Israel Needs To Dump Olmert

OrnotBitwise said:
Among other things, it means people who are willing to kill innocent men, women and children in order to make themselves safer or happier.

You, sir, are a terrorist sympathizer.
Click to expand...

I disagree Ornot....

a Terrorist intentionally plans and seeks out the killing of innocent people to further their radical causes....

to rewrite what "terrorist" means as you and anyold have done is intellectually DISHONEST, in my very humble opinion.... :eek:

you seek to diminish the terroristic acts of suicide bombers in restaraunts, or on trains and subways, or in kamikaze pilots with hundreds of innocent passengers on board....when you speak as you and Anyold have done....

I think it is wrong to do such....because there IS A DIFFERENCE between that and dropping leaflets in to a community to warn them to get out because you are going to bomb the shit out of them.....and BOTH MAY STILL BE BAD ACTIONS....but as with all things, intent and other circumstances define the degrees of the wrong action. For example, there is murder in the first degree or the second degree, or there is voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter.....

AND BOTH CIRCIMSTANCES ABOVE ARE NOT IN ANY WAY EQUAL....

to say such, as I have said above, is just outright WRONG....( Ornot and Anyold)

hahahaha! Now be nice, when you answer me.....lol...

:p

care
 
Maybe you are a good Christian Ornot and believe if someone tries to kill you you should let them. I disagree. If someone tries to kill me, then I have the right to make the pay for the effort to kill me, by killing them. Guess I am not as Christian as you. LOL
 
Care4all said:
I disagree Ornot....

a Terrorist intentionally plans and seeks out the killing of innocent people to further their radical causes....

to rewrite what "terrorist" means as you and anyold have done is intellectually DISHONEST, in my very humble opinion.... :eek:

you seek to diminish the terroristic acts of suicide bombers in restaraunts, or on trains and subways, or in kamikaze pilots with hundreds of innocent passengers on board....when you speak as you and Anyold have done....

I think it is wrong to do such....because there IS A DIFFERENCE between that and dropping leaflets in to a community to warn them to get out because you are going to bomb the shit out of them.....and BOTH MAY STILL BE BAD ACTIONS....but as with all things, intent and other circumstances define the degrees of the wrong action. For example, there is murder in the first degree or the second degree, or there is voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter.....

AND BOTH CIRCIMSTANCES ABOVE ARE NOT IN ANY WAY EQUAL....

to say such, as I have said above, is just outright WRONG....( Ornot and Anyold)

hahahaha! Now be nice, when you answer me.....lol...

:p

care
Click to expand...

With all respect, Care, I think you're missing some important points.

First, I don't give a poop about whether someone "intends" to kill innocent civilians or not. Arguing about other people's intentions is childish speculation. I don't care about the state of their souls -- largely because I don't believe in souls, or redemption, or damnation.

Killing innocent civilians in pursuit of some "higher" goal is wrong. Period. It doesn't matter whether the perpetrator intends to kill them or not. If you want to reserve the word "terrorist" for people who do it intentionally, fine. I'll just call the others "murderers" instead. How's that?

The Israelis are murdering people and have to be stopped. Furthermore, they're being worse murderers than the Shi'ite terrorists are being terrorists, since a lot more innocent Lebanese than innocent Israelis are being killed.

No offense intended but, to claim that lack of intent excuses murder is intellectually dishonest. We have phrases for murder without specific intent. Phrases like "second degreee murder" and "manslaughter" for example.

Now, let me pose a question. Which is worse, 40 cases of first degree murder or 400 cases of manslaughter? I'll go with the latter as being the worse, every time.
 
Last edited:
toby said:
Maybe you are a good Christian Ornot and believe if someone tries to kill you you should let them. I disagree. If someone tries to kill me, then I have the right to make the pay for the effort to kill me, by killing them. Guess I am not as Christian as you. LOL
Click to expand...
There is a difference between defending your life and "making someone pay" for attacking you. A very large difference, Toby, and a critical one.
 
Heck Ornot, I am not a Christian and I understand that. Perhaps I do understand because I am not a Christian ?
 
uscitizen said:
Heck Ornot, I am not a Christian and I understand that. Perhaps I do understand because I am not a Christian ?
Click to expand...
LOL! Oh, I know quite a few Christians who get it. I think Care probably would if she'd just think of it in those terms.

Good to see you again, uscit. :clink:
 
Good to chat with ya again too Ornot.
Hey I like the ignore thingy, it shows that the ignored party posted, but not what they said.
Could cause some gaps in reading the replies, but I can live with that :)
 
If you READ what I said ;), I clearly did not in any way bring in Christianity to the issue...the issue is degrees of killing, as in first degree murder, or voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter...etc...all is killing another human being that did not deserve to die....

to DENY that this is how a JUSTICE system works is beyond me...?

