Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Because if a country kills all of the ”bad guys” the only “bad guys” left will be the one who killed all of the people.
Responsibility lies with the person whose action caused the death. Your argument means you would declare the vigilante in the Death Wish films innocent. The law does not agree with you.
I'm sure the QR codes on the leaflets would help: Palestinians should learn to read them manually.
I've just read a review of a book about My Lai. There were atrocities on both sides but what stood out was how the brave whistle blowers were vilified, how the perpetrators mostly got off scot free and were praised by many of the US public, and how the commanders covered up and suffered no loss including Colin Powell and how Nixon blamed adverse newspaper stories on New York Jews! The Vietcong were dehumanised as "gooks" and the author made the point that young men with automatic weapons do atrocities because they can: but that doesn't make it right or ok or excusable in any way.
The filter doesn’t automatically censor, or at least it didn’t used to, slurs like that even the one for North Koreans which is explicitly prohibited in one of the pinned rules threads.
I believe the filter can be configured. If I'm right, this is just a term the PTB didn't think to add to the list.
Do you think it would be justifiable for a police officer or private citizen to kill 10 to 15 people and wound 30 more in the process of killing the mall shooter?
Only if the shooter had 10 to 15 people tied up on the floor unknown to the police officer or private citizen. What if the shooter killed the hostages first, should the citizen or police officer be held responsible?
Are you simply going to keep change the scenario until it seems less brutal? You started off saying that if you couldn't see a single hostage then blazing away is just fine. I think we'll stick with that as an accurate representation of the current situation.
While we know what the terrorists did, we don't have an accurate assessment as to who and how many have been killed in Gaza nor as to the circumstances surrounding their deaths.
As your analogy relies on the fact that innocent people died because, well, no-one could see them, then it admits to innocent people being killed in actuality in the case that the analogy is meant to represent. Now that you've realised that, your escape clause is now the accuracy of the numbers and not the fact of those deaths?
Nope, just stating what we know and what we don't know. Obviously if Hamas said there were zero innocents killed, and said only Hamas and those who support Hamas were killed, their propaganda campaign would fall apart.
I've know people reject analogies before when they thought they contradicted one's position. I've not known anyone reject their own for the same reason...
The U.S. simply needs to publicly urge Israel to continue to avoid the loss of life of innocents, and remain silent on how Israel should proceed--that should be entirely up to Israel.The United States put the blame on Hamas after Israeli military forces resumed bombarding the Gaza Strip with airstrikes, an end to a weeklong pause in fighting.
The White House said Friday that Hamas failed to deliver a list of hostages the militant group would release. Meanwhile, Israel and Hamas presented conflicting narratives about why the truce ended.
US blames Hamas for end of truce; Israel resumes airstrikes in Gaza Strip: Live Updates
Shortly after a seven-day truce between Israel and Hamas expired, combat resumed in full force.www.yahoo.com
