exactly what they did, understanding this was the optimal outcome. They may well have expected much more resistance and less resulting killing and fewer hostages, but they wanted to accomplish unprecedented damage. And thy understood that the reaction would kill many, many Palestinians. The cycle is to their benefit, they think, making them the group most admired by other extremists.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:00 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:52 pm ...Lot of that to be found in various religions!

What's the difference between anti modern and conservative?

Conservative means a lot of different things in different contexts.

Surely you aren’t suggesting that “Conservative “ Jews are identical to “Orthodox “, right?

Anti- modernist is an extreme form of Orthodoxy, demanding that all modern context must be avoided and/rejected and that religious ideology is frozen in a context historically that is preferred. Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:45 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:36 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:26 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:24 am Sure they do, but seems as though Egypt may have received different more specific intel than Israel/US? "Mind boggling" to me how this could have happened?

My guess is that when Hamas was sorting out strategies to do what they did, they had some obviously clandestine conversations with Egypt.

Perhaps. I'm sure you read it but here's Friedman's take again:

"I promise you that if and when there’s an inquiry into how the Israeli Army could have so missed this Hamas buildup, investigators will discover that the Israeli Army leadership had to spend so much time just keeping its air force pilots and reserve officers from boycotting their service to protest Netanyahu’s judicial coup — not to mention the time, attention and resources they had to devote to preventing extremist settlers and religious zealots from doing crazy things in Jerusalem and the West Bank — that they took their eyes off the ball."

That's a reasonable supposition, as is the supposition that what resources and attention they did have were focused on West Bank violence with the settlements.

Egypt may well have human sources closer to Hamas than Israel's and the US' largely technology based monitoring. It is a little "mind boggling" that the listing apparatus didn't pick up chatter...or was it there and they were just understaffed, no one taking sufficiently seriously, "eye off the ball"? Or was Hamas just really smart in how they communicated the plans, trained, etc such that the technical listening wouldn't pick anything up? Were they sophisticated in a disinformation campaign to suggest a false calm? Or a combination?

But Egypt would have been focused on Gaza.

Doesn't mean they were complicit, but then again Egypt is run by a terrible, corrupt regime and there are factions within it who see profit in Hamas...so, can't simply rule it out that they were 'consulted'...

That is not a reasonable supposition by Friedman. It is pure biased conjecture. He's purporting to speak for Israel's officer corps.
...& you're not qualified to disparage Israel's intel services.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:00 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:52 pm ...Lot of that to be found in various religions!

What's the difference between anti modern and conservative?

Conservative means a lot of different things in different contexts.

Surely you aren’t suggesting that “Conservative “ Jews are identical to “Orthodox “, right?

Anti- modernist is an extreme form of Orthodoxy, demanding that all modern context must be avoided and/rejected and that religious ideology is frozen in a context historically that is preferred. Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time.

Isn’t this better known as “reactionary?”

Or is that use confined to the secular?

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm Surely you aren’t suggesting that “Conservative “ Jews are identical to “Orthodox “, right?

Anti- modernist is an extreme form of Orthodoxy, demanding that all modern context must be avoided and/rejected and that religious ideology is frozen in a context historically that is preferred. Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time.

No I am not. Though I do think there's a high correlation between the two.

Anti-modern... I still don't get it. I get that the amish are anti-modern. for obvious reasons. But... what's another example?

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:11 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm ... Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time...

Isn’t this better known as “reactionary?” Or is that use confined to the secular?

I've heard this word 5,000 times and always thought it meant something else. ...Opposing liberalization or reform. MD, is that warmer?

re·ac·tion·ar·y
/rēˈakSHəˌnerē/
adjective
(of a person or a set of views) opposing political or social liberalization or reform.
"reactionary attitudes toward women's rights"

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:10 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:45 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:36 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:26 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:24 am Sure they do, but seems as though Egypt may have received different more specific intel than Israel/US? "Mind boggling" to me how this could have happened?

My guess is that when Hamas was sorting out strategies to do what they did, they had some obviously clandestine conversations with Egypt.

Perhaps. I'm sure you read it but here's Friedman's take again:

"I promise you that if and when there’s an inquiry into how the Israeli Army could have so missed this Hamas buildup, investigators will discover that the Israeli Army leadership had to spend so much time just keeping its air force pilots and reserve officers from boycotting their service to protest Netanyahu’s judicial coup — not to mention the time, attention and resources they had to devote to preventing extremist settlers and religious zealots from doing crazy things in Jerusalem and the West Bank — that they took their eyes off the ball."

