Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Friday, August 01, 2014

OT: Politics, August 2014: DNC criticizes Christie’s economic record with baseball video

As Gov. Chris Christie prepares to cap off his trip to New Hampshire tonight with a fundraiser at a minor-league baseball game, the Democratic National Committee has released a online video taking a swing at the Republican governor’s handling of New Jersey’s economy.

The clip is modeled after an old-time newsreel — the kind that would have been shown in movie houses when Babe Ruth ruled the baseball diamond in the 1920s.

It notes that under Christie — a possible candidate for the Republican nomination for president in 2016 — New Jersey has among the highest property taxes and slowest job growth in the U.S.

“On his economic record, Chris Christie strikes out,” the video’s narrator says.

Bitter Mouse Posted: August 01, 2014 at 09:10 AM | 6359 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: new jersey, politics, video

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 16 of 64 pages ‹ First  < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 >  Last ›
   1501. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:36 PM (#4766556)
Plus as as been noted ISIS/Islamic State is evil, hell they are almost cartoonishly evil, Bond villains have nothing on them, if you had written a script 15 years ago which described a terrorist/insurgency the way ISIS actually is... it would have been deemed either a parody or an over the top bigoted anti-Arab screed.

Remember True Lies?

HARRY: Abu Kaleem Malik.
GIB: Hardcore, highly fanatical, ultra- fundamentalist. Linked to numerous car-bombings, that cafe bomb in Rome, and the 727 out of Lisbon last year. Major player.

FAISIL: Now he's formed his own splinter faction called CRIMSON JIHAD.

GIB: Guess he thought the other terrorist groups were too warm and fuzzy for his taste.


That's ISIS and its leader Baghdadi, Al Qaeda was too warm and fuzzy for him...


Yes, if the U.S. can't summon an international consensus around crushing ISIS, we are too pathetic for words.
   1502. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4766557)
Except there is the proportional response part of the equation*. Or put another way, too many civilians relative to what? Well the obvious answer is relative to the number of Israeli civilians we are retaliating over. Hence the ratio.
What you call "the obvious answer" is simply not right, though. Neither the agreed-upon rules of war nor just war theory allow 'retaliation' in the way you describe. It's not "They killed one [or two] of our civilians, so we're allowed to kill one [or two] of theirs." (Or some multiple of the number of deaths, just for interest, or anything like that.) To be justified, the enemy deaths (the expected deaths, that is; countries are not required to be omniscient) must be proportionate to the military objective.
   1503. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:38 PM (#4766558)
Plus as as been noted ISIS/Islamic State is evil, hell they are almost cartoonishly evil, Bond villains have nothing on them, if you had written a script 15 years ago which described a terrorist/insurgency the way ISIS actually is... it would have been deemed either a parody or an over the top bigoted anti-Arab screed.


This is very true. They are clearly awful. What can we do, what should we do, in the context of everything is a challenging question. And for us civilians, without access to full diplomatic and military briefings, really we are just guessing and hoping.
   1504. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:39 PM (#4766559)
And no one has suggested avoiding all civilian casualties (it would be nice, but not realistic). However all of the numbers (rate and counting stats) paint a picture of an Israeli military that either doesn't care, is sending a deliberate message or is incompetent.

Which do you think it is?


How do you judge that?

Israel is involved in house-to-house, street-to-street fighting with an enemy that disregards civilian casualties, and refuses to let the civilians evacuate.

How do you know the Israelis aren't doing their best, consistent with protecting their troops, to limit civilian deaths?

If you're saying they should accept far more casualties among their troops to protect civilians (e.g. eschew covering artillery and mortar fire), you're just being unreasonable.
   1505. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:39 PM (#4766560)
However all of the numbers (rate and counting stats) paint a picture of an Israeli military that either doesn't care, is sending a deliberate message or is incompetent.

Which do you think it is?

Now who's "assuming the worst"?

Regardless, "sending messages" is often how wars are won.
   1506. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:40 PM (#4766561)
As a public service, here's a complete list of the things America does that doesn't "radicalize Islamists against the United States":


I laughed.

