Illustration by Escher.
Illustration by Escher.
Gotta love this thinking here.
So tell me, should the US have stopped attacking Japan once they’d matched the ~2.4k soldiers killed at Pearl Harbor?
Or should the allies have stopped “genociding” Nazi Germany once they’d matched Hitler’s body count?
OF COURSE NOT. This isn’t about tit for tat. Especially when going after an enemy that is openly committee to your annihilation. Israel certainly appears to be doing a shit job of it, but there is no need to muddy the waters with specious arguments.
For example, if someone hits you with their car? It’s ok to scratch it.
Are you 12?
Or do you just see every unfortunate occurrence as personal victimization?
I’ll pretend this is an honest inquiry.
They relate, directly, because what is happening now is that Israel is attempting to eradicate and eliminate Hamas, once and for all.
The problems people have with “proportionality” collapse under any scrutiny… Should the US have stopped attacking Japan once we reached the total number of servicemen killed at Pearl Harbor? Or the allies stop once a “proportionate” number of Germans had died?
No, obviously, because these were enemies openly dedicated to taking over and/or wiping out whole populations. Were innocent civilians killed in the process? Certainly. Is Hamas deliberately seeing to it that civilians are used as defense and propaganda sacrificial la,bs? Unquestionably.
Finally, Hamas could end hostilities today by returning all hostages and surrendering its leaders to an international court. But the PR game is wildly successful, especially among this crowd, so why would they ever?
Minty MacBook resurrection I did a while back
Only on religion.
Based on the mostly fantastic choices presented here, I am now using those mentioned that I haven’t seen as a guide to future choices.
Then your _________ is a cancer and needs to fail.