-
So did Isreal do the right thing?
As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?
So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?
So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?
wow is that a powderkeg of a question! :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?
So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?
It happened in there backyard. Heck yes they should have and i hope they keep it up. Maybe they can take care of some of the crap so that we wont have to.
-
Here's the ointment...
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
It happened in there backyard. Heck yes they should have and i hope they keep it up. Maybe they can take care of some of the crap so that we wont have to.
...and here comes the fly...bzzzzz!!...
That cr@p is because of them...
jimHJJ(...talk about Catch-22...)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
Maybe they can take care of some of the crap so that we wont have to.
No, I must agree with R Loser. "We/US" are already cleaning up their crap in Iraq, except for the oil factor. There were two triggers: Saddam decided to trade oil in euros, threating Shrub and his oil buddies, and Saddam decided to form a "Jerusalem Army" to take back the Holy City, threatening the Jews. He had to go down - see what happens to a "decider"?! Anyway, the Zionists have bit off more than they can chew this time, and will be agitating, and their "Christian" running-dogs will be agitating for US intervention. WW III, here we come - the run-down to Armageddon. I fear that most US personnel in Iraq will not be coming home...and worse, that large areas all over the world will become self-illuminated glass parking lots. Make your final music and gear purchases, and enjoy while you can...
Laz
-
The sad sick part is you really believe this crap
Quote:
Originally Posted by trollgirl
No, I must agree with R Loser. "We/US" are already cleaning up their crap in Iraq, except for the oil factor. There were two triggers: Saddam decided to trade oil in euros, threating Shrub and his oil buddies, and Saddam decided to form a "Jerusalem Army" to take back the Holy City, threatening the Jews. He had to go down - see what happens to a "decider"?! Anyway, the Zionists have bit off more than they can chew this time, and will be agitating, and their "Christian" running-dogs will be agitating for US intervention. WW III, here we come - the run-down to Armageddon. I fear that most US personnel in Iraq will not be coming home...and worse, that large areas all over the world will become self-illuminated glass parking lots. Make your final music and gear purchases, and enjoy while you can...
Laz
Trollgirl, you seem nice enough, but seriously, the only contributions you make at AUDIOREVIEW.com are off-topic political conspiracy, anti-U.S. rhetoric. You're either hard up looking for a spot to rant in cyberspace, or you use this handle to disassociate yourself from your comments. Which is it?
Methinks the UK had a zillion times more to do with these problems than the Jews, the Palestinians, or the US...time for them to step up and be accountable for some of their bad decisions.
And FWIW, I'm pretty sure RL will confirm you don't agree with what he had to say...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
Trollgirl, you seem nice enough, but seriously, the only contributions you make at AUDIOREVIEW.com are off-topic political conspiracy, anti-U.S. rhetoric. You're either hard up looking for a spot to rant in cyberspace, or you use this handle to disassociate yourself from your comments. Which is it?
Methinks the UK had a zillion times more to do with these problems than the Jews, the Palestinians, or the US...time for them to step up and be accountable for some of their bad decisions.
And FWIW, I'm pretty sure RL will confirm you don't agree with what he had to say...
Kex, you should listen to yourself sometimes. I am taken aback at the quickness with which you jump all over me. First, I make contributions other than "rants". You can find me especially over at the Analog forum from time-to-time, and I got back to this thread after a discreet PM to another member on serious financial matters. I hope it helps him. Second, "...political conspiracy, anti-US rhetoric..." may be how you see it, but for me, it is a matter of reading a lot from a variety of sources and viewpoints, and connecting the dots. Unlike most of my countrymen, I don't see why any other country should kowtow to the American view of things. I love my country, but at the same time, I realise that we are going to have to pay for our crimes and mistakes. Others think we can do no wrong or make a mistake. As for the handle, thing, it came about because at some point I could no longer log on as "Lazarus Short" anymore, and had to fall back on my daughter's moniker. Don't read a CONSPIRACY into it, dude! I take full credit for my comments, that's why I sign off as Laz. Further, if you must know, I wrote the post in question feeling very sad, and we will presently see if I am correct.
BTW, you are spot on about the UK. The whole present sad situation in the Middle East can be easily laid at their door.