Seriously, though the research shows that the problems with terrorism comes from people who come back to their homes after fighting in a region. If we end the conflict and scatter the ISIS peeps, we make terrorism more likely because they're no longer working to create a state.
   1507. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:40 PM (#4766562)
How ineffective must a "threat" be in order to be downgraded from a "threat?"

So ineffective that it's not a threat anymore. If Hamas was shooting bb's from the launchers, that wouldn't be a threat. Modern missles? Pretty much speaks for itself.
   1508. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:40 PM (#4766563)
This is very true. They are clearly awful. What can we do, what should we do, in the context of everything is a challenging question.

Kill them. Kill them everywhere you find them.

If we end the conflict and scatter the ISIS peeps, we make terrorism more likely because they're no longer working to create a state.

Don't scatter them. Kill them.

They're attempting genocide. This isn't a hard moral choice.
   1509. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:41 PM (#4766564)
How do you know the Israelis aren't doing their best, consistent with protecting their troops, to limit civilian deaths?


Because they're using mortars close to UN refugee stations.

I mean, there's your obvious answer.
   1510. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:41 PM (#4766565)
Or put another way, too many civilians relative to what? Well the obvious answer is relative to the number of Israeli civilians we are retaliating over. Hence the ratio.

Israel isn't "retaliating" over the civilian deaths. They're engaging in a military operation.
   1511. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:42 PM (#4766568)
It's not "They killed one [or two] of our civilians, so we're allowed to kill one [or two] of theirs."


I never said it was exactly that. However one can infer some things about the total state of the numbers.

And more to the point I want to go back to the fact that even if you think there are two equally likely options (the writer wants fewer Palestinian deaths or the writer wants more Jewish deaths) - and honestly there is no way you think that it is equally likely for anyone on this board, I mean seriously - it is still telling that some folks immediately jumped to the option that was the absolute worst, most horrible option and pretended that was 100% the position being presented.
   1512. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:42 PM (#4766569)
And no one has suggested avoiding all civilian casualties (it would be nice, but not realistic). However all of the numbers (rate and counting stats) paint a picture of an Israeli military that either doesn't care, is sending a deliberate message or is incompetent.

Which do you think it is?
I think that the picture is being painted of the people saying those things, not the Israeli military. I think that if Israel "either doesn't care, is sending a deliberate message or is incompetent," there would be an extra zero or two on the end of the casualty figure. (To provide an illustration, the civilian death rate in Grozny during just one of the Russian assaults was about 100x that of the civilian death rate in Gaza.)
   1513. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:43 PM (#4766570)
What can we do, what should we do, in the context of everything is a challenging question.

Not really. In the early goings, they were lined up like sitting ducks in convoys the U.S. easily could have taken out.
   1514. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:44 PM (#4766571)
Because they're using mortars close to UN refugee stations.

I mean, there's your obvious answer.


And, if you read my earlier post, mortars are a completely legitimate weapon if you're engaged in urban close combat.

If your platoon is taking casualties from a machine gun, and mortar fire is the quickest way to stop it, you use it. You don't wait around for 15 minutes to scramble an aircraft with precision weapons.
   1515. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:45 PM (#4766573)
Anyway, for parents not obsessed with the Ivies, here's a much better ranking system that's already around.

Whatever that "unskewed" rating is, "better" doesn't seem like the obvious choice. Ranking social mobility & service (Peace Corps & ROTC) rather than academics may appeal to some, but it's a very quirky result that has little to do with the quality of the institutions.
   1516. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:46 PM (#4766574)
So ineffective that it's not a threat anymore. If Hamas was shooting bb's from the launchers, that wouldn't be a threat. Modern missles? Pretty much speaks for itself.
Exactly. There is a huge difference between an assault that isn't capable of being lethal vs. an assault that just isn't very good. If a child comes up to you and starts whacking you with a nerf baseball bat, that's in the former category; it just can't hurt you. If a clumsy adult comes up to you and starts swinging violently at you with a real baseball bat, that's in the latter category; maybe he misses you most of the time because you duck or he's a klutz, but there's still the potential for you to be killed. You can laugh off the former; you can't laugh off the latter.
   1517. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:46 PM (#4766575)
Not really. In the early goings, they were lined up like sitting ducks in convoys the U.S. easily could have taken out.

