iNow Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Yes, as cool as I am with 31% of Israeli soldiers casualties being from Israeli fire. So, instead of addressing the valid point that we must be careful of our responses (and encourage caution among others who are responding) regardless of the target, including preventing these responders from attacking members of the UN and the Red Cross, you're going to pretend that not only are you okay with Israelis killing humanitarian workers, but that you also think it's funny that they are accidentally killing their own people? I really believe you're trying to make some point, but it's not coming through with the short snarkiness in your post. Can you elaborate... please... and earn back some of the respect I had for you which was lost after reading the above?
DrP Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Can you elaborate... please...? I think he means that it was accidental. When we bombed Iraq a few years back - one of our cruise missiles landed in Iran!
john5746 Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 So what Hamas has done is so bad that Israel should be given carte blanche to do whatever they want to the Palestinian people? No, Hamas deserves the worst, but not all Palestinians. If mistakes or war crimes are done, then they should be exposed. However, more action should be taken against Hamas. As long as they are killing Israeli citizens, no peaceful solution can take place. Are you cool with Israel opening fire on the UN and the Red Cross? Nope.
Pangloss Posted February 4, 2009 Author Posted February 4, 2009 The reason I laughed in post #25 above was I was laughing at BOTH of the two previous posts. Bascule was being just as "snarky" as Mr. Skeptic (who probably did it just to point that fact out), and I didn't consider EITHER response worthy of a response of my own.
Mr Skeptic Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 So, instead of addressing the valid point that we must be careful of our responses (and encourage caution among others who are responding) regardless of the target, including preventing these responders from attacking members of the UN and the Red Cross, you're going to pretend that not only are you okay with Israelis killing humanitarian workers, but that you also think it's funny that they are accidentally killing their own people? I really believe you're trying to make some point, but it's not coming through with the short snarkiness in your post. Can you elaborate... please... and earn back some of the respect I had for you which was lost after reading the above? I put bascule in the position of either coming up with some explanation for Israel wanting to kill their own soldiers, or owning up to the fact that in a war accidents happen. This is how I see it: Israel should conduct an investigation concerning the UN and Red Cross casualties. If there is reason to suspect that those were not accidents, then Israel should bring to trial the people responsible. If there is evidence that the ICC would have fair trials, then maybe they could be tried in the ICC. Since the ICC is not holding trials for Hamas war crimes, then it follows that they shouldn't be holding trials for Israel either -- that would be unjust, the antithesis of a court. 1
iNow Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 (edited) Now THAT is a good response. Thank you for elaborating, Mr Skeptic. I agree that mistakes happen in war, and I also agree that negative actions which are determined not to be accidents should be punished. Another agreement is that the ICC should be doing trials both ways if they do them at all. With that said, I ALSO agree with bascule that Palestinians deserve human rights protections just like anyone else, and that Israel has been rather uneven-handed when it comes to civilian deaths, and really stepped in a pile of crap when they killed humanitarian workers, accident or not. Edited February 4, 2009 by iNow
D H Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 Why should the ICC perform the trials? Think of the ICC as an analog of the US government pursuing civil rights abuses. The federal government only intervenes when the states fail to do their job properly. In the case at hand, the outcomes are Israel conducts an investigation, accuses their own people of illegal conduct, and wins a conviction with a just punishment. Israel conducts an investigation, accuses their own people of illegal conduct, and wins a conviction but the punishment is little more than a slap on the wrist. Israel conducts an investigation, accuses their own people of illegal conduct, but the accused are found innocent. Israel conducts an investigation, but decides no charges are warranted. Israel doesn't conduct an investigation. In case 1, justice accomplished. The ICC should keep out. Use of the ICC might be applicable in the other cases, and then only if it shows that Israel has failed to serve justice.
Severian Posted February 4, 2009 Posted February 4, 2009 Yes, as cool as I am with 31% of Israeli soldiers casualties being from Israeli fire. So would you be OK with us dropping a great big pile of nukes on the entire middle east? I am sure that would stop the fighting. A few innocents might die, but what does that matter in the scheme of things?
Pangloss Posted February 4, 2009 Author Posted February 4, 2009 Ugh. I'm starting to think maybe this thread needs to be closed so we can move on.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now