That's a reasonable supposition, as is the supposition that what resources and attention they did have were focused on West Bank violence with the settlements.

Egypt may well have human sources closer to Hamas than Israel's and the US' largely technology based monitoring. It is a little "mind boggling" that the listing apparatus didn't pick up chatter...or was it there and they were just understaffed, no one taking sufficiently seriously, "eye off the ball"? Or was Hamas just really smart in how they communicated the plans, trained, etc such that the technical listening wouldn't pick anything up? Were they sophisticated in a disinformation campaign to suggest a false calm? Or a combination?

But Egypt would have been focused on Gaza.

Doesn't mean they were complicit, but then again Egypt is run by a terrible, corrupt regime and there are factions within it who see profit in Hamas...so, can't simply rule it out that they were 'consulted'...

That is not a reasonable supposition by Friedman. It is pure biased conjecture. He's purporting to speak for Israel's officer corps.
...& you're not qualified to disparage Israel's intel services.

Then again if he is "darn sure" who are we to question his judgement? Darn Sure is the new gold standard for passing judgement on anyone.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:00 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:52 pm ...Lot of that to be found in various religions!

What's the difference between anti modern and conservative?

Conservative means a lot of different things in different contexts.

Surely you aren’t suggesting that “Conservative “ Jews are identical to “Orthodox “, right?

Anti- modernist is an extreme form of Orthodoxy, demanding that all modern context must be avoided and/rejected and that religious ideology is frozen in a context historically that is preferred. Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time.

To me conservative is effectively a philosophical physics concept like velocity or rate of change whereas anti-modernist is diametrically opposed to change that is perceived as forward (which is a little silly given how non linear existence is). There’s certainly a heavy overlap between the two circles. But not synonymous.

Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:56 pm There’s certainly a heavy overlap between the two circles. But not synonymous.

I hear that.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 11:27 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 9:34 am

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 9:09 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 8:55 am

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:45 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:24 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:06 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:54 pm I'll need that article posted here to read it...was it already? The thread is moving fast and I have a 'day job'!

pg 49, this thread, lengthy quote, posted by Kismet. Good detailed analysis.

Reasonable analysis, some open questions certainly, of what appears to be both intelligence and operational failures. It ignores the over arching strategic failure, but didn't purport to be discussing that aspect.

and sure, Hamas apparently gave some head fakes over the past months that led the intelligence is wrongly assume that Hamas wasn't preparing to take any particular actions, certainly not on any such mass, coordinated scale.

But that's a far cry from thinking that Hamas wanted peace or that Netanyahu and the right wing so wanted peace that they were fooled into thinking Hamas wanted that too...If that had actually been true, how stupid are they???

That NYT analysis makes many of the same points as the Dennis Ross interview you posted.
Both make the point that Bibi tried to work with Hamas, & neither makes the same hate filled, over-the-top, politically biased accusations against him that you & Friedman make.

Did I quote or parrot Friedman???

Did I post a Dennis Ross interview???

Perhaps you're mixing me up with someone else.

I read the article you pointed to and it definitely doesn't suggest that Netanyahu "wanted peace"; it only suggests that Israeli intelligence was fooled by Hamas' head fakes that they weren't preparing for immediate aggression, certainly nothing along the lines of this scale.

sure, it was what they "wanted to hear", given their focus on Israel's own aggressive actions in the West Bank...they 'wanted to hear' that Hamas was weak and passive, that subjugation was working in that quarter...clearly it wasn't.

That's why I said the article didn't address the errors in strategy, only focused on the operational and intelligence failures.

The strategy has been completely broken; it was just a matter of time.

An entirely new strategy is being put into play. I bet you won't like it one damn bit.

"like it"??? I don't think many Americans, or Israelis even, will "like it".
It's going to be truly awful bloodshed on a mass scale, I predict.

A whole lot of Israelis are going to be killed as well as huge numbers of Palestinian citizens.

I can't "like it".

But let's not kid ourselves by calling that a pathway to "peace".
It's only going to deepen the generational hate and violence.
Of course, that's what Hamas and related extremists wants...

More than 50% of Gaza residents are under the age of 18...they're going through immense trauma and will lose many family members and friends to Israeli rockets and bullets, many courtesy of the USA.