This. A half dozen attack helicopters could have slaughtered them.

It's wide open country. On the offensive, they were ridiculously vulnerable, and we did nothing.
   1518. The Good Face Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:46 PM (#4766576)
I suspect that you and David will hang onto the technical semantics of a "ratio" vs a "numerator" until the sun explodes, and it's pointless to try to actually reason with you here, but this is obviously bullshit and pretty much everyone with a vague aura of common sense understands as much.


Stop using logic and reason and defined terms against Sam, it's making his head hurt. You see, when he talks about ratios, he doesn't really MEAN ratios, you're just being obtuse thinking crazy stuff like that. Can't you all just agree with him that everything is the fault of the perfidious, covetous Joooos?
   1519. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:48 PM (#4766580)
It's wide open country. On the offensive, they were ridiculously vulnerable, and we did nothing.

That's some of the most open territory on Earth. They could have been (and should have been) annihilated.
   1520. Lassus Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:49 PM (#4766581)
Signed, the non-annoying people

Forgery is a crime, Ray.
   1521. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:51 PM (#4766582)
Israel isn't "retaliating" over the civilian deaths. They're engaging in a military operation.


A random, out of no where, "hey this had no cause at all it just now occurred to us that maybe we should deal with these tunnels right now with a major military operation" sort of thing. Hey you are right, that happens all the time and no one pays any attention to the number of civilian deaths caused ever, except in Israel.

Now who's "assuming the worst"?

Regardless, "sending messages" is how wars are won.


Well if you don't like my three choices add some. snapper thinks they are doing their best, but I have a much higher opinion of the Israeli army vis-a-vis Hamas than that.

Personally I think they are either sending a message or at this point just don't care. On some level I get the response,living in a constant state of low level war is terrible. However that does not make any level of civilian deaths either side chooses to inflict OK. it just doesn't.

And no sending messages is not how wars are won.

The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.

Sun Tzu


Essentially you win by changing the minds of the other side. Fighting,messages, killing are all part of it, but unless you are willing to engage in genocide the ultimate goal is to change their "hearts and minds."
   1522. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:51 PM (#4766583)
Israel "controls" that only to the extent it doesn't fight back at all. It can't do that and avoid all civilian casualties.


No one has suggested that the only acceptable number of civilian Gazan deaths was 0.
   1523. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:52 PM (#4766584)
Well I suppose it depends on what threat you're talking about.

A threat to the existence or territory of a state?
or a threat to the lives of its people?


It's an open, honest question, not an attempt at a gotcha.
   1524. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:54 PM (#4766586)
ISIS is ethnically-cleansing (or worse) the Christians and Yazidis from the Nineveh region, and no one seems to give a ####. The death toll is almost certainly already multiples of that in Gaza, but Hamas gets more sympathy (or maybe people just like bashing the Jews).

Obama is considering the options. Still. What do you want, leadership?
   1525. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 03:54 PM (#4766587)
snapper thinks they are doing their best

I'm not sure. I'm not there.

But, I'd guess they want to limit civilian deaths if only purely cynically, to avoid international opinion turning against them.
   1526. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:00 PM (#4766588)
Rockets with sufficient range to hit all your major urban areas, that your enemy routinely launches, isn't a "threat"?


A military threat? No, they'd need far more and with better targeting. Hamas' rockets are a political/terror threat. Militarily they're almost useless, especially the way Hamas deploys them.

To go back in time, WWII, Germany tossed nearly 10,000 V-1s at London, some 2,000 V-2s- That sheer number of rockets could have had a valuable military use- with better accuracy and a volume of fire directed at a military target. Firing them off at London? The only military value for Germany was that it made UK expend resources to counter the missiles... guess what Germany expended far more of a % of its military resources to launch those missiles than UK did to defend. The V-1/V-2 programs were not useless militarily, they were a net military negative to Germany.