And I NEVER SAID that both parties can not be BOTH GUILTY OF WRONG, did I? I specifically said that they BOTH COULD BE WRONG, but that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN DEGREES of killing.

.... and my friend Ornot :), if YOU want to bring Judeo/Christain values in to it, then you are wrong...there is most CERTAINLY DEGREES OF KILLING that involve intent with the appropriate just punishment in these religions as well as our Justice system!

Not that I believe in any way that Christianity sanctions unjustified wars, because in no way does it and I am "with you there"...only that there is a difference between killing in the manner that I spoke of above in my initial post to you....

care
 
Care4all said:
If you READ what I said ;), I clearly did not in any way bring in Christianity to the issue...the issue is degrees of killing, as in first degree murder, or voluntary manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter...etc...all is killing another human being that did not deserve to die....

to DENY that this is how a JUSTICE system works is beyond me...?

And I NEVER SAID that both parties can not be BOTH GUILTY OF WRONG, did I? I specifically said that they BOTH COULD BE WRONG, but that THERE IS A DIFFERENCE IN DEGREES of killing.

.... and my friend Ornot :), if YOU want to bring Judeo/Christain values in to it, then you are wrong...there is most CERTAINLY DEGREES OF KILLING that involve intent with the appropriate just punishment in these religions as well as our Justice system!

Not that I believe in any way that Christianity sanctions unjustified wars, because in no way does it and I am "with you there"...only that there is a difference between killing in the manner that I spoke of above in my initial post to you....

care
Click to expand...
But think about it. Let's say a bomb goes off in the middle of a sidewalk cafe killing about a dozen people and wounding many more. Let's further say, just for the sake of argument, that we just don't know whether it was a bomb planted by some terrorist group or one dropped by a military plane trying to take out the terrorists.

Why should we care if the bomb was intended to kill the civilians or not? What difference does it make? It killed a bunch of innocent men, women and children. Do the families of the dead give a shit whether those who set off the bomb intended to kill innocents? No, they don't. In fact, if those who set off the bomb didn't intend to kill innocents then it almost makes it worse, in some ways.

In practice, the only reason we might care about the intent of the bombers is if we care about the state of their souls. Whether they're really bad people or basically good people who made a bad decision.

That might make a difference in a criminal case. I'm sure it would. But now suppose that bombs are going off every single day and civilians are dying left and right. The more "accidents" that happen the less the mitigating circumstances are going to count.

Right now, Israel is killing more innocents than Hezbollah is. I don't care if they feel justified or not. In fact, it kind of makes it worse if they do feel justified.

As I said earlier, 400 cases of manslaughter are worse than 40 first degree murders, even though one single case of murder is clearly more heinous than one single case of manslaughter.
 
.

I don't think I'd feel any different if my wife were blown up in a pub by an IRA bomber, or if she were killed in a (hypothetical) airstrike by british aircraft seeking to destroy IRA supporters and financiers located in Boston.

I can see the difference in "intent" being important in a criminal sense. Indisrminate attacks with the goal of maximizing civilian casualites is a war crime. Presumably, the British air force would nominally seek ways to reduce or mitigate collateral damage.
 
Cypress said:
I don't think I'd feel any different if my wife were blown up in a pub by an IRA bomber, or if she were killed in a (hypothetical) airstrike by british aircraft seeking to destroy IRA supporters and financiers located in Boston.

I can see the difference in "intent" being important in a criminal sense. Indisrminate attacks with the goal of maximizing civilian casualites is a war crime. Presumably, the British air force would nominally seek ways to reduce or mitigate collateral damage.
Click to expand...
I think it helps if we think of these as criminal acts from the outset. For indeed, so they are.

Lobbing missiles into Israeli cities -- or any other cities -- is criminal. It's absolutely unforgivable. But you can't react to criminal acts by lobbing bombs into the areas where you know the criminals live. That's not justice, that's revenge. That's not self-defense, it's escalation and retribution.

The Israelis -- and here I'm talking about the Israeli people, not the Israeli government -- want justice. They also want security in their own homes. That's totally fair: everyone is entitled to those things. They don't have the right, however, to kill off everyone in southern Lebanon to gain those goals.
 
Amen brother Ornot.
You pretty well summed it up for me. Israels actions are just fanning the flames to keep the hatred from dying down. After all if they did not have enemies would they be the biggest recievers of US foreign aid ? Peace = poor for Israel. At least in their leaders limited viewpoint.
 
Cypress said:
I don't think I'd feel any different if my wife were blown up in a pub by an IRA bomber, or if she were killed in a (hypothetical) airstrike by british aircraft seeking to destroy IRA supporters and financiers located in Boston.

I can see the difference in "intent" being important in a criminal sense. Indisrminate attacks with the goal of maximizing civilian casualites is a war crime. Presumably, the British air force would nominally seek ways to reduce or mitigate collateral damage.
Click to expand...

I don't either....and I have not "justified" Israels wrong actions...I only say, that there is a difference between a terrorist's actions of committing suicide while INTENTIONALLY killing men women and children....and a nation's killing of innocent people, after these people have been warned to get out, while the agressor is trying to get to "the bad guys".....

I am not going to give the satisfaction to the terrorists that INTENTIONALLY CHOOSE to blow up people that just chose to ride the subway that day, and say their actions are no different than the killing that sometimes occurs on a battlefield.

So, the Dems and others like you can COUNT ME OUT on jumping haphazzardly on that "band wagon"....but, to each his own... ;)

I see both of them as WRONG.....just not equal.

Thus I truely believe in loving thy enemy and by Turning my cheek, before war.... war is for self defense only....


care
 
Care4all said:
I am not going to give the satisfaction to the terrorists that INTENTIONALLY CHOOSE to blow up people that just chose to ride the subway that day, and say their actions are no different than the killing that sometimes occurs on a battlefield.

care
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't say "no different" -- except when I'm trying to irritate conservatives -- but rather "little different." It's the same mindset, really, just a difference of degree.

The terrorists and those who've decided to attack the terrorists in urban areas have made the same choice. Specifically, they've both decided that a certain number of civilian deaths are acceptable in pursuit of their goal. I'd say that they're both damned by it save that, as previously stipulated, I don't believe in damnation. ;)

Have you ever read the statements by the groups like Hezbollah and Al Qaeda? Inevitably, they say that civilian deaths are "regretable." They always say, however, that the innocents are not really innocent because they haven't joined to fight against the Great Satan, or the Zionist Invaders or whomever the chosen Evil du jur is.

Just like the Lebanese civilian deaths are "regretable" but they should have left when they had the chance and shouldn't have allowed Hezbollah in their communities in the first place.

Same sh*t, different toilets.
 
OrnotBitwise;5585]Personally, I don't say "no different" -- except when I'm trying to irritate conservatives -- but rather "little different." It's the same mindset, really, just a difference of degree.

The terrorists and those who've decided to attack the terrorists in urban areas have made the same choice. Specifically, they've both decided that a certain number of civilian deaths are acceptable in pursuit of their goal. I'd say that they're both damned by it save that, as previously stipulated, I don't believe in damnation. ;)

Sorry, I gotta stop you here, ONCE AGAIN, there is a difference...the terrorists CHOSE INTENTIONALLY TO KILL ONLY CIVILIANS TO MAKE a statement or a point.... to believe that there is "little difference" is just plain ignorant Ornot.... and like I said, I don't believe in war....I have ALWAYS been a Dove since the beginning.... I was even sickened by the actions in Afghanistan, but could understand why most Americans felt the need to go in there for our own security and safety, and to get Bin Laden. But all of the innocent people that we killed there made me ill...extremely ill... :(

I don't see this war in Lebanon in the same manner as the war in Iraq... I think Israel was and is justified in protecting themselves from Hezbollah, I just think their actions in defending themselves were the wrong actions...

We had no reason to go in to Iraq, Iraqis did not attack us, nor would they ever attack us more than likely, even with Saddam in power.... This was a TOTALLY unjustified war in my mind....
so yes:) I do have levels of "wrongness" or degrees of "wrongness" in my moral structure and my ethical foundation that I live by...and make my judgements by...

Have you ever read the statements by the groups like Hezbollah and Al Qaeda? Inevitably, they say that civilian deaths are "regretable." They always say, however, that the innocents are not really innocent because they haven't joined to fight against the Great Satan, or the Zionist Invaders or whomever the chosen Evil du jur is.

Nope, haven't heard any of the suicide terrorists say that! ;)

Just like the Lebanese civilian deaths are "regretable" but they should have left when they had the chance and shouldn't have allowed Hezbollah in their communities in the first place.

Well, they should have left if they did get the leaflet warnings....wouldn't you have done that?

....and I do not think this makes the death of any innocent people any less of a "death"

....just that they were warned...I have heard news reports that Hezbollah has held some of them as shields and at gunpoint, and that is why some of them may not have left, even though they were forwarned about the bombing to come....

And yes, I do believe that some of these people could be the wives and children and brothers of Hezbollah members...to me it would be illogical to think that some might not be...?

And once again, to me, that does not make their deaths any less of a "death"....they are all human beings and deserve to live in peace...

Same sh*t, different toilets.

And again, I respectfully disagree with you.

care
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top