Israel/Palestine thread
Think this merits its own thread...
Discuss my fellow 2+2ers..
AM YISRAEL CHAI.
[QUOTE=Crossnerd]
there is , in the sense that societies don't do "anything in their power at any cost" to keep rapes and child abuse at 0, this admitting not any tradeoff to reduce them is considered morally mandatory.we don't put cameras in all homes for example. we don't execute all people with any history of sexual assaults or worse.we don't chemical sterilize all men convinced of violent cr
I would actually support doing all those things. Except for the sterilization - no need to do that I as I would be fine putting those people into the execution/lifetime imprisonment category. Anyone who doesn't support any of those things is definitely not as anti-child abuse and anti-rape as I am.
https://apnews.com/article/israel-palest...
The buffer zone will be necessary especially if Israeli isn't going to be an occupying military force
"Despite international objections " is hilarious. Nobody has a plan to keep Israel safe but don't do anything to ensure your safety after the war!
The US can consider anything they dislike illegal and sanction accordingly. It's not for the US to decide if some individuals are linked to violence in a foreign country as well, that's for local courts isn't it?
I would actually support doing all those things. Except for the sterilization - no need to do that I as I would be fine putting those people into the execution/lifetime imprisonment category. Anyone who doesn't support any of those things is definitely not as anti-child abuse and anti-rape as I am.
You support mandating government cameras in all homes?
Check the sterilization: i wrote execution, for all sex related offenders, and sterilization for all violent offenders (under the known correlate that violent male criminals have a higher chance to rape and abuse children)
I've never once heard anyone suggest that "Never again" is somehow only applicable to one group of people, seems like a deranged lesson to take away from WWII.
I would actually support doing all those things. Except for the sterilization - no need to do that I as I would be fine putting those people into the execution/lifetime imprisonment category. Anyone who doesn't support any of those things is definitely not as anti-child abuse and anti-rape as I am.
You're definitely not as anti-rape as somone who would support executing all men at birth
I would actually support doing all those things. Except for the sterilization - no need to do that I as I would be fine putting those people into the execution/lifetime imprisonment category. Anyone who doesn't support any of those things is definitely not as anti-child abuse and anti-rape as I am.
Jfc, I can see why you don't want to live any longer. That sounds pretty damn miserable.
There's no 'acceptable line' on then number of civilian deaths
It's like asking what the acceptable line is on the number of abused children or rape victims.
Numerous people in this thread have argued otherwise and called civilian deaths a “necessary evil” with a few pithy qualifiers like “awful, sad”.
Numerous people in this thread have argued otherwise and called civilian deaths a “necessary evil” with a few pithy qualifiers like “awful, sad”.
And I asked originally because if the answer for some is that there is no limit to acceptable civilian death in the face of obtaining absolute security for Israel’s borders and “annihilating” Hamas, then the genocide question becomes less of a question and more of a foreseeable outcome.
So I am again asking the hardliners, where is the line for acceptable civilian death?
Necessary evil is another way of saying the same thing. There's no line on the number of them.
What there should be is answering to a court (plus the electorate). Were all your evil acts necessary? If not then your guilty of heinous acts inlcuding, quite possibly, war crimes.
And I asked originally because if the answer for some is that there is no limit to acceptable civilian death in the face of obtaining absolute security for Israel’s borders and “annihilating” Hamas, then the genocide question becomes less of a question and more of a foreseeable outcome.
So I am again asking the hardliners, where is the line for acceptable civilian death?
There is no fixed line inasmuch as you don't tell your enemy: you know, if you increase the number of meat shield to X, we actually let you be a terrorist in peace forever.
So, all civilian lives that Hamas put in jeopardy are free game, no matter the amount, and every single one of them is entirely and exclusively murdered by Hamas, is it's used as a meat shield.
If Hamas has offices in a building, they killed all the residents and visitors of that building.
If Hamas personnel goes to a hospital, they are murdering civilians in that hospital.
And so on.
Aside from that, the line is quite low actually.
If civilians aren't used as meat shield it's very rare you are justified killing them in a modern war
And I asked originally because if the answer for some is that there is no limit to acceptable civilian death in the face of obtaining absolute security for Israel’s borders and “annihilating” Hamas, then the genocide question becomes less of a question and more of a foreseeable outcome.
So I am again asking the hardliners, where is the line for acceptable civilian death?
It depends what outcome is obtained in the end, doesn't it?
The outcomes in WW2 in the end, largely justified the price. Freedom and democracy over this much time was worth that price.
In this case is the outcome a future Gaza where the highest paying job isn't "suicide bomber"? And where life in Israel isn't defined by how often your children run to bomb shelters, or how often you get pogromed?
You actually need an outcome to justify a price.
It depends what outcome is obtained in the end, doesn't it? The outcomes in WW2 in the end, largely justified the price. Freedom and democracy over this much time was worth that price. In this case is the outcome a future Gaza where the highest paying job isn't "suicide bomber"? And where life in Israel isn't defined by how often your children run to bomb shelters, or how often
Which price are you thinking of for WW2?
I really don't think Dresda bombing helped winning the war that much if at all for example
I think when the casualties get to 50,000+ the Biden admin will be under enough pressure that they get serious about a ceasefire.
You support mandating government cameras in all homes?
Check the sterilization: i wrote execution, for all sex related offenders, and sterilization for all violent offenders (under the known correlate that violent male criminals have a higher chance to rape and abuse children)
Yes, for all homes housing minors.
I understand, but I would never allow violent offenders to be free again, so really no need to sterilize them.
a necessary evil perhaps
Which price are you thinking of for WW2?
I really don't think Dresda bombing helped winning the war that much if at all for example
Then you're mistaken, and it's spelt 'Dresden'. It was the largest intact centre of munitions production in the Third Reich in February 1945, with over 140 vital war factories engaged in precision light engineering, producing machine guns and ammunition, field radios, field telephones, gunsights, bombsights, U-boat periscopes, bomb fuses, shell fuses, torpedo fuses, torpedo steering and guidance systems, V-1 cruise missile steering and guidance systems, V-2 ballistic missile steering and guidance systems, Me262 jet-fighter tail units, Me262 and Fw190 fighter instrument panels, and I could go on. There was every reason to bomb it and no reason not to. The high death toll was due to poor air-raid precautions on the ground. Most of those who died could have walked away from the fire zone long before the firestorm occurred if they had not been given government advice to 'remain in shelter'. Many thousands more chose to ignore that advice, and walked, and lived.
Has Dunyian (?) posted since Lucion started?
(Not that I'm asking for any bans. I'm not.)
