Our moral culpability for Qana

[FanOfFridays]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Tough cowboy talk...

Well... I hate to say this, but I somehow doubt that the resolve of the Israeli army and their level of technological sophistication and the intelligence gathering capabilities of Mossad and the will of the majority ot Israelis (who, according to BBC yesterday, are solidly in favour of the Israeli counter-attacks) can be summed up as being 'tough cowboy talk'. If it's tough cowboy talk, they can also walk the tough cowboy walk and I don't think they are showing much compunction about walking it when they are pushed down that road.

I think 'Don't fuck with Israel' is exactly the message here and I don't think it looks much like 'tough cowboy talk'.

 

[traderob]

ZZZ
Am I right in understanding that you object to what the USA did in WWII where it used its military superioity to anihilate the German and Japanese military. You would have advised limiting their response to an exact tit for tat, nothing more?
Or do you think they shoudl have tried a Gandhian approach to the war and surrended all their weapons to Hitler and laid down perhaps saying "go ahead kill us all, if you dare?"

Perhaps that would work with the Middle east? Give Iran et al a few thousand nuclear misslies to show that the west treats them as equals?

 

[Arnie]

As usual the Lil' z is wrong. Police do not have to show that the "only option" was to shoot.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Quote from traderNik:

Hey!! Wait a minute here. This analogy doesn't work, unless you include the caveat that the bank robber is a known murderer who has just killed a bunch of people. If that is the case (as it is here), are you seriously saying that the cops would have to show that they had 'no option' but to shoot?

And even if the bank robber hadn't just killed a bunch of people, I still say huh???? If a bank robber grabs a hostage and puts a gun to her temple and drags her off, that is it, man!!! The guy is in forfeit, complete forfeit. He has forfeited his right to life at that point, has he not? The cops are supposed to do what, wait until they can run his facial expressions, stance, age, priors, handedness, serotonin levels, weight, height, grade 4 aptitude test results and his breakfast that morning through a computer program in order to come up with a % likelihood that he is going to kill the hostage, before they can use lethal force to end the situation??

Jesus Christ, Z, I am all for innocent until proven guilty but where is the line?? Is there not a line somewhere??

This analogy is crap.

Quote from traderNik:

Hey!! Wait a minute here. This analogy doesn't work, unless you include the caveat that the bank robber is a known murderer who has just killed a bunch of people. If that is the case (as it is here), are you seriously saying that the cops would have to show that they had 'no option' but to shoot?

And even if the bank robber hadn't just killed a bunch of people, I still say huh???? If a bank robber grabs a hostage and puts a gun to her temple and drags her off, that is it, man!!! The guy is in forfeit, complete forfeit. He has forfeited his right to life at that point, has he not? The cops are supposed to do what, wait until they can run his facial expressions, stance, age, priors, handedness, serotonin levels, weight, height, grade 4 aptitude test results and his breakfast that morning through a computer program in order to come up with a % likelihood that he is going to kill the hostage, before they can use lethal force to end the situation??

Jesus Christ, Z, I am all for innocent until proven guilty but where is the line?? Is there not a line somewhere??

This analogy is crap.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Quote from Arnie:

As usual the Lil' z is wrong. Police do not have to show that the "only option" was to shoot.

Quote from Arnie:

As usual the Lil' z is wrong. Police do not have to show that the "only option" was to shoot.

 

[dddooo]

Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Are you sabotaging your own thread?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

I am opposed to indiscriminate bombing civillians.

It really is that simple.

Comparisons to WWII are so badly flawed, do you really want to go there?

Why not try bombing villages in Viet Nam?

That didn't work either...

Actually, I read an interesting op ed pieces that suggested Iran get nukes, to balance the power in the region, and prevent all out war.

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/2280/

My preference is that no countries have nukes...which is also the preference of most Americans:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-03-31-nuclear-fears_x.htm

Quote from roberk:

ZZZ
Am I right in understanding that you object to what the USA did in WWII where it used its military superioity to anihilate the German and Japanese military. You would have advised limiting their response to an exact tit for tat, nothing more?
Or do you think they shoudl have tried a Gandhian approach to the war and surrended all their weapons to Hitler and laid down perhaps saying "go ahead kill us all, if you dare?"

Perhaps that would work with the Middle east? Give Iran et al a few thousand nuclear misslies to show that the west treats them as equals?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Quote from dddooo:

Are you sabotaging your own thread?

Quote from dddooo:

Are you sabotaging your own thread?

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Quote from traderNik:

Well... I hate to say this, but I somehow doubt that the resolve of the Israeli army and their level of technological sophistication and the intelligence gathering capabilities of Mossad and the will of the majority ot Israelis (who, according to BBC yesterday, are solidly in favour of the Israeli counter-attacks) can be summed up as being 'tough cowboy talk'. If it's tough cowboy talk, they can also walk the tough cowboy walk and I don't think they are showing much compunction about walking it when they are pushed down that road.

I think 'Don't fuck with Israel' is exactly the message here and I don't think it looks much like 'tough cowboy talk'.

Quote from traderNik:

Well... I hate to say this, but I somehow doubt that the resolve of the Israeli army and their level of technological sophistication and the intelligence gathering capabilities of Mossad and the will of the majority ot Israelis (who, according to BBC yesterday, are solidly in favour of the Israeli counter-attacks) can be summed up as being 'tough cowboy talk'. If it's tough cowboy talk, they can also walk the tough cowboy walk and I don't think they are showing much compunction about walking it when they are pushed down that road.

I think 'Don't fuck with Israel' is exactly the message here and I don't think it looks much like 'tough cowboy talk'.

 

[ZZZzzzzzzz]

Quote from traderNik:

Hey!! Wait a minute here. This analogy doesn't work, unless you include the caveat that the bank robber is a known murderer who has just killed a bunch of people. If that is the case (as it is here), are you seriously saying that the cops would have to show that they had 'no option' but to shoot?

And even if the bank robber hadn't just killed a bunch of people, I still say huh???? If a bank robber grabs a hostage and puts a gun to her temple and drags her off, that is it, man!!! The guy is in forfeit, complete forfeit. He has forfeited his right to life at that point, has he not? The cops are supposed to do what, wait until they can run his facial expressions, stance, age, priors, handedness, serotonin levels, weight, height, grade 4 aptitude test results and his breakfast that morning through a computer program in order to come up with a % likelihood that he is going to kill the hostage, before they can use lethal force to end the situation??

Jesus Christ, Z, I am all for innocent until proven guilty but where is the line?? Is there not a line somewhere??

This analogy is crap.

Quote from traderNik:

Hey!! Wait a minute here. This analogy doesn't work, unless you include the caveat that the bank robber is a known murderer who has just killed a bunch of people. If that is the case (as it is here), are you seriously saying that the cops would have to show that they had 'no option' but to shoot?

And even if the bank robber hadn't just killed a bunch of people, I still say huh???? If a bank robber grabs a hostage and puts a gun to her temple and drags her off, that is it, man!!! The guy is in forfeit, complete forfeit. He has forfeited his right to life at that point, has he not? The cops are supposed to do what, wait until they can run his facial expressions, stance, age, priors, handedness, serotonin levels, weight, height, grade 4 aptitude test results and his breakfast that morning through a computer program in order to come up with a % likelihood that he is going to kill the hostage, before they can use lethal force to end the situation??

Jesus Christ, Z, I am all for innocent until proven guilty but where is the line?? Is there not a line somewhere??

This analogy is crap.