This just in: Israel returns fire on Syrian targets from the Golan Heights

[giblets]

That's probably true, they're scum as we all know.

What's also true is that Israel is bombing homes they know children are in. The children of people they target. One of the chiefs they just managed to kill had his house bombed in 2004 also, but he wasn't home and they just killed his kids.

The world isn't black & white. Israel has tons of childrens' blood on their hands here, and you can't blame Palestine for them all.

Every single one of those children would be alive today if Hamas had not made the decision to fire rockets into Israel. Don't like getting your children killed? Don't vote for terrorists. There is no feasible way to defend yourself from the murderous intent of a majority of a country's inhabitants without some innocent civilians getting caught in the crossfire, especially if your enemies don't care about the laws of warfare. Wars suck. The only way around that is to not start them.

[SlowwHand]

Last report I saw said that Israel had 5 casualties, of which 4 were civilian and about half the Gaza casualties were civilian; neither of which is surprising considering how Hamas conducts war.

[Asher]

Every single one of those children would be alive today if Hamas had not made the decision to fire rockets into Israel. Don't like getting your children killed? Don't vote for terrorists.

I hope I don't need to explain how this logic can be used as justification for any number of horrors.

It could be used to defend 9/11 by some people. Don't like getting innocent civilians killed? Don't vote for administrations which choose to meddle with the affairs of other sovereign nations.

It is wrong in all cases by anyone with a shred of morality.

[Felch]

It could be used to defend 9/11 by some people. Don't like getting innocent civilians killed? Don't vote for administrations which choose to meddle with the affairs of other sovereign nations.

It is wrong in all cases by anyone with a shred of morality.

That's the libertarian position. If America kept its dick in its pants, people wouldn't be pissed off. And far from immoral, it's the only sane way to look at the world.

[Asher]

That's the libertarian position. If America kept its dick in its pants, people wouldn't be pissed off. And far from immoral, it's the only sane way to look at the world.

Sorry, you misunderstand. I agree with that position.

I'm referring to his harebrained logic in defending the slaughter of children because "close to a majority of people voted for a government which shells Israel with rockets". No moral person could argue that.

[giblets]

I hope I don't need to explain how this logic can be used as justification for any number of horrors.

It could be used to defend 9/11 by some people. Don't like getting innocent civilians killed? Don't vote for administrations which choose to meddle with the affairs of other sovereign nations.

It is wrong in all cases by anyone with a shred of morality.

The attacks on the WTC killed civilians on purpose. There is no moral equivalence between terrorism and collateral damage. Did Canada choose to sit out WWII rather than risk the deaths of German civilians? No. I guess Canadians are morally depraved!

[Asher]

The attacks on the WTC killed civilians on purpose. There is no moral equivalence between terrorism and collateral damage.

There can be. Israel is clearly not doing its due diligence. It's dropping massive amounts of explosives on houses where they think a terrorist might be WITHOUT EVEN CHECKING, which becomes a form of terrorism.

You can't blindly fire massive amounts of deadly explosives in the general direction of a country and hope to kill a very specific target, shrugging off the death of hundreds of innocent civilians per target killed.

Did Canada choose to sit out WWII rather than risk the deaths of German civilians? No. I guess Canadians are morally depraved!

Americans are morally depraved for sitting out WWII until they were attacked.

[giblets]

There can be. Israel is clearly not doing its due diligence. It's dropping massive amounts of explosives on houses where they think a terrorist might be WITHOUT EVEN CHECKING, which becomes a form of terrorism.

You can't blindly fire massive amounts of deadly explosives in the general direction of a country and hope to kill a very specific target, shrugging off the death of hundreds of innocent civilians per target killed.


Americans are morally depraved for sitting out WWII until they were attacked.

How do you propose that they CHECK to make absolutely sure a terrorist really is in the house? Don't they need troops on the ground for that? Is it your position that bombing Gaza is immoral and evil but a full scale invasion and occupation would be just dandy? Maybe you're right. In fact, maybe Gaza really isn't fit for self-government. Yes, bombing will kill some people by accident. I'm terribly sorry that no one has invented a weapon that can kill adults but not children.

[Felch]

Sorry, you misunderstand. I agree with that position.

I'm referring to his harebrained logic in defending the slaughter of children because "close to a majority of people voted for a government which shells Israel with rockets". No moral person could argue that.

He wasn't defending the slaughter of children. He was placing blame where it belongs, with Hamas.

Hamas could stop firing rockets at Israel, and the war would end. They continue their vain efforts to attack Israel, because they don't care about the suffering of their own people. Hamas's leaders hide in bunkers and let the women and children of the Gaza Strip pay the price.

[Asher]

How do you propose that they CHECK to make absolutely sure a terrorist really is in the house?

The US does this very well, actually. Don't sell yourself short. Satellites, drones, intel, spy planes, radio transmissions, etc.

Don't they need troops on the ground for that?

No.

[Asher]

He wasn't defending the slaughter of children. He was placing blame where it belongs, with Hamas.

Blaming Hamas is defending Israel's actions, which resulted in the slaughter of many children.

Own up to your moral failings, don't run from them or pretend they don't exist. If you are defending Israel's actions here, you are defending the murder of 36 children.

[giblets]

The US does this very well, actually. Don't sell yourself short. Satellites, drones, intel, spy planes, radio transmissions, etc.


No.

Doesn't Israel have this technology?

[Asher]

Doesn't Israel have this technology?

One would hope. They clearly don't use it, or don't know how to use it. More likely, they just don't ****ing care.

[DaShi]

Oh, and about those backyard rockets...



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012...ile-technology

So?

[giblets]

Blaming Hamas is defending Israel's actions, which resulted in the slaughter of many children.

Own up to your moral failings, don't run from them or pretend they don't exist. If you are defending Israel's actions here, you are defending the murder of 36 children.

Israel's "moral failing" is that they don't put equal value on Israeli and non-Israeli lives. It's a "moral failing" of every single country in existence. Hamas was well aware of this "moral failing" when they initiated this conflict.