Until the strategy presents at least a pathway to, and a hope for, true peace, with not only mutual respect and security, but an actual stake in each other's happiness and prosperity, supported by neighbors and the international community, the only pathway for this generation will be more "resistance"...meaning asymmetric war...terror...

Now, if you're saying the new strategy will be complete genocide of all Palestinians....?

I'm guessing the new strategy eliminates Gaza for being a base of Hamas operations. In case you were not paying attention, even with Gaza being obliterated in front of our eyes Hamas is still launching rockets into Israel. The old poker player in me tells me this...Hamas went all in with a pair of dueces trying to bluff. Israel called them with 4 of a kind . Much to your disappointment MD Hamas will lose this struggle. Too bad for you...

cradle, for the last time, let me ask you to stop saying personally offensive BS to me. Cut it out.

I'd like Hamas to be completely destroyed, certainly any member who took part in the planning and execution of this mass terrorism event should be brought to full, and hopefully swift, justice.

But unless there is also an actual solution to the degradation of the millions of Palestinians who are not Hamas soldiers, there will be one after another "Hamas" rising from the rubble.

On your poker analogy, that might be correct, a "miscalculation"; but I think this a long game, not a single card hand... I think Hamas knew what the repercussions would be and didn't care. I think they wanted to shock Israel into mass killing of Palestinians with the objective of creating future soldiers from the million children and their families in the line of fire and from the many millions of other influenceable young people observing Israel's mass killing and destruction. And, short term, they wanted to prevent the Saudi-Israel normalization and its potential longer term implications.

dislaxxic wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 9:46 am

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:15 pmBibi & Israel's other leaders wanted peace so badly, they were tricked into thinking they could trust Hamas. They were fooled by a very sophisticated disinfo op (see the NYT analyis posted earlier).

That first sentence is the most disingenuously mis-guided thing you may have ever said, and there is a large body of work to choose from there.

"Peace" to Bibi means "stay in your cage and keep your mouth shut." He's radically right-wing, you understand that, right? Always has been, always will be.

The news is all about how Israel "left" Gaza, left it to the Palestinians and well, they got what THEY wanted, so why would they pull off the sort of barbaric atrocities we saw last weekend?

Why indeed.

Read this recent Report which makes pretty darn clear that Hamas is overly militant and has suppressed political change in Gaza. They need to go. Hamas needs to be vilified and run out of Gaza on a rail, if not outright eliminated. These heinous atrocities need to be prosecuted vigorously.

But by a ground war with door-to-door fighting? Bombing with huge munitions? How will they tell Hamas members from "regular" citizens of Gaza? Do they care to differentiate?

The Israeli blockade of Gaza has effectively stopped Palestinians from evolving their society in Gaza. No airport, control of their water, electricity, imports and exports...it is a PRISON controlled by the guy you think is so desirous of peace. Peace on his terms no doubt, and just WHAT do you think are his terms?

He himself will NEVER allow a two-state solution. Saying he could be "fooled" by Hamas is just ignorant.

..

Keep in mind that Israel departed Gaza in 2006. $billions in aid from Qatar, the EU, & other donors flowed in.
Much of the time since, Bibi has been in power. He accepted the results of the election & dealt with Hamas on Gaza, rather than Fatah (who governed the West Bank). He let Hamas govern Gaza & occasionally "mowed the lawn" in response to smaller rocket attacks by Hamas from Gaza.
He is now being second guessed for having tolerated & dealt with Hamas for so long, allowing them to govern Gaza

https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-years ... our-faces/
For years, Netanyahu propped up Hamas. Now it’s blown up in our faces
The premier’s policy of treating the terror group as a partner, at the expense of Abbas and Palestinian statehood, has resulted in wounds that will take Israel years to heal from

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/202 ... dfd8f30000
Why Did Netanyahu Want to Strengthen Hamas?

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:17 pm

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:11 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm ... Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time...

Isn’t this better known as “reactionary?” Or is that use confined to the secular?

I've heard this word 5,000 times and always thought it meant something else. ...Opposing liberalization or reform. MD, is that warmer?

re·ac·tion·ar·y
/rēˈakSHəˌnerē/
adjective
(of a person or a set of views) opposing political or social liberalization or reform.
"reactionary attitudes toward women's rights"

sure. That's another reasonable descriptor.

Religious Fundamentalism is what we were describing, and in it's more extreme forms is quite hostile to social reform...and the basis of that hostility is supposedly rooted in sacred texts and teachings. Rigid thinking, ignoring that those same texts are read differently by others who are in the same general faith tradition. And at its most extreme can be quite ugly in response to modern values, particularly pluralism.

