1147
Push the button
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Jan 2024
1147 points (98.2% liked)
Political Memes
4587 readers
3333 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
By that logic if we drone strike a school shooter, the children who die in the drone strike are not intended targets. It's actually the fault of the school shooter, not the state, that those children died in a drone strike. And that would be incredibly ridiculous, of course it's the state at fault for killing those children. They did the drone strike.
What are you talking about? I'm sure analogy sounded good in your head, but it only indicates you understand nothing about a military operation.
In a civilian context you don't need to first invade a country so you can have boots on the ground so you can send someone into the school. Invading a country will result in a huge number of civilian casualties before you can send soldiers into that school to take out the target. Is that what you want?
There is basically no probability that you're sending soldiers into an ambush, there's no probability that the school is rigged to explode as soon as the soldier opens the door when it's a school shooting.
It's actually more the opposite. Terrorists have been known to blow up schools do you understand that? So if you have just one opportunity to take out that terrorist and you don't do it, and next week that same terrorist blows up a school and 50 children die, did you make the right decision?
These kinds of scenarios are a constant trolley cart problem. No matter what you do, civilians are going to die. You're just ignorantly calling the guy operating the track switch of genocide triggers the switch and you also accuse him of genocide if he doesn't trigger the switch, you're just someone accusing everyone of genocide constantly which means that word doesn't mean anything anymore. That only benefits the people that actually commit genocide.
True, terrorists have been known to blow up schools. Hundreds of them in fact
Yes and terrorist also fire rockets from schools too. Hundreds of them in fact.
How many children does that justify the IDF killing? Because it's over 10,000 now.
It's pretty wild that we are at a point in which we can say with all seriousness "how many children does that justify the IDF killing?" Like, it's clear that people who approve of what Israel is doing are okay with some number that is above zero, and we have to ask a question like that to understand where the "too far" line could possibly be. And any refusal to answer that question is an implicit blank check. I think I could've forgiven up to maybe a dozen if they had been careful and not signaled clearly that genocide was their intent. We're way past that though, hoping that the answer to your question is some number less than "all of them" and it's really fucking sad.