Hamas' rockets are "cheaper" than Germany's WWII ones- but tactically even less effective, they fire fewer with (amazingly if you think about it) even less accuracy. On the other hand Israel spends a ton on defending from them, an Iron Dome interceptor costs far far more than a dozen Hamas rockets- so one purpose of the rockets attacks is to bleed Israel financially- but that's a minor goal to Hamas (it may not even be a goal at all, just a beneficial side effect)- the goal is/was to keep poking at Israel until Israel responded militarily-

because Hamas is essentially an authoritarian militaristic government - and there's nothing such governments like more than a foreign military threat to rally the populace behind the flag - which in the minds of authoritarian militaristic government is the same thing as having the populace line up behind them.

It doesn't always work of course, when Argentina's Junta poked at the UK in the early 80s, the Junta lost all benefit of the rally round the flag effect when it prosecuted the war it provoked so badly.

Here I think it's clear that both Hamas' leaders and Netanyhu were looking for an excuse to begin poking the other, but I'm not sure either wanted to go full tilt quite yet- Hamas in particular seems to have been caught unready- the infrastructure for their war plans had not been completed yet- if the had we would have seen far more, and far more deadly tunnel excursions into Israel proper- but alas for them when tensions mounted they couldn't seem to restrain themselves from firing off rockets.

   1527. GregD Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:00 PM (#4766589)
   1528. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:01 PM (#4766590)
And, if you read my earlier post, mortars are a completely legitimate weapon if you're engaged in urban close combat.

If your platoon is taking casualties from a machine gun, and mortar fire is the quickest way to stop it, you use it. You don't wait around for 15 minutes to scramble an aircraft with precision weapons.


Look, the argument is that Israel doesn't care enough about minimizing Palestinian civilian casualties. So taking the quickest way to stop machine gun fire is unacceptable if it results in the possibility of mass civilian casualties.
   1529. Johnny Sycophant-Laden Fora Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:05 PM (#4766591)
They are clearly awful. What can we do, what should we do, in the context of everything is a challenging question.


It looks to me (sitting thousands of miles away) that at the top of the less bad and feasible options is to arm the Kurds, they can fight and unlike the Iraqi Government Army are willing to fight, but they need heavy weaponry, anti-tank weapons, APCs, etc.

We should also re-establish some drone/predator operations, set up such ops both near Baghdad and Arbil.
   1530. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4766593)
Rocket fire is obviously horrific and difficult, but hardly a real military tactic that amounts to a "threat."

Rather hypocritical for Vigilante Sam, who reserves the right to take extralegal actions if those close to him are harmed or threatened, to suggest that Israel is denied the right of self-defense because it is being attacked by less than state-of-the-art rockets. Of course, Israel's defensive weaponry was a major reason why the rockets weren't as effective as they otherwise would have been.
   1531. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:06 PM (#4766594)
Obama is considering the options. Still. What do you want, leadership?


Especially compared to the previous President, considering options is an important part of leadership. You know to avoid invading countries semi-randomly and getting bogged down in a war costing trillions and killing many thousands.
   1532. The Good Face Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:07 PM (#4766595)
Look, the argument is that Israel doesn't care enough about minimizing Palestinian civilian casualties. So taking the quickest way to stop machine gun fire is unacceptable if it results in the possibility of mass civilian casualties.


So apparently your problem IS that there aren't enough Israeli casualties after all.
   1533. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:08 PM (#4766596)
Rather hypocritical for Vigilante Sam, who reserves the right to take extralegal actions if those close to him are harmed or threatened, to suggest that Israel is denied the right of self-defense because it is being attacked by less than state-of-the-art rockets.


For me I would rather a Democratically run country and ally to the US which also has a Nuclear arsenal be held to a higher standard than "guy on the internet" is held to. Maybe that is just me.
   1534. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:17 PM (#4766601)
Obama Met With National Security Council today, plans decision imminently . . .

