What would be your reaction if Russia instituted a relentless aerial bombing campaign on Kiev similar to what Israel is doing to the civilians in Gaza. The situations are not exactly the same, Kiev has some defense and air support while the people in Gaza are totally defenseless. But Russia does have air superiority so if it decided its losses would be worth the slaughter it would wreak it could probably unleash similar destruction. Would Russia be committing a war crime by intentionally targeting civilians? Is Israel?
An Interesting Question To Ponder
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Dan, stop banging your head against the wall. These garbage people don't value the lives of Palestinians as humans at all. They are not a clever analogy away from changing their mind. Put your energy into calling/writing/faxing your congress critter to condition any aid to Israel on a ceasefire.
To be clear I am talking about you and the rest of the genocide cheerleaders on this board.
Oh you aren't a genocide cheerleader? Please call your congress critter then.
You made the accusation. Back it up.
Happy to be wrong on this one. Please call your congress critter and demand a ceasefire.
That's a tricky question. I can't recall a single instance where you called the slaughter in Gaza genocide and cheered for it. On the other hand I can't recall a single instance where you expressed the slightest concern that Palestinians are being slaughtered by the thousands in a very genocidal fashion. In fact, it seems to me you have given the slaughter a pass under the guise that Israel is defending itself.
Last edited:
With all due respect, Pilt, what good do you think would come from calling Congress and asking for a cease fire? With the exception of "the Squad," which most people reard as loons (I confess I do, too, most of the time) there's not a person in Congress that has the stones to defy the Israeli propaganda machine in this country.
I wish I could believe you. I think Congress listens to their donors. If their donors make money off war Congress is going to support war. I point to Nikki Haley as a prime example.
Last edited:
They listen to donors because donors give them campaign money to advertise to voters. So yes they listen to donors more than individual voters, but If the voters are vehemently opposed to something all the donor money in the world won't matter.
If a swarm of killer bees attacked @Ponca Dan, he’d just stand there and do nothing. And die.
Not realy. I understand the maximum that: forward movement — making a big, relentless push until you achieved your objective — saves time and energy, and most importantly, reduces causalities. The more steadily you advanced, the more rapidly the enemy retreats, the less fighting you have to do.
I understand the rationale, but I don't think there are any reduced casualties in Gaza, and I suspect there wouldn't be any reduced casualties if Kiev got flattened in the same way. Intentionally targeting civilians is a war crime. It would be a war crime if Russia did it, and it's a war crime for Israel to do it.
If there are no reduced casualties either way, then what you are arguing essentially is "tear the band aid off quickly or slowly." Even then the quicker you get the war over the better it is for everyone involved as well. Speed is essential in reducing the suffering to its bare minimum. If suffering is to be had prolonging the suffering only benefits time and those who capitalize on it.
Sounds like a textbook answer. It's hard to reconcile speedy casualities with reduced suffering.
Not to mention that civilian causalities are usually counterproductive and extend conflict instead of abbreviate it.
Do you consider the fight between Russia and Ukraine a war? If the answer is yes, then bomb away. We Americans have no right to criticize anyone else's wartime actions. We dropped not one but two nuclear bombs on civilian cities.
According to many historians the war was on the verge of being over. Japan had already approached the US seeking terms. Murdering 100,000 civilians was unnecessary, but the US knew it needed to justify the murder so it concocted the ruse that it saved the lives of more American Gi’s than it took of innocent Japanese. So, yes, the war ended quickly, but at a cost that needn’t be paid. I won’t argue the veracity of this claim, I only know it exists, and sounds plausible.
I don’t know what else you could call what Israel is doing if not genocide. Maybe people aren’t cheerleading it, but they are supporting it. I doubt it matters much to those cowering as the bombs rain down on them whether it’s called cheerleading or supporting, they’re just as dead or just as mutilated.
There's truth to it. Don't know if terms were asked for specifically, but the war was winding down. That said, I do believe that there were Japanese who would 'never' surrender and thus the example was made. That was proven in the fighting on Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal.
That said, I'm not condoning us dropping the bomb. I wasn't in the President's shoes. I hadn't seen 4 years of bloody warfare across basically every continent in the world. But because we've done it, I do believe we have no right to criticize others' methods. If you want to argue if a war is just or unjust, or which side we support, then those are fair topics. But if its a war, you do what's necessary to win, and nothing less. To do less is what leads to North Korea being the world's prick for the past 73 years.
