LogFAQs > #979134873

Devil_May_Cry posted...

Should Americans be crucified for what bush did after 9-11?

adjl posted...

I (and pretty much everyone else speaking on the matter) have made it pretty clear that when I say "Israel" in this context, I'm speaking of the country in terms of its government and actions on a national scale.

Again with the "not all Israelis" strawman. Being critical of the government and military does not mean "crucifying" Israeli citizens who are in no way responsible for the actions of the government and military.

As outlined in a previous post, the comparison to America's actions post-9/11 also doesn't particularly favour Israel. America killed orders of magnitude fewer civilians per unit of time and had significantly more enemy combatant kills to show for it, following an attack that killed more American civilians in a matter of hours than Hamas has killed Israeli citizens since the country came into existence. And America has been thoroughly criticized for the amount of collateral damage they caused, and in recognition of that damage they put ample resources into providing humanitarian aid and helping to rebuild damaged infrastructure. That's a far cry from insisting that there's nothing wrong with massacring civilians by the tens of thousands in search of a handful of alleged terrorists and destroying critical infrastructure without a hint of remorse or accountability, then turning around and begging the rest of the world for their allowance so they can afford to keep doing so.

Devil_May_Cry posted...

We all make mistakes is what I should have said.

Speak for yourself. I personally have never shot a thousand starving homeless people as they lined up to get food after I bombed their homes, jobs, fields, and medical facilities to ash, so I'm afraid I can't really sympathize with that particular brand of "mistake." Nor do I have any intention of doing so.

Collateral damage in the heat of battle is bad, but understandable and potentially justifiable. Mass murder in a non-combat situation that just wasn't calm enough for your liking? That's just plain old mass murder. Heck, even if it were just collateral damage, if it's even possible to accidentally shoot a thousand innocent civilians that possibility alone is reason not to engage because whatever you might accomplish with the assault does not justify collateral damage on that scale.