Terror act or not?

[DinoDoc]

cia: Imran endorses warfare on civilians. He's a proud Roman!

[Imran Siddiqui]

So do you (you support Israel)

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,3-268533,00.html

[DinoDoc]

Warfare on civilians is detrimental to one's interests. Both the Israelis and Palestinians should have learned that lesson by now.

Hail Ceaser, Imran!

[cia]

See, I view it like this. I think both sides kill civilians deliberately. However, obviously one side (the one all of the pro-Palestinians say has the guns) is holding itself in check, otherwise the situation would be over already.
There are three sides in any armed conflict: who is right, who is wrong, and who is left. The last group settles the first two. Just pick up any history book. They're all written by the winners.

[Imran Siddiqui]

The Israeli are 'holding themselves in check' only because of public opinion and fear of losing US support (and thus our military supplies). And when Rabin was in, the Pals held themselves pretty much in check as well.

Oh, and Dino aren't you in support of the Death Penalty? There goes your 'moral stance' on not killing civilians.

[DinoDoc]

You're starting to get desperate to make my equivilant to your raison d'etat view of how warfare should be conducted.

Would you like to tell me how a criminal penalty is eqivilant to the massacring of civilians? I would also like to find out how you can condemn Sharon for his involvement in the deaths of civilians and laude Arafat for doing the samething.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Would you like to tell me how a criminal penalty is eqivilant to the massacring of civilians?

Many people on this site (especially Europeans) would call the Death Penalty a massacre of civilians.

I would also like to find out how you can condemn Sharon for his involvement in the deaths of civilians and laude Arafat for doing the samething.

One is the oppressed, the other is the oppresser. Different morals for different power statuses.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Many people on this site (especially Europeans) would call the Death Penalty a massacre of civilians.

Let's use the reasonable person standard, then.

One is the oppressed, the other is the oppresser. Different morals for different power statuses.

Does a civilian's life have more or less value depending on which side in the war happens to kill him for sport?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Let's use the reasonable person standard, then.

Reasonable person where?

Does a civilian's life have more or less value depending on which side in the war happens to kill him for sport?

It has nothing to do with lives, but to do with causes.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Reasonable person where?

In New Jersey. Surely, we can find a reasonable person in New Jersey.

It has nothing to do with lives, but to do with causes.

It is the behavior of the "oppressed party" (since that is who you are concerned about) that removes the moral value of thier cause.

[Imran Siddiqui]

In New Jersey. Surely, we can find a reasonable person in New Jersey.

Which is much different than a reasonable person in, say, France.

It is the behavior of the "oppressed party" (since that is who you are concerned about) that removes the moral value of thier cause.

Your opinion.

The behavior of the 'oppressor' removes the moral value of their cause.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Which is much different than a reasonable person in, say, France.

You'll notice that I failed to ask about his opinion. That was because I'm not interested in his opinion. I specifically asked about your views on the question I presented.

Your opinion.

Every party believes his own cause to be just and can almost never be shaken from that conviction. The true indicator of which side carries the right to call itself just is the behavior of the respective belligerents during the conflict.

You may call it an opinion but it seems to hold up to the logical test.

[Imran Siddiqui]

You'll notice that I failed to ask about his opinion. That was because I'm not interested in his opinion. I specifically asked about your views on the question I presented.

Death Penalty is, morally, the same as what the Palestinians are doing.

The true indicator of which side carries the right to call itself just is the behavior of the respective belligerents during the conflict.

So with evidence of Israel slaughtering Palestinians in Jenin means that they aren't just either... less so than the Pals, I'd say.

[DinoDoc]

Death Penalty is, morally, the same as what the Palestinians are doing.

How so?

So with evidence of Israel slaughtering Palestinians in Jenin means that they aren't just either... less so than the Pals, I'd say.

That's why I like you Imran. You do that impression of a brickwall so well in these debates.

[Natan]

I don't think there is evidence that Sharon knew the phalangists would perpetrate a massacre - the entire Lebanon war was precipitated on an inflated view of the phalangists discipline and political/military capabilities.