Nothing says "leadership" like immediately leaking that you had a meeting to the New York Times.
   1535. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:27 PM (#4766604)
Nothing says "leadership" like immediately leaking that you had a meeting to the New York Times.


Will that DEVIL stop at nothing!?
   1536. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:28 PM (#4766605)
Update on dead man walking - Walsh Quits Senate Race:
Sen. John Walsh said Thursday he is pulling out of the Senate race because his campaign was distracted by the controversy over allegations that he plagiarized a U.S. Army War College research paper.

Montana looks to be a GOP pick-up. The silver lining for Democrats is that they can redirect some money to more winnable races, but money isn't really their problem.
   1537. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:36 PM (#4766607)
Walsh Quits Senate Race


Thanks Obama!
   1538. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:46 PM (#4766612)
Walsh Quits Senate Race


Thanks Obama!


Maybe the media will finally provide more than token coverage of this story now.

Not likely.
   1539. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:51 PM (#4766613)
Looks like they may have finally nabbed Smitty: Man Armed With Leaf Blower Arrested For Doing Yard Work In The Nude:
A Massachusetts homeowner was arrested Monday for “open and gross lewdness” after passing motorists spotted him--leaf blower in hand--doing yard work in the nude, according to cops. As Richard Capra, 69, worked on the curb appeal of his Shrewsbury home, “several vehicles were slowing down taking photographs,” according to the Shrewsbury Police Department.

Further evidence of "the decline".
   1540. Rickey! trades in sheep and threats Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:54 PM (#4766615)
Rather hypocritical for Vigilante Sam, who reserves the right to take extralegal actions if those close to him are harmed or threatened


This is, admittedly, an novel gambit. I'll give you credit for creativity. I do reserve the right to do whatever needs doing, extrajudicially if necessary, for my family. I in no way would expect the state, or other actors, to rationalize why my behavior was anything other than what it was. And of course, the case you're referring to is the Zimmerman example, at which point the casualties of my actions would be 1. The guy that murdered my son. It's not like I'd blow up a night club he was at and say the 30 extra dead were justifiable.

EDIT: I will leave this to you kids. I have important matters to attend to. Softball lineups need to be made. Dead foreigners will have to wait.
   1541. Greg K Posted: August 07, 2014 at 04:58 PM (#4766616)
Looks like they may have finally nabbed Smitty: Man Armed With Leaf Blower Arrested For Doing Yard Work In The Nude:

Assuming it was a pull cord starter, this could not be a more clear violation of the principles of Good-Naked/Bad-Naked.

EDIT: Though I suppose one of the main principles of that school of thought is that all male naked is Bad-Naked.
   1542. spike Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:00 PM (#4766618)
   1543. Greg K Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:05 PM (#4766623)
Leader of one of the world's largest food importing countries, checkmates free world by banning food imports from the EU and America.

Interesting picture in that second article. Are those Russians lined up to eat that cat? Or is the cat guarding the store? Or is the implication that the cat has eaten all the food, heartlessly leaving Russian children to starve?

Either way that cat looks awfully smug.
   1544. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:10 PM (#4766625)
For Andy, to get his glaucoma-fueled blind rage going before his pool match tonight:

NBC White House Correspondent Chris Jansing was discussing the recent U.S.-African Leaders Summit on MSNBC's "The Reid Report," when she casually mentioned that Obama being from Africa should have helped relations between the U.S. and African nations.

"Yeah, the fact that he's from Kenya, and that fact that when he was elected there were expectations from the African continent that he would do great things for them," Jansing said Tuesday.

Read more at http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/tv-anchor-accidentally-claims-obama-born-kenya-article-1.1895771?cid=radiumOne#EiBPKq46VZjQMquw.99
   1545. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:11 PM (#4766626)
The presence of the finicky cat means that Putin is a cruel dictator like Mao, Mao, Mao, Mao; Mao, Mao, Mao, Mao; Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao.
   1546. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:14 PM (#4766628)
Look, the argument is that Israel doesn't care enough about minimizing Palestinian civilian casualties. So taking the quickest way to stop machine gun fire is unacceptable if it results in the possibility of mass civilian casualties.