Laz [a nice guy, after all]
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by trollgirl
Kex, you should listen to yourself sometimes. I am taken aback at the quickness with which you jump all over me. First, I make contributions other than "rants". You can find me especially over at the Analog forum from time-to-time, and I got back to this thread after a discreet PM to another member on serious financial matters. I hope it helps him. Second, "...political conspiracy, anti-US rhetoric..." may be how you see it, but for me, it is a matter of reading a lot from a variety of sources and viewpoints, and connecting the dots. Unlike most of my countrymen, I don't see why any other country should kowtow to the American view of things. I love my country, but at the same time, I realise that we are going to have to pay for our crimes and mistakes. Others think we can do no wrong or make a mistake. As for the handle, thing, it came about because at some point I could no longer log on as "Lazarus Short" anymore, and had to fall back on my daughter's moniker. Don't read a CONSPIRACY into it, dude! I take full credit for my comments, that's why I sign off as Laz. Further, if you must know, I wrote the post in question feeling very sad, and we will presently see if I am correct.
BTW, you are spot on about the UK. The whole present sad situation in the Middle East can be easily laid at their door.
Laz [a nice guy, after all]
You're right, I did come across to harsh. My apologies...you ahve every right to post here that I do....Still...I'm struggling to see how the Jews were responsible for the war in Iraq...:cornut:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
You're right, I did come across to harsh. My apologies...you ahve every right to post here that I do....Still...I'm struggling to see how the Jews were responsible for the war in Iraq...:cornut:
Apology accepted! As for the war in Iraq, the causes are often complex, and it is always helpful to look deeply at the situation, and see who benefits from events.
Laz
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
You're right, I did come across to harsh. My apologies...you ahve every right to post here that I do....Still...I'm struggling to see how the Jews were responsible for the war in Iraq...:cornut:
Could we refer to "the Jews" as "the Isreali's"? That's like referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims". I'm not comparing the Isreali's to Al Quada, I'm just saying that there are Jews all over the world who have nothing to do with the Middle East conflict. Thanks.
-
I can already see the hard feeling in this thread so for me,i'm bailing.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
Could we refer to "the Jews" as "the Isreali's"? That's like referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims". I'm not comparing the Isreali's to Al Quada, I'm just saying that there are Jews all over the world who have nothing to do with the Middle East conflict. Thanks.
Sure, FA, I appreciate the PC sensitivity - fair point.
Though I would respectfully suggest it's more like calling Netherlanders the Dutch than
referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims".
I've picked that up from spending so much time with two people of Jewish faith I work with, over the last 2 years I've just adopted their lingo for Israelis...Not the first time I've been taken to task on it either ...
Anyway, to them there is no distinction, they use the two words interchangeably, when I asked why, the answer they gave me included a lot of history, Israel's Law of Return, and more I'm sure I can't recall. As it's been simplified to me all Jews are welcomed Israeli's (or can be if they visit Israel) but not vice-versa, so it's common to use the term "Jew" as a nationalistic descriptor rather than only a reference to religious belief. Bad habbit I've adopted, I guess. Oddly enough it seems to bother Christians more than anyone else. No offence intended. Sincere apologies..
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by kexodusc
Sure, FA, I appreciate the PC sensitivity - fair point.
Though I would respectfully suggest it's more like calling Netherlanders the Dutch than
referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims".
I've picked that up from spending so much time with two people of Jewish faith I work with, over the last 2 years I've just adopted their lingo for Israelis...Not the first time I've been taken to task on it either ...
Anyway, to them there is no distinction, they use the two words interchangeably, when I asked why, the answer they gave me included a lot of history, Israel's Law of Return, and more I'm sure I can't recall. As it's been simplified to me all Jews are welcomed Israeli's (or can be if they visit Israel) but not vice-versa, so it's common to use the term "Jew" as a nationalistic descriptor rather than only a reference to religious belief. Bad habbit I've adopted, I guess. Oddly enough it seems to bother Christians more than anyone else. No offence intended. Sincere apologies..
I see where you're coming from now and there is no apology necessary. I think that I know you well enough by now (as much as you can "know" someone from an internet board) to know that you didn't mean to offend. And, actually, I wasn't offended at all. As you say, it's more a PC thing...I like to avoid the broader stereotypes whenever I can. I have a lot of Jewish friends who would not consider themselves within the context of this discussion and who think that Isreali politics are quite radical. On the other hand I've also met Jews who think along the same lines as your co-workers...Jews are Isreali's by birthright (or something along those lines).
But we digress...
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
I can already see the hard feeling in this thread so for me,i'm bailing.
No hard feelings. Just honest discussion.
-
I've given...
...the history lesson more times than I care to...France, UK, most of Europe laid the foundations for the current state of affairs, as did the Zionists and the UN...and we, the US, are not without some blame, tacit participation is still participation, regardless of how well intentioned.
Re: Jews/Israeli's...most of the interviews I've seen with non-Israeli Jews show "full" support for the current actions...my question: If you support the activities WTF are you doing here? Why aren't you over there supporting them? And that pretty much goes for all nationalities who support their homeland/motherland/fatherland with that mi encanto-type of covert nationalism...
jimHJJ(..."...no allegiance to any foreign prince or potentate..."...)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
I see where you're coming from now and there is no apology necessary. I think that I know you well enough by now (as much as you can "know" someone from an internet board) to know that you didn't mean to offend. And, actually, I wasn't offended at all. As you say, it's more a PC thing...I like to avoid the broader stereotypes whenever I can. I have a lot of Jewish friends who would not consider themselves within the context of this discussion and who think that Isreali politics are quite radical. On the other hand I've also met Jews who think along the same lines as your co-workers...Jews are Isreali's by birthright (or something along those lines).
But we digress...
Actually, in response to yours and RL's comments about Israeli support - the few I've spoken with don't support the "measured response" (as a certain Canadian politician called it), but also admit to being so far detached from the last few decades of high-tensions that they aren't the ones to ask.
I have to admit, if I was Israel, having gone through what its people have gone through, I'd probably react every bit as strongly, if not moreso out of fear of history repeating itself. There's a point where a people have been attacked and persecuted so many times that any act of aggression against them triggers an explosive response, maybe they're overly paranoid now. (and I'm not suggesting Israel didn't cast the first stone or start its fair share - who alive seriously knows?). It's unfortunate, because I'm sure the other side feels largely the same way - hence "escalation", as the media refers to it.
I don't think it helps that Hezbollah's political platform calls for "the destruction of Israel" and that Iran's leader stated its policy was to "wipe Israel off the map". If your neighbours said that to you, you'd probably be a bit trigger happy too.
I think Dream Theater wrote a song about all this....
-
I think given their circumstances, they're doing the right thing. They've got a fanatic militant group that wants to wipe them off the map that is backed by a regime that is about to develop nuclear weapons. I think the current response was/is way over done relative to having a few soldiers kidnapped. But in the context of the likelyhood that in the not so distant future those 30 mile missles might be delivering nuclear material (dirty or not) at the hands of suicidal fanatics...I think they're doing the right thing to secure their future safety.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by noddin0ff
I think given their circumstances, they're doing the right thing. They've got a fanatic militant group that wants to wipe them off the map that is backed by a regime that is about to develop nuclear weapons. I think the current response was/is way over done relative to having a few soldiers kidnapped. But in the context of the likelyhood that in the not so distant future those 30 mile missles might be delivering nuclear material (dirty or not) at the hands of suicidal fanatics...I think they're doing the right thing to secure their future safety.
I agree with this, and RL comment on Europe. As much as I love Europe (specifically Great Britain because its my second home country and where my grandmother is from) they have made a huge mess in the middle east trying to push western style governments on tribal religious people. A square peg in a round hole. After they made this mess, they have now become to passive to clean it up.
I think Israel is doing the right thing. For Lebanon to cry out save us smacks of hypocrasy. On one hand you have provided a home for what every other country calls terrorists, and then when the terrorist get out of hand and are punished you attempt to seperate the Lebanese people from the terrorist. If the Lebanese people lend them this kind of support, then they have to take the punishment with the terrorist. I feel the same for the Palistinians. If you elect a terror group as your government, don't expect money from us, Europe, or anyone else. And don't cry out when the terrorist have to be put back in the box and you have to suffer in the process.
Flame suit on!
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?
So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?
I think the leaders should sit down and discuss these problems over coffee.That's all,no need to respond as I'm happy listening to my headphones.
-
I say shoot them all and let God sort it out :cornut: (And i mean all religious fanatics)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Terrence the Terrible
I think Israel is doing the right thing. For Lebanon to cry out save us smacks of hypocrasy. On one hand you have provided a home for what every other country calls terrorists, and then when the terrorist get out of hand and are punished you attempt to seperate the Lebanese people from the terrorist. If the Lebanese people lend them this kind of support, then they have to take the punishment with the terrorist. I feel the same for the Palistinians. If you elect a terror group as your government, don't expect money from us, Europe, or anyone else. And don't cry out when the terrorist have to be put back in the box and you have to suffer in the process.
Flame suit on!
I'm not going to flame you, but from what I have gathered, the Lebanese government is a fledgling, tinpot operation that has no control over Hezbollah. Until very recently Syria was running Lebanon. Syria left, but Hezboollah (supported by Syria and Iran) has remained. They are more militarily powerful in Lebanon than the Lebanese "military".
Of course most of the citizens of Lebanon have nothing to do with Hezbollah. The Lebanese people and government are both essentially helpless. Israel should be able to deal with Hezbollah, but what Israel seems to be doing is punishing all the innocent civilians (destroying their infrastructure and what not) in hopes that it will cause them to "revolt" against Hezbollah or something. They're doing the same thing with Hamas. You can bet that the opposite will happen (actually it already has - Israel's aggression has made both Hamas and Hezbollah the powerful organizations they are today). This is going to rally more people to Hezbollah's cause. It's like attacking Utah because there are some polygamists hiding out there.
I don't like where this is going at all. Next stops, Syria and Iran. At this point, it is safe to say that all of our world leaders are complete failures.
OK, I am going to go back to my policy of staying out of political threads now..
-
Back to the original question - Perhaps one other consideration, the situation was a bit different when American's were captured. The terrorist groups captured US citizens who were basically on their soil. What we're being told is the Israeli soldiers were captured during an attack <i>on</i> Israeli soil.
I don't know about you but somehow, in my twisted logic, the latter seems a more aggressive, war-like act than the former.
Attacking me in your back yard is one thing, attacking me in my front yard is something else. Perhaps in light of that, the response has been "measured"?
Isreal certainly has the capability to do far worse damage to Lebanon than it is doing.
Side note - the name of the mission to kidnap the soliders "Operation Truthful Promise",
The Israeli counterattacks "Operation Just Reward".
Nothing, if not dramatic.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericl
I'm not going to flame you, but from what I have gathered, the Lebanese government is a fledgling, tinpot operation that has no control over Hezbollah. Until very recently Syria was running Lebanon. Syria left, but Hezboollah (supported by Syria and Iran) has remained. They are more militarily powerful in Lebanon than the Lebanese "military".
Lebanon's military isn't huge, but it isn't exactly doing much to try either. And her people did elect the political wing of Hezbollah. There's at least some support there...
Quote:
Israel should be able to deal with Hezbollah, but what Israel seems to be doing is punishing all the innocent civilians (destroying their infrastructure and what not) in hopes that it will cause them to "revolt" against Hezbollah or something
.
Not exactly. In the good ol' days the French and English war tactics were much more civilized..line up in rows, and take turns shooting each other, or settle it "on the battlefield" .... Well now we have Hezbollah terrorists not playing by the rules, hiding in hospitals, stores, schools, public infrastructure and among the general public. If Israel's right to defend herself means collateral damage to another country, the original perpetrators should share the responsibility, if not bear it completely.
Quote:
I don't like where this is going at all. Next stops, Syria and Iran. At this point, it is safe to say that all of our world leaders are complete failures.
Could get ugly...Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that an Israeli strike on Syria would be considered "attacking the whole Islamic world and this regime will receive a very fierce response" So if Iran bombs Israel (which is quite capable of dealing Iran a blow) does NATO or the UN respond? Bad business for Russia to go against Iran, China is a bit of a wildcard on this one...France seems to be sympathetic to its former imperialist buddies in Lebanon.
