Skip to comments.
BLAST AT CITY TUBE STATION - FOUR BOMB EXPLOSIONS AROUND LONDON
Sky News ^
| July 7, 2005
Posted on 07/07/2005 1:45:13 AM PDT by RWR8189
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,021-4,040, 4,041-4,060, 4,061-4,080, 4,081-4,089 last
To: RWR8189
I am hopeful that we have heard the last of that "flypaper strategy" bullshit. If this attack doesn't bring home the fact that the terrorists are not "pinned down" in Iraq nothing will.
Unfortunately I suspect that some people (including some of King George's folks) will be very eager to pin this on one of the countries on the Wargasm Party's hit list. I hope I am wrong about that.
To: Gunrunner2
Not that I disagree with you, but when we dropped the two Atomic bombs on Japan weren't there innocent people in those two city's?
4,082
posted on
07/12/2005 3:24:09 AM PDT
by
stockpirate
(We can fight the Muslum Army in Iraq! Or we can fight them outback! Which do you prefer?)
To: stockpirate
There were. . .but the action was justified under the concept of "just war."
Just war permits this because of the rule of "proportionality."
This means the attack on Japan was allowed because the expected military gain was worth the expected civilian loss. Terror attacks aim to murder the innocent, not achieve a military gain. Terrorists intent to to harm the innocent, as that is their goal, whereas the attack on Japan had a military objective that was deemed to be proportionate when balanced against the expected civilian loss. It was not an attack with an evil aim, as is a terror attack.
Because it was anticipated that we would experience close to one million casualties if we invaded Japan, then the dropping of the bomb was justified. Just War by Tucker, Just and Unjust War by Walzer are excellent reads on the subject. Also, Just War Against Terror by Jean Bethke-Elshtain is timely and informative.
To: Gunrunner2
Thanks.
But objective is very subjective!
The Muslum Army could just say that the way to stop the government and military of that government is to get the "TAXPAYERS", to put pressure on their leaders.
For the taxpayers to be the target removes the far-awayness concept of a war. So it becomes more of a point of safety to them because they are on the frontline.
So, the choice of target is military because it could result in England, "Doing a Spain".
4,084
posted on
07/12/2005 4:06:38 AM PDT
by
stockpirate
(We can fight the Muslum Army in Iraq! Or we can fight them outback! Which do you prefer?)
To: stockpirate
Everthing is subjective except for hard science, and even then there are exceptions.
The difference is the "intent" of the act.
If the intent is just and proportional then the act is acceptable (however tragic).
If, like mooslime terrorist attacks, the intent is clearly aimed at causing the innocent to suffer with not proportional military gain, then it is an evil act.
Attacking people to put pressure on a government is evil, as this violates the concept of "Strategic Devastation." Strategic Devastation is indiscriminate and without purpose except to cause pain on the innocent. . .again, with no proportional military gain.
Attacking people through terror attacks is evil because it has no aim other than to cause the suffering of the innocent.
Complicated stuff and that is why the military has JAG's at all levels. . .to help the commander make the difficult moral judgment calls.
To: Gunrunner2
Well Gunrunner2 it isn't that I was disagreeing with you , it was just that you seemed to know things I didn't.
So thanks, check out my about me page about Kerry and the VVAW and FBI files.
SP
4,086
posted on
07/12/2005 1:40:15 PM PDT
by
stockpirate
(We can fight the Muslim Army in Iraq! Or we can fight them outback! Which do you prefer?)
To: stockpirate
Didn't mean to come off abrupt. Recovering from minor surgery today and on meds.
Interesting subject, rules of war.
Always pleased to provide what little I know.
Will check out the pages.
To: Gunrunner2
you wee not abrupt at all, I was never in the service and like to take a position that gets more information out in the open. I am sure the books you recommend are great reads on the topics, but I am up to my eyeballs in alligators and they are draining the swamp. My wife does work in airline/airport/homeland security and I have actually done some engineering work in explosive detection systems for a company selling systems to the FAA.
But as you said it is subjective, but the point is our goal is not to target anyone buthe bad guys.
So that we don't profile I think we should now go out and look into the people at the Baptist churches in case they have people there planning on bombing any of our trains or subways, you can never tell about those Baptists, heck in tht case the Budists too...lol
4,088
posted on
07/12/2005 3:06:13 PM PDT
by
stockpirate
(We can fight the Muslim Army in Iraq! Or we can fight them outback! Which do you prefer?)
To: stockpirate
And don't forget the Amish.
;-/
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 4,021-4,040, 4,041-4,060, 4,061-4,080, 4,081-4,089 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson