Quote:
Originally Posted by Sean
If missiles were constantly dropping randomly in my neighborhood, I'd want to see some action taken to stop it too.
|
what action? Seriously, I'm not trying to be argumentative. I'm just curious what has been proposed as an alternative by those who don't focus on the injust asymmetry of the response?
Because the problem we're having as critics is the lack of any alternative proposed. It seems that justification to defend oneself == open season on palestinians. There's no line drawn. Whatever Israel does, including using depleted uranium shells and phosphorus, is justified carte blanche.
I think pretty much all of us, maybe not myrrh, on this pig pile have couched their dissent in a stand point of what is best for *israel* so I'm pretty much going to wave off any argument that being a critic of this barbarism is biased against israel.
Also, I understand that wars are justified, and I actually do believe that if any nation state is categorically denied action to defend itself because of possible civilian casualties on the other side, then those nation states are in real mortal danger.
So i'm pretty much going to wave off any argument that being a critic of this barbarism is misguided, hypocritical hippy daisy chaining.
here's where the problem is.
Quote:
|
Dr. Mads Gilbert: "The statistics are clear. Among the 2,400-2,500 injured, 45 percent are women and children. And then there are also all the civilian men. So the large majority of the injured, the victims, are women, men and children civilian. Among the the killed, 25 percent of the killed are children and women, and among the children, today, it was—this morning, it was 801 children either killed or injured. 101 children had been killed.”
|
45% isn't a defense. its a slaughter.