Getting pretty soupy..
-
Whatever happened to...?
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
I can already see the hard feeling in this thread so for me,i'm bailing.
Wise man here, perhaps...for bailing. But I wonder, whatever happened to speaking the truth, and letting the chips fall where they may? It is this, there is no consensus anymore, and one man's Truth is another man's vicious lie. Worse, good is called evil, and evil good.
Further, I'm thinking about the posts above, and expanding my frame of reference. My best friend is a big fan of Gorby, and he told me that Gorbachev said that the end of the Cold War was a gift, yes read that again: A GIFT, to the West. However, he also said, the West threw away its opportunity for lasting peace thru greed and arrogance. Former enemies in the Middle East had the same chance, as I recall, with the Camp David Accords, and I can not help but wonder if the chance for peace was thrown away for much the same reasons... Pre-emptive war, bombing everything in sight, refusing to admit wrong-doing, savaging our allies for even faint criticism...who does it sound like? We are so much alike, the USA and Israel [but I prefer the "J" word, knowing who Israel is and is not]. We have both been sowing to the wind for a long time, and I fear both will soon be reaping the whirlwind. Don't think for a second that I gloat when I write this, for it is sad.
Laz
-
I moved this to the Steel Cage because of it's content
But in reality everyone one of us should be asking this question to himself or herself.
The sad fact is that real people are dieing. Not just the bad guys either. Innocent people. Women and children. People who have never raised a hand in anger against anyone have been terrorized and slaughtered. Homes destroyed, lives ruined. A whole country is now being bombed into to the same horrible state that Iraq is in.
Is it fair? Is it moral? Is it a sin before god?
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
But in reality everyone one of us should be asking this question to himself or herself.
The sad fact is that real people are dieing. Not just the bad guys either. Innocent people. Women and children. People who have never raised a hand in anger against anyone have been terrorized and slaughtered. Homes destroyed, lives ruined. A whole country is now being bombed into to the same horrible state that Iraq is in.
Is it fair? Is it moral? Is it a sin before god?
All that Lebanon has to do is return the two kidnapped soldiers and assure Israel that their will be no more rockets launched at them from their soil. ...and that no incursions into Israel will take place from there, either.
Simple as that.
If Lebanon was sincere about not wanting trouble with Israel they would have put a stop to the shenanigans in the south sometime within the last five years when Israel returned that land to Lebanon. Israel has been more than patient for five years as they lobbed rockets into Israel . Since they (Lebanon) seem to be either unwilling or unable to do the job, I guess it leaves Israel little choice except to do it themselves.
Remember, they are now using that land to stage incursions onto Israeli territory. That's a whole 'nuther ballgame and ratchets up the stakes quite a bit.
Until then, what is fair and moral? Who do you suppose is more accountable to God?
The terrorists, who accepted "land for peace" from Israel five years ago, only to use it to launch rockets at Israeli cities, send suicide bombers to blow up civilians and launch incursions into Israel, or the Israelis for finally reacting to that which has been their daily existance for fifty years or so? It seems they have run out of cheeks to turn.
It's been said that if the Arab nations gave up their weapons there would be peace. If Israel gives them up there will be a slaughter. Likewise, if Arab mothers loved their children more than they hated the Jews, there would be peace.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
But in reality everyone one of us should be asking this question to himself or herself.
The sad fact is that real people are dieing. Not just the bad guys either. Innocent people. Women and children. People who have never raised a hand in anger against anyone have been terrorized and slaughtered. Homes destroyed, lives ruined. A whole country is now being bombed into to the same horrible state that Iraq is in.
Is it fair? Is it moral? Is it a sin before god?
I thought this thread had been deleted at first. But I finally noticed it hiding up in The Cage. Why is there no "moved" notice like there is when threads are moved from one forum to another?
All very good questions Geoffcin. It is a sad fact of war that innocent people die. I'm thankful every day that these wars are not being waged in my own country...yet. Eight Canadian tourists were killed earlier this week in Lebanon. Hell, they don't even live there! They go on a vacation to a city that they believe is reasonably stable (under the perpetual circumstances), suddenly the winds change and they were bombed to death.