It can't be unacceptable. You can't ask soldiers to go in harm's way, and deny them perfectly ordinary military tools to protect themselves.

This isn't carpet bombing a city block to kill a sniper. Targeted mortar fire is highly unlikely to cause civilian casualties. Certain less likely than artillery or aerial bombs. One errant shell doesn't change that.
   1547. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:17 PM (#4766630)
And no sending messages is not how wars are won.

Sure it is. In different ways, the U.S. sent a message in Japan and Germany, and it was received loud and clear. So-called "surgical warfare" is and almost always will be a loser, especially when fighting in places where the civilians generally support the forces being targeted "surgically."

The "hearts and minds" business might be a consideration before hostilities start or after hostilities end, but it's all but irrelevant during hostilities.
   1548. spike Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:22 PM (#4766636)
Targeted mortar fire is highly unlikely to cause civilian casualties.

Holy cow. It's the AC130 all over again. The IDF uses 120mm mortar shells with "thousands of shards" and is designed for use against hidden terror cells in buildings or armored vehicles. It causes a lot of mayhem of incredible penetrating power - exactly the sort of thing that ,maximizes civilian casualties, not that I'm going to engage on the morality of the conflict.
   1549. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:44 PM (#4766642)
Update on dead man walking - Walsh Quits Senate Race:


Good. Plagiarism is shitty, and he didn't deserve to win, even if he was from Team Blue.
   1550. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:47 PM (#4766645)
Good, even if he was from Team Blue. He didn't deserve to win, because plagiarism is shitty.
   1551. GregD Posted: August 07, 2014 at 05:48 PM (#4766646)
I don't think Montana ever looked good for the Dems, but clearly they handled it in about the dumbest way possible, clearing the field for a guy who imploded. And clearly he had to go.
   1552. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:00 PM (#4766654)
Great! John Walsh, the junior United States Senator from Montana, serving since February 9, 2014.[5][6], who is a Democrat and a former Lieutenant Governor of Montana from 2013 to 2014.[7]

Some say [who?] he committed plagarism, which is shitty, and he didn't deserve to win.
   1553. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:01 PM (#4766655)
And clearly he had to go.

Well, it seems clear he was toast in this particular election, but if Biden's plagiarism didn't disqualify him from office, I don't see why Walsh's did. Frankly, Walsh had better excuses than Biden did.
   1554. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:16 PM (#4766664)
If Biden's plagiarism didn't disqualify him from office, I don't see why Walsh's did. Frankly, Walsh had better excuses than Biden did.

We still reward hard work in this country. Biden had to hand-copy six pages of a law review article into his paper, since he went to law school long before personal computers were available. Walsh had it much easier, merely cutting and pasting others work into his 14-page "thesis". Of course, the hand-copying would seem to undermine Biden's defense that he just was unfamiliar with the rules of citation, but give the man credit for invoking the Costanza Defense before even George.
   1555. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:25 PM (#4766669)
The presence of the finicky cat means that Putin is a cruel dictator like Mao, Mao, Mao, Mao; Mao, Mao, Mao, Mao; Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao Mao.


Indeed.
   1556. Greg K Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:30 PM (#4766673)
On the subject of plagiarism:

In Cemetary Gates Morrissey pronounces the word oddly to my ear.

You say : "'Ere thrice the sun done salutation to the dawn"
And you claim these words as your own
But I've read well, and I've heard them said
A hundred times (maybe less, maybe more)
If you must write prose/poems
The words you use should be your own
Don't plagiarise or take on loan
'Cause there's always someone, somewhere
With a big nose, who knows
And who trips you up and laughs
When you fall

I'm terrible at describing pronunciation, but he says "plague-arize" rather than how I've always heard it "plajarize". Have I got it wrong? Or is this a British-ism? Or has Morrissey just not know how to talk?