Last edited:
Then Hamas (which is the ruling government) should sue for peace. The real story here is how Hamas simply lets its civilians die en masse because of its ultimate hatred of Israel, but noone talks about that side of the story. Japan could have fought to the last man but eventually the rulers thought about someone other than themselves and sued for peace for a war they knew they couldn't win. Hamas could do the same if they cared about the Palenstinians they rule. And if Palestinians want something other than bombs for breakfast, they need to rise up en masse against their real oppressors (and its not one's flying the 6 pointed star). If they did so, they would get the world's (and Israel's) support in a heartbeat and the bombs would stop.
Korea and Vietnam should thank their lucky stars they didn't get what Japan did. I had two great uncles disappear in the Bataan death march. Not to mention several others in Korea and Vietnam.
I agree with a great deal of what you said. But I believe each individual has a moral imperative to condemn war and war methods regardless of which government is involved. None of us should ever advocate that war participants should have carte blanche to do “whatever it takes” to win. That could only lead to the exculpation of the most vicious evil-filled heinous barbarians. War is an abomination against civilization as it is; let’s don’t make it any worse.
The “real story” is not about Hamas not caring what happens to the Palestinian people. It’s one of many stories that are involved in the conflict. Another story is about Israel not caring what happens to the Palestinians trapped in Gaza. I disagree with you about the “real” oppressors. Israel is just as guilty as Hamas and has inflicted far more damage on the Palestinians. Hamas eggs Israel on and Israel responds with great enthusiasm. Everywhere they look, everywhere they turn they are surrounded by oppressors. What needs to get the world’s support is to quit taking a side and condemn the way both Hamas and Israel treat the people in Gaza. As it is it gets treated like a sporting event where the world roots for one side or the other while the people of Gaza are kicked around like a soccer ball.
Wrong. The US ending their insistence on total surrender and the red army invading Manchuria ended the war pretty darn quick.
The US had been doing air raids on the scale of Hiroshima since March of 1945.
I don’t know, Woody. Would the way to get rid of Black Lives Matter be to start killing every black American until we think we got all the BLM members?
You must admit most of them blm folk think along the lines of terrorists as they've proven thus far Dan. Similar thinking/ideology.
There was a ceasefire. On October 6th.
It is a war crime to embed military assets in civilian infrastructure. Its is not a war crime to attack that infrastructure once its compromised.
So Hamas is according to the "laws of war" committing war crimes and Israel is not.
There is no moral equivalence.
Moral relativism is a cancer that undermines western civilization and all of the progress we brought to humanity.
Collectivism and cultural Marxism are the ultimate auto immune disease that will consume its host and kill it. Israel and Ukraine are not at fault for having been attacked.
Hamas can end this and offer themselves up to the gallows, after a trial for war crimes of course. Do this tomorrow and this will end for the average Joe Palestinian.
Russia, China, NK, Hamas, and Iran are enemies of western civilization and must be looked at through that prism.
So Hamas is according to the "laws of war" committing war crimes and Israel is not.
There is no moral equivalence.
Moral relativism is a cancer that undermines western civilization and all of the progress we brought to humanity.
Collectivism and cultural Marxism are the ultimate auto immune disease that will consume its host and kill it. Israel and Ukraine are not at fault for having been attacked.
Hamas can end this and offer themselves up to the gallows, after a trial for war crimes of course. Do this tomorrow and this will end for the average Joe Palestinian.
Russia, China, NK, Hamas, and Iran are enemies of western civilization and must be looked at through that prism.
You pretend like the Palestinian peoples are a helpless soccer ball. But its on them to rise up. They have to cut out their own cancer (Hamas) or accept the fact that they have become its host and will die along side it. But we both know that deep down, the Palestinian people (as a whole) don't like the Israelis and aren't upset at what Hamas does. Just like the Israelis (as a whole) aren't upset about the utter devastation they bring when they get to 'enthusiastically' respond to an attack.
Honest question: Is Russia really an enemy of Western Civilization? They run a capitalist society. Outside of attacking Ukraine, which was the obvious response to the imperialistic, unified army of NATO ever-encroaching towards its borders, which part of Russia hasn't been a good neighbor? We still use them to fly goods and people to the ISS. For years, they were our solution for space travel, once we retired the shuttle program. They've been a fair global trading partner for energy. They supplied Europe with cheap gas for years. Even in a war, they supported the Black Sea agreement and allowed their opposition to maintain food shipments. They aren't perfect by any means, but they're a hell of a lot closer to my idea of Western Civilization than many of our so-called Allies and friends. China, NK, Hamas, and Iran are all communist (China, NK) or worse (Hamas, Iran). Russia doesn't fit that bill, imo.
