Spencer278
Diamond Member
- Oct 11, 2002
- 3,637
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: miguel
Originally posted by: Spencer278
Originally posted by: miguel
Originally posted by: Spencer278
Originally posted by: miguel
Originally posted by: Spencer278
If israel doesn't want thier civilians target maybe they should stop using "civilians" to occupy their stolen land.
Interesting argument. That holds that if terrorists are hiding in a school building full of children, the US can fire a cruise missle into that building and it would have your thumbs up?
No but they should raid the school and kill the terrorist that are occupying the school. How does that relate to the problem in isreal?
You wrote that israel should stop using civilians to occupy stolen land. By using them, they become valid targets.
So are you implying that terrorists in schools are not valid targets? So in your example the terrorist are the settlers and the school/childern are the people displaced by the settlers then who the heck is the US and which side are they on?
Or where you just trying to get a save the childern and terroist in the same post.
OK, let me try that again. I admit it wasn't very clear. Terrorists in schools are valid targets. The children are not. You suggested that civilians are valid targets because they set up a settlement in somebody else's land. I'm challenging your notion that civilians are valid targets because of that. I used the school building example (probably not the best example, come to think of it) to try and show that the civilians are NEVER valid targets, regardless of the result.
Correct the wanted result does not effect if a target is valid it is the actions of the targets that determine if it is a valid. Civilians have always been valid targets in war if the Civilians have been part of the war effort, maily manufactoring, food, and house of troops. The settlers are simple occupying land for their goverment and I think the either get the land/house for cheap or free.