Is it fair? Never.
Is it moral? I would say, Yes, it is moral to defend yourself and protect your citizens. It's unfortunate and unfair that innocent people are caught in the process.
Is it a sin before god? As an athiest, I'll leave this one up to the religious to try to answer.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I say shoot them all and let God sort it out :cornut: (And i mean all religious fanatics)
Hey Florian is that a picture of your music room.It looks nice.I bet you sleep good at night knowing that a missle is not on it's way.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
I thought this thread had been deleted at first. But I finally noticed it hiding up in The Cage. Why is there no "moved" notice like there is when threads are moved from one forum to another?
All very good questions Geoffcin. It is a sad fact of war that innocent people die. I'm thankful every day that these wars are not being waged in my own country...yet. Eight Canadian tourists were killed earlier this week in Lebanon. Hell, they don't even live there! They go on a vacation to a city that they believe is reasonably stable (under the perpetual circumstances), suddenly the winds change and they were bombed to death.
Is it fair? Never.
Is it moral? I would say, Yes, it is moral to defend yourself and protect your citizens. It's unfortunate and unfair that innocent people are caught in the process.
Is it a sin before god? As an athiest, I'll leave this one up to the religious to try to answer.
Sorry to hear of those deaths. I'm not sure how anyone could assume anywhere over there is reasonably safe.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
I thought this thread had been deleted at first. But I finally noticed it hiding up in The Cage. Why is there no "moved" notice like there is when threads are moved from one forum to another?
All very good questions Geoffcin. It is a sad fact of war that innocent people die. I'm thankful every day that these wars are not being waged in my own country...yet. Eight Canadian tourists were killed earlier this week in Lebanon. Hell, they don't even live there! They go on a vacation to a city that they believe is reasonably stable (under the perpetual circumstances), suddenly the winds change and they were bombed to death.
Is it fair? Never.
Is it moral? I would say, Yes, it is moral to defend yourself and protect your citizens. It's unfortunate and unfair that innocent people are caught in the process.
Is it a sin before god? As an athiest, I'll leave this one up to the religious to try to answer.
Of course it's moral to defend yourself, but when is it moral to bomb innocent people? If a suspect hides in a movie theater full of innocent people is it moral to bomb the movie theater?
I pose the religious question not for us, but for them, as fully 99.99% of the combatants are deeply religious. Supposedly they all pray to the same god. Surely he's not condoning the killing of innocents.
It's interesting to see that everyone has assumed I was talking strictly about Israels actions. Please re-read my post, I wasn't.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffcin
Of course it's moral to defend yourself, but when is it moral to bomb innocent people? If a suspect hides in a movie theater full of innocent people is it moral to bomb the movie theater?
You know, that's a question that I struggle with. Its very difficult to see innocent people die. And I'm sure that it's not easy for the military to target a place where they know civilians will be. But, yes, in your example, I think that there are circumstances when bombing the movie theatre is moral. If the person that you are targeting is known to be a threat and there is no other known alternative to rid yourself of that threat, then I would say that bombing the theatre is moral.
If Osama Bin Laden were sitting in a movie theatre in Afganistan, it is moral to bomb the theatre even though some innocent people will be killed. By doing so, you are defending yourself by eliminating a very large threat and protecting your people. To not bomb the theatre leaves you open for Osama's next attack and puts your people at risk.
What is immoral is if you bombed the theatre just for the hell of it. Just because you can. With your sole purpose being only to hurt innocent people.
-
When the bad guys are hiding and living around them,come out to kill and fight go back to the innocent people to hid,then yes they are going to get hurt and killed. Its a bad deal.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
When the bad guys are hiding and living around them,come out to kill and fight go back to the innocent people to hid,then yes they are going to get hurt and killed. Its a bad deal.
Good point. If the innocents are really innocent and want to save themselves, they need to turn in the bad guys who are hiding amonst them.
The problem is, the people in the theatre (to continue with the previous example) may not think that Osama is a bad guy. They may support his actions and may be protecting him. In which case, that makes them a threat also. Suddenly the people in the theatre don't seem as innocent as they may have first appeared. It's all very grey. Who are innocent and who are the enemy?
If you follow this train of thought, it's easy to see how a "If you're not with us, then you must be against us" mentality is born.
-
The terrorist don't follow Geneva, they don't play by the rules. If anyone thinks they can be contained, or defeated, or reasoned with by playing by the rules, they are dreaming.
They hide among the "innocent" because they wish to exploit the moral dilemma their military adversaries have to deal with when pointing a missile at a hospital, anything to get an edge. It works. I guarantee you if their enemies started bombing schools and hospitals in the first wave of retaliation, they wouldn't be there anymore. Of course the next step is to hide in their enemies' hospitals and schools instead of their own.
We view the deaths of innocent people and civilians as collateral damage, tragic and terrible. To them, there are no innocents - you're either loyal to the cause, or loyal to the enemy. People who are killed when a suicide bomber blows up a bus or school are revered as martyrs. It's the greatest honor. Foreign civilians are sympathizers responsible for electing the leaders they're at war with.
These religions have been fighting for centuries, both sides would rather sacrifice their lives than give up the battle to the aggressors. Western civilization doesn't understand this. It's nothing like dying for your country, or even your family - it's far beyond that to these people.
How do you defeat such an enemy with conventional warfare? You don't.
You either give in to their demands and hope they never ask for more (which I'm skeptical of based on my admittedly limited understanding of some countries' values of human rights and lack of tolerance) or you draw the line and play dirty yourself.
You're forced to choose the lesser of two evils pretty much.
I'll be blunt though, if it's "us" vs. "them", I'll pick "us" right or wrong every single time. Guess I'm just simple.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn
Good point. If the innocents are really innocent and want to save themselves, they need to turn in the bad guys who are hiding amonst them.
The problem is, the people in the theatre (to continue with the previous example) may not think that Osama is a bad guy. They may support his actions and may be protecting him. In which case, that makes them a threat also. Suddenly the people in the theatre don't seem as innocent as they may have first appeared. It's all very grey. Who are innocent and who are the enemy?
If you follow this train of thought, it's easy to see how a "If you're not with us, then you must be against us" mentality is born.
Problem is the more innocents that die,the more they will turn on the side of the bad guys around them.
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by shokhead
Problem is the more innocents that die,the more they will turn on the side of the bad guys around them.
Yes, it's a lose-lose situation for the common people on both sides.
"You can't fight for peace. You have to peace for peace." Peace as a verb - I like that.
Here is the Plan:
"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." Albert Pike 1871
Albert Pike was high up in the Masonic organization here in the USA. What we are seeing unfolding has been planned for a long time. If any of you are curious as to what Pike said about World Wars one and two, I can post those quotes too.
Laz
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Florian
I say shoot them all and let God sort it out :cornut: (And i mean all religious fanatics)
I'm with you on this one Flo. I've said before, we should neutron bomb the entire middle east. We should include Afghanistan and Iran in the bombing. Neutron bombs would kill only people and preserve the valuable infrastructure. Oh and while we're at it we should accidently drop a few on North Korea and get rid of that mess also.:incazzato:
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fergymunster
Hey Florian is that a picture of your music room.It looks nice.I bet you sleep good at night knowing that a missle is not on it's way.
I wish that was my music room, but in this world women are competing against me with the same rights as me and this makes it hard for to me suceed.
-Flo
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeE SP9
I'm with you on this one Flo. I've said before, we should neutron bomb the entire middle east. We should include Afghanistan and Iran in the bombing. Neutron bombs would kill only people and preserve the valuable infrastructure. Oh and while we're at it we should accidently drop a few on North Korea and get rid of that mess also.:incazzato:
Yep, i am sick of all this religious crap and this incl. the entire christianity all the same. :)
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by trollgirl
Yes, it's a lose-lose situation for the common people on both sides.
"You can't fight for peace. You have to peace for peace." Peace as a verb - I like that.
Here is the Plan:
"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." Albert Pike 1871
Albert Pike was high up in the Masonic organization here in the USA. What we are seeing unfolding has been planned for a long time. If any of you are curious as to what Pike said about World Wars one and two, I can post those quotes too.
Laz
Sounds sort of like the Tribulation.
|