I have empathy for civilians. I am not pleased civilians were killed or injured in the attack. However, civilian casualties result in almost every modern military operation. That doesn't mean you cannot be happy the operation occurred or was successful. I am pleased thousands of Hezbollah terrorists were killed/injured/maimed in the operation. I am also pleased with the nature of the attack given the circumstances. I am pleased the attack resulted in a fantastic ratio of terrorists to civilians injured/killed/maimed for a modern military operation. I don't see how an attack could be more pinpointed then targeting handheld devices issued to Hezbollah terrorists by the organization. The attack was not "indiscriminate" it was as pinpointed as reasonably possible. The only mental breakdown occurring here is yours Mr. 52,000 politics posts on a basketball forum. That indicates everything one needs to know about the state of your mental health.
If the amount of civilians reportedly killed is the threshold for a morally justified attack you approve of them I guess the Hamas and Hezbollah rocket attacks are morally fine as they barely ever kill people.
I don't consider any aggressive actions by Hamas or Hezbollah morally justified. They are terrorists organizations which have no right to exist. If they had the opportunity, Hamas and Hezbollah would kill, rape, enslave, subjugate or forcibly convert me and everyone I know or care about in this world. They are evil and I am very happy to express my support for Israel in their conflicts with those organizations.
These are things we already know you believe. I'm asking would it be morally justified to detonate 5000 explosives that are sprinkled around civilian population centers from private homes to schools where the people employing these explosives will have no clue where they will be exploded in the US across various American towns even if it was targeting "bad people"
That's not what you asked. You're now presenting an entirely new scenario and hypothetical. We can just stick with the scenario which actually occurred.
From the very beginning the question being asked of you is whether the method of attack be morally justified on a American civilian population? The method of attack... We agree all version of suicide bombings in a civilian place.is morally unjustified even if it was a red blooded American fighting against Muslim terrorists, blowing yourself up in a civilian place would be morally unjustified. I'm asking about the specific method of attack being morally justified or not if it was done on an American population?
It was not an attack on the a civilian population. It was an attack on members of Hezbollah, a terrorist organization which actively engages in war or war-like activities with the State of Israel. If Ukraine was able to interdict communication systems in the global supply chain bound for the Russian military and detonate them once they had been distributed killing/maiming a great many Russian soldiers but also resulting in some incidental civilian casualties, while I would find it lamentable any civilians were killed, I would not consider that morally unjustifiable conduct.
So it's moral because the targets who had the pagers are allegedly all combatants and therore its justified. So hiding explosives amongst American soldiers' personal belongings and waiting for them to return home and detonating the explosives not knowing whether they are at home amongst family members like a spouse or their children, at a school picking up their children, at a local cafe amongst a crowd of civilians is not a war crimes? The specific target are combatants.
I would hope the US stop providing arms to Ukraine the moment they hide explosives amongst Russian military personnel and wait for them to detonate once they are not on a military base and amongst civilians like their residence.
It's a legitimate question. Do you apply the same ethical standard to Americans as you do Lebanese. The answer we all know is no. You don't. But you can't admit that a American life is far more valuable than a Lebanese. Just be real. Hopefully you can at least admit it to yourself.
It's not a legitimate question. A legitimate question deals with reality and actual events. There are an unlimited number of hypothetical scenarios I could invent and force you to address but I'm not playing that game.
Suit yourself. There's nothing wrong with sabotaging your enemies equipment and making it blow up in their face.
According to whom? If that were true, we'd still be living in the stone age. The basis of modern thought is all hypotheticals. Foundation of western philosophy. Incredible that you can make this statement with a straight face. You spend more time dodging the question than answering it. The lady doth protest too much.
Happy to address the real situation. Not interested in your hypotheticals. You're hostile and not operating in good faith. I'll pass on that.
I understand this position from your perspective. It's a consequence of dehumanizing entire population groups to get to this state you currently are in and one random chode on the Internet like me isn't going to change the entire perspective of which humans deserve value as humans. I understand that. Decades of experiences and propaganda has gotten you to this position of default dehumanizing of entire Middle Eastern populations and one back and forth on a Houston Rockets message board isn't going to shift that.
Yup jihadists don’t have a goal for peace , economic growth and obviously advanced of women’s rights Like the women’s rights most of Europe , Asia and the rest of the world has had for the last 400 years