Often when you make the bed, you are forced to lie in it. Perhaps Bibi should have re-read the Aesop fable about the scorpion and the frog

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

Ambassador Ross nailed this very point in his recent interview on NBC.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:14 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm Surely you aren’t suggesting that “Conservative “ Jews are identical to “Orthodox “, right?

Anti- modernist is an extreme form of Orthodoxy, demanding that all modern context must be avoided and/rejected and that religious ideology is frozen in a context historically that is preferred. Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time.

No I am not. Though I do think there's a high correlation between the two.

Anti-modern... I still don't get it. I get that the amish are anti-modern. for obvious reasons. But... what's another example?

Taliban...

When the groups become openly political, one of the things they find a way to overcome is the ban on all modernity, as they are willing to use modern tools as weapons in their 'holy' quest to return to a bygone society which they imagine is what their god wishes...but what they want is the end to pluralism, individual rights, etc. "Modern" concepts in their view...

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 9:09 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 8:55 am

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:45 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:24 pm

old salt wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 11:06 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 11, 2023 10:54 pm I'll need that article posted here to read it...was it already? The thread is moving fast and I have a 'day job'!

pg 49, this thread, lengthy quote, posted by Kismet. Good detailed analysis.

Reasonable analysis, some open questions certainly, of what appears to be both intelligence and operational failures. It ignores the over arching strategic failure, but didn't purport to be discussing that aspect.

and sure, Hamas apparently gave some head fakes over the past months that led the intelligence is wrongly assume that Hamas wasn't preparing to take any particular actions, certainly not on any such mass, coordinated scale.

But that's a far cry from thinking that Hamas wanted peace or that Netanyahu and the right wing so wanted peace that they were fooled into thinking Hamas wanted that too...If that had actually been true, how stupid are they???

That NYT analysis makes many of the same points as the Dennis Ross interview you posted.
Both make the point that Bibi tried to work with Hamas, & neither makes the same hate filled, over-the-top, politically biased accusations against him that you & Friedman make.

Did I quote or parrot Friedman???

Did I post a Dennis Ross interview???

Perhaps you're mixing me up with someone else.

I read the article you pointed to and it definitely doesn't suggest that Netanyahu "wanted peace"; it only suggests that Israeli intelligence was fooled by Hamas' head fakes that they weren't preparing for immediate aggression, certainly nothing along the lines of this scale.

sure, it was what they "wanted to hear", given their focus on Israel's own aggressive actions in the West Bank...they 'wanted to hear' that Hamas was weak and passive, that subjugation was working in that quarter...clearly it wasn't.

That's why I said the article didn't address the errors in strategy, only focused on the operational and intelligence failures.

The strategy has been completely broken; it was just a matter of time.

An entirely new strategy is being put into play. I bet you won't like it one damn bit.

... It does look to me that the game plan is different and will likely surprise. That however is not guaranteed. Even if it does surprise, there is no guarantee that the results will be better than in the past. That is the metric that will be used to judge success or failure. A lot more dead Palestinians and a totally dead Hamas will not be viewed by the world as a good result. The Israelis on the other hand will view this as a good result. This would be a terrible result for the US and Biden and ultimately the Israelis as well.

Frankly I am getting f*cking tired of hearing Israeli representatives and apologists lecturing the world on how bad Hamas is, that is already obvious to the world, with no mention of the Palestinians, other than an off hand "we will of course try to limit co-lateral damage, but this is a war zone". Coupled with historical results this really makes it sound like their position is, Palestinian loses will be whatever they are and we really don't care. The clowns the Israelis are running out on TV are not helping the Israeli position. They should just shut the F up.

The world's position is "don't tell us, show us." The world is not going to buy the rhetoric "a thousand Jewish babies were beheaded" and "50,000 dead Palestinians were co-lateral damage" as an excuse for the dead Palestinians! To me, it really sounds like the Israeli reps are trying to prepare the world for this result. I am sure a lot of other people are hearing the same thing.

In good news, the Israeli war cabinet has been formed and the fascist cabinet members Gvir and Smotrich have been "demoted". Whatever demoted means. Hopefully it means they are fired.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 2:10 pm ...but what they want is the end to pluralism, individual rights, etc. "Modern" concepts in their view...