It is probably my favourite Smiths song, but that part always leaves me perplexed.
   1557. Spahn Insane Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:31 PM (#4766674)
Good, even if he was from Team Blue. He didn't deserve to win, because plagiarism is shitty.

I see what you did there.
   1558. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:33 PM (#4766675)
I'm terrible at describing pronunciation, but he says "plague-arize" rather than how I've always heard it "plajarize". Have I got it wrong?


Yes, by liking the Smiths you have gotten it very wrong indeed.
   1559. Greg K Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:33 PM (#4766676)
I do recall a friend of mine who was in film school working on a project that involved writing a poem, then creating some visuals to go with it. He really hated the writing part it as not up his alley at all, and I always liked writing poetry back then so I offered to write something and then have him adapt the visuals. And his response was: "this is fine arts, literally the only way for me to fail this course is to submit something that isn't my own work".
   1560. Greg K Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:34 PM (#4766677)
Yes, by liking the Smiths you have gotten it very wrong indeed.

Why, you!

*shakes fist
   1561. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:36 PM (#4766681)
(158) What of it?

What do you think a 500lb bomb or a 155mm howitzer round does?

Troops under for will call for fire support. A mortar is less likely to cause mass civilian casualties than heavier ordnance. It's clearly not impossible just less likely.

Mortars are the proportional response people here are asking for.
   1562. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:37 PM (#4766682)
(158) What of it?

What do you think a 500lb bomb or a 155mm howitzer round does?

Troops under for will call for fire support. A mortar is less likely to cause mass civilian casualties than heavier ordnance. It's clearly not impossible just less likely.

Mortars are the proportional response people here are asking for.
   1563. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:40 PM (#4766685)
I see what you did there.

I there did what you see.
   1564. spike Posted: August 07, 2014 at 06:52 PM (#4766689)
What of it?

In the first place, A mortar is less likely to cause mass civilian casualties than heavier ordnance is not the same as Targeted mortar fire is highly unlikely to cause civilian casualties.. I'd love to know what the hell you founded the latter statement on. Second, mortars "ARE" heavy ordinance. These ain't something you stick on a goddamned backpack like in The Green Berets. They are tank mounted or towed heavy weapons with a range up to 10 miles. It's got the destructive power of a tank shell (or more depending on AP, WP or HE payload), only they operate on a parabolic trajectory rather than line of sight.
   1565. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 08:30 PM (#4766740)
In the first place, A mortar is less likely to cause mass civilian casualties than heavier ordnance is not the same as Targeted mortar fire is highly unlikely to cause civilian casualties.. I'd love to know what the hell you founded the latter statement on. Second, mortars "ARE" heavy ordinance. These ain't something you stick on a goddamned backpack like in The Green Berets. They are tank mounted or towed heavy weapons with a range up to 10 miles. It's got the destructive power of a tank shell (or more depending on AP, WP or HE payload), only they operate on a parabolic trajectory rather than line of sight.

There are all sorts of mortars. I'm sure the Israelis have 107 mm mortars mounted in M113 APCs, 81 mm mortars that are vehicle mounted and carried, and maybe even some 60 mm mortars at the company level.

A tank shell, in your example, is not disproportionate force to use in a close infantry combat situation. Neither is a mortar.

Targeted mortar fire is highly unlikely to cause civilian casualties, unless the target is located in close proximity to civilians. It's Hamas' fault that they are in such close proximity.

What do you want? You want Israeli soldiers to just sit there and take fire and casualties?

You can't expect Israeli soldiers facing death in combat to care more about Gazan civilians than the Gazan's own Gov't does.
   1566. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 08:53 PM (#4766747)
You can't expect Israeli soldiers facing death in combat to care more about Gazan civilians than the Gazan's own Gov't does.


