Palestinian Strikes Blow for Freedom Against Israel

mysteryman, bullies always cry when they get slapped back. The Israeli war merchants are still wondering what took so long for this attack. But they finally achieved their objective after 9 long months.

mysteryman, you use hysterics like bullies do. All those who refuse to admit Israeli atrocities and persecution of Palestinians are the root of their problem and contribute to the violence. As Jimmy Carter had the guts to say, "Peace will come to Israel and the Middle East only when the Israeli government is willing to comply with international law." He should also have pointed America's violations of international law also. Attacks like the one on the bakery play into the schemes of Israeli/American war merchants and if nobody attacked they would stage an attack and make it look like the "enemy" did it. They never had a problem with staging false flag attacks. Remember the Gulf of Tonkin? The Liberty?

...All those who refuse to admit Israeli atrocities and persecution of Palestinians are the root of their problem and contribute to the violence...

blueflame1 wrote:

...All those who refuse to admit Israeli atrocities and persecution of Palestinians are the root of their problem and contribute to the violence...

Even if this were true, and it's not, how does that justify an attack in which non-combatants are killed, not by accident, but as the primary, intended targets?

Brandon,

The fact that you are posting this is silly.

As a liberal, my position is that violence is rarely justified and that violence that violates international law is never justified. I also understand that this type of brutal violence that hurts civilians is counterproductive even to the alledged cause of the people who support violence.

You seem to think that violence is jusitified if you hate your enemy sufficiently. You are willing to support violent acts that break international law. You believe also believe that violent acts are an effective way to reach your goals.

Why are you confusing my position with yours. I am the one who opposes violence. Period.

Brandon, I never said this attack justifies anything. But I have said this attack is what Israeli war merchants want and if it hadn't happened they are capable of staging an Operation Northwoods style attack and blaming it on their enemies. Those who killed Rabin and rejoiced at his death have proven themselves capable of much worse if it helps them acheive their imperialist goals. Those who ignore American and Israeli atrocities are certainly not part of the solution. They are the ones who justify mass murder whether in Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza or some bakery in Israel. Israel probably would't commit so many war crimes if the Palestinians possessed Apache helicopters and fighter planes and bombs and nukes.

What I have said here, and what I do believe is that violence that targets non-combatants as the intended target is unethical. That is the only statement I have made in this thread.

Brandon9000 wrote:

What I have said here, and what I do believe is that violence that targets non-combatants as the intended target is unethical. That is the only statement I have made in this thread.

I agree with you that violence that targets non-combatants as the intended target is unethical.

The problem I have with your position is that you find violence that willingly accepts the deaths of non-combatants as "collateral damage" completely ethical and acceptable.

old europe wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:

What I have said here, and what I do believe is that violence that targets non-combatants as the intended target is unethical. That is the only statement I have made in this thread.

I agree with you that violence that targets non-combatants as the intended target is unethical.

The problem I have with your position is that you find violence that willingly accepts the deaths of non-combatants as "collateral damage" completely ethical and acceptable.

I find it equally shocking that you, or someone like you, would try to bring up that same old **** every time a thread like this comes up. What is wrong with discussing the violence of Palestinian terrorists without getting into the bed-wetting whining about how evil Israel is and how they bring it on themselves.

I doubt the people killed in that bakery had much to do with any crime against against any Palestinian... well, unless you count being a Jew as a crime.

What I object to is the idea that unethical violence by ones enemies justifies violence that willingly accepts the deaths of non-cambatants.

It seems to me that the conservatives on one side use the abuses of the conservatives on the other side to justify their own abuses.

It seems to me that limiting violence and opposing abuses by either side is the only ethical stance. Evil does not justify evil.

ebrown_p wrote:

What I object to is the idea that unethical violence by ones enemies justifies violence that willingly accepts the deaths of non-cambatants.

It seems to me that the conservatives on one side use the abuses of the conservatives on the other side to justify their own abuses.

It seems to me that limiting violence and opposing abuses by either side is the only ethical stance. Evil does not justify evil.

It seems to me that there is a difference between aiming at a military target and trying hard not to hurt non-combatants on the one hand, and deliberately aiming at civilians on the other. I feel sorry for anyone who can't see the moral distinction, or who believes that it's of no consequence.

It seems to me that there is a difference between aiming at a military target and trying hard not to hurt non-combatants on the one hand, and deliberately aiming at civilians on the other. I feel sorry for anyone who can't see the moral distinction, or who believes that it's of no consequence.