I hear it. For the Taliban and others. Thanks. And I agree. Also not my taste.

old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:10 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:45 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:36 am

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:26 am

tech37 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 10:24 am Sure they do, but seems as though Egypt may have received different more specific intel than Israel/US? "Mind boggling" to me how this could have happened?

My guess is that when Hamas was sorting out strategies to do what they did, they had some obviously clandestine conversations with Egypt.

Perhaps. I'm sure you read it but here's Friedman's take again:

"I promise you that if and when there’s an inquiry into how the Israeli Army could have so missed this Hamas buildup, investigators will discover that the Israeli Army leadership had to spend so much time just keeping its air force pilots and reserve officers from boycotting their service to protest Netanyahu’s judicial coup — not to mention the time, attention and resources they had to devote to preventing extremist settlers and religious zealots from doing crazy things in Jerusalem and the West Bank — that they took their eyes off the ball."

That's a reasonable supposition, as is the supposition that what resources and attention they did have were focused on West Bank violence with the settlements.

Egypt may well have human sources closer to Hamas than Israel's and the US' largely technology based monitoring. It is a little "mind boggling" that the listing apparatus didn't pick up chatter...or was it there and they were just understaffed, no one taking sufficiently seriously, "eye off the ball"? Or was Hamas just really smart in how they communicated the plans, trained, etc such that the technical listening wouldn't pick anything up? Were they sophisticated in a disinformation campaign to suggest a false calm? Or a combination?

But Egypt would have been focused on Gaza.

Doesn't mean they were complicit, but then again Egypt is run by a terrible, corrupt regime and there are factions within it who see profit in Hamas...so, can't simply rule it out that they were 'consulted'...

That is not a reasonable supposition by Friedman. It is pure biased conjecture. He's purporting to speak for Israel's officer corps.
...& you're not qualified to disparage Israel's intel services.

And YOU are definitely not qualified to disparage the US FBI, Salty. Nor the US IC.

Nope, I have opinions which I'm sure will evolve as we learn more over time. I merely said that Friedman's "supposition" is "reasonable...IMO, based on the little we know so far, all of which is subject to ongoing review. Note that I added other possible explanations which I think are plausible as well...but also note I didn't suggest a nefarious, purposeful avoidance of preparing to swiftly respond to such an event. That's something some critics think actually plausible, but I think that's pretty far-fetched and I'm not big on such conspiracies. I could be wrong...

I certainly don't think YOU are qualified to defend or critique Israel's intel services in any absolute certainty sense. We simply don't know how the intel services didn't see this coming, why with all the effort they undoubtedly put into surveillance (or we've been told they put into it) they could have missed it...but, hey, maybe Hamas did a superior job of evading detection. Or the intel services were preoccupied and did 'take their eye off the ball'...but I think it's incredibly implausible that they (and "Bibi") were so overwhelmed by their desire for peace that they thought that was Hamas' objective as well...these are not stupid, naive people the way you seem to want to suggest.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:01 pm

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 12:34 pm Interesting. Didn't think about this.

I find that take hard to buy. This attack was way too large, way too coordinated, way too many access points, way too many targets, to only be hoping for two hostages.

I don’t buy it. I think they were looking to do exactly what they did, understanding this was the optimal outcome. They may well have expected much more resistance and less resulting killing and fewer hostages, but they wanted to accomplish unprecedented damage. And thy understood that the reaction would kill many, many Palestinians. The cycle is to their benefit, they think, making them the group most admired by other extremists.

... it is inventive, outside the box.

jhu72 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 2:26 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:01 pm ... The cycle is to their benefit, they think, making them the group most admired by other extremists.

... it is inventive, outside the box.

I find it believable. Same was true for 9/11.

Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:17 pm

PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:11 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 12, 2023 1:07 pm ... Sure, we might colloquially call that ideology “conservative” relative to views and values that have evolved through time...

Isn’t this better known as “reactionary?” Or is that use confined to the secular?

I've heard this word 5,000 times and always thought it meant something else. ...Opposing liberalization or reform. MD, is that warmer?

re·ac·tion·ar·y
/rēˈakSHəˌnerē/
adjective
(of a person or a set of views) opposing political or social liberalization or reform.
"reactionary attitudes toward women's rights"

But don’t view the other side as proactive in a positive sense. I guess literally but same reason I find the co-opting of the term progressive by that side to be bulls**t. So it could work in a completely value neutral sense but once a value is conferred with it then that would be problematic.