user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
Yes if it were shown that the residents of Sadr City were actively supporting Al Sadr and his terrorists.In Gaza the people who live their actively aid Hamas and are Hamas militants so Israel has every right to attack Gaza inorder to free their man.
I point to the obviously esoteric ethical principle: Two wrongs don't make a right.
They should go after that fat ƒu¢k who's running the militia.
Why is assassination not an option?
Why would it ever be an option to kill innocents?
No, I don't think it is.
Is it acceptable for the leadership of a terrorist or terrorist group to put its people through this when all they have to do is release ONE person? I would say in this case that the US wouldn't be INTENTIONALLY targeting civilians (which isn't the case either in situation you are making an illusion to).
Let the person go and stop any suffering your people are experiencing. I think it is rather repulsive that the terrorists would rather have harm come to potentially several or many of their own people rather than release ONE person.
"...US wouldn't be INTENTIONALLY targeting civilians ...."
that's a convienient excuse that can blow up in our faces.
because YOU KNOW that there have been cases that CIA HAS targetted civilians, in secret, one way or another.
Heck, they have even targetted US citizens in the past.
the problem with that argument fiddlefaddleonlsd , is what will we say if they find one case of our troops targetting civilians (haditha for example), what excuse can we put up?
Would it be okay if Afganis, objecting to taking one of their soldiers in Guantanimo, start blowing up US cities, and level the white house in order get him released?
by LCD on Fri Jul 07, 06 12:49pm
[+]
One of the first saying I ever heard in relation to the Mafia was "We do not make war on women and children." 'Nuff said.
LCD do you know for certain that the marines targeted civilians in Haditha?Your make these accusations and the men have not even had a trial yet.The last time I checked it's innocent until gulity in America.
Well I can see where if they would not release through negotiation than maybe if you had to storm the place and whatever happens, happens. But to just target an area not knowing if they support the guy or not then that is where it gets sketchy.
But I would agree with corrupt if they have shown that they do support him whole-heartedly then I would say bombs away.
But again only as a last resort.
You should use force as a last result, but unfortunately terrorists usually will not negotiate with anyone they just want what they want.
Fiddle:
And I think it is repulsive that a government would kill innocent people, who are not directly involved in a hostage-taking, as a way of extorting the release of an individual from another military group. And what's the limit? 10, 20, 100, 1,000 innocent civilians? Does the government just keep blowing up innocent men, women, and children as long as it takes? So it's okay for a "Western nation" to slaugher innocents but it's bad for a military group to refuse to release a hostage because the "Western nation" has said it will keep killing the innocents until they do?
Amazing.
...but hey they aren't real people, they're just a bunch of ragheads and are so expendable.
^typical leftist racisim
|
|