Yes you ####### can. That's the whole point of the 900/2 ratio. Israelis don't care enough about Palestinian Civilians. They need to care more than Hamas, because Hamas views Palestinian deaths as a recruitment opportunity.
   1567. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:07 PM (#4766754)
Yes you ####### can. That's the whole point of the 900/2 ratio. Israelis don't care enough about Palestinian Civilians. They need to care more than Hamas, because Hamas views Palestinian deaths as a recruitment opportunity.

That's an absurdity. No nation can ask its combat troops to flat out sacrifice their lives to save enemy civilians. The best you can ask for is restraint.
   1568. Joe Kehoskie Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:19 PM (#4766760)
Yes you ####### can. That's the whole point of the 900/2 ratio. Israelis don't care enough about Palestinian Civilians. They need to care more than Hamas, because Hamas views Palestinian deaths as a recruitment opportunity.

Aside from the fact that you seem to buy into the above theory way too much, Hamas wasn't having recruitment problems before the latest hostilities.

It's hard to imagine there are many Palestinians who will join up with Hamas after the 900th Palestinian is killed who wouldn't have joined up after the first or 30th or 107th.
   1569. JE (Jason) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:23 PM (#4766765)
So taking the quickest way to stop machine gun fire is unacceptable if it results in the possibility of mass civilian casualties.

What "mass civilian casualties" resulted from a mortar attack?

That's the whole point of the 900/2 ratio. Israelis don't care enough about Palestinian Civilians.

Why don't you just admit that you swallow whole Hamas/UNRWA propaganda? We'll find out weeks from now that the IDF was way more accurate than Gaza officials (i.e., Hamas) in the former's 1:1 estimate of Hamas fighter to civilian ratio.
   1570. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:29 PM (#4766770)
Yes you ####### can. That's the whole point of the 900/2 ratio. Israelis don't care enough about Palestinian Civilians. They need to care more than Hamas, because Hamas views Palestinian deaths as a recruitment opportunity.

To start with, that 900 to 2 ratio seems to be based on a count that assumes that only those ages 18-27 can be Hamas fighters. I doubt that is the case. But if Hamas wanted to minimize Palestinian casualties, they wouldn't set up shop in hospitals, schools and even UN facilities, while firing missiles from residential areas. This is an argument that Israel should fight a war with one hand tied behind its back.
   1571. JE (Jason) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:30 PM (#4766772)
So the "JV team [which] puts on Lakers uniforms that doesn’t make them Kobe Bryant" is now scoring enough points that we have to engage in a so-called military humanitarian mission to prevent genocide. Meanwhile, Qaraqosh, Iraq's largest Christian town, has fallen to ISIS.
   1572. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:34 PM (#4766778)
So what would any of you do if you were Netanyahu, and Hamas was raining missiles upon your population, and deliberately putting its own civilians in potential harm's way? I'm sure I'm just dense, but I don't see any easy way out of this, at least not if you grant the right of self-defense to a country under attack.
   1573. Spahn Insane Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:38 PM (#4766779)
I see what you did there.

I there did what you see.

Cute, but not plagiarism. That time.
   1574. JE (Jason) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 09:55 PM (#4766786)
Hamas reportedly executes its own spokesman, later wonders why it's off-message:
While initial reports stated that Ayman Taha, a former spokesman for the Gaza-based terror organization, had been killed during an Israeli airstrike in the embattled coastal enclave, Palestinian daily Al-Quds reported that he was executed by a Hamas firing squad earlier this week for allegedly maintaining contact with intelligence services in Arab countries, and specifically in Egypt.

Taha, according to Al-Quds, was shot several times in the head and chest. His body was later transferred to the Shifa hospital. Hamas initially barred the incident from publication until Thursday, when the information was released.

#winning
   1575. A big pile of nonsense (gef the talking mongoose) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 10:14 PM (#4766797)
I'm terrible at describing pronunciation, but he says "plague-arize" rather than how I've always heard it "plajarize". Have I got it wrong? Or is this a British-ism? Or has Morrissey just not know how to talk?

It is probably my favourite Smiths song, but that part always leaves me perplexed.


Since his best song misuses "Everyday" in the title, perhaps he's just not nearly as smart as he & his sