There's not much to argue.
Ethical principles apply to war. Attacking civilians directly cannot be justified unless there are extreme circumstances (and I can't think of that many).
On the other hand, if a democratic country persists in doing that very thing, or in waging immoral wars or other immoral activity, the people who fail to remove such governments are responsible for it. If not them, then who else? In a democracy, the voters are in the end responsible, that's the whole point of democracy after all.
And that is why Americans who call Al Qaeda murderers should not be so quick to cast the first stone. Just because the attack on the WTC was wrong, does not mean that the "enemies" might not have a just cause. After all, the fact that the firebombing of Dresden was a criminal act in no way diminishes the allies' cause and in no way absolves the Nazis from being in the wrong.
Ethical principles apply to war. Attacking civilians directly cannot be justified unless there are extreme circumstances (and I can't think of that many).
On the other hand, if a democratic country persists in doing that very thing, or in waging immoral wars or other immoral activity, the people who fail to remove such governments are responsible for it. If not them, then who else? In a democracy, the voters are in the end responsible, that's the whole point of democracy after all.
And that is why Americans who call Al Qaeda murderers should not be so quick to cast the first stone. Just because the attack on the WTC was wrong, does not mean that the "enemies" might not have a just cause. After all, the fact that the firebombing of Dresden was a criminal act in no way diminishes the allies' cause and in no way absolves the Nazis from being in the wrong.
Comment