I was just reading about how a current Israeli war minister’s son died in combat and it made me wonder that if Israeli’s politicians who make these decisions know their family will be affected by it personally and directly, does that lend towards the suggestion that it is more likely they are making genuinely ethically and morally correct decisions to engage in war stuff given their personal skin i the game?
It would seem totally different from American politicians like Cheney who create bullshit geopolitical conflicts knowing full well their progeny will never be touched by it…
Edit: I’m assuming they actually care/give a shit about their offspring and family, even if only just for appearences
The assumption that direct familial involvement would make people more peaceful or make them take more ethical decisions is flat out incorrect. If anything it will make them more ruthless and dehumanizing against the “other” and seek even faster ways of total annihilation rather than difficult nuanced and diplomatic peaceful solutions. The military mindset is a very rigid one, with only rights and wrongs, blind obedience, the only nuance allowed is tactical nuance, the only complexity allowed is logistic complexity. Morally and ethically it’s always down to I’d rather the other die than me. The IDF once traded 1000 prisoners for 1 IDF soldier, what makes you think they will not kill 10000 children if it means it saves 1 soldier?
Because… the moral considerations in both cases are completely different…? How is this even a question?
That’s like saying “He once bought a car for $50,000, what makes you think he won’t steal $500,000 if it meant getting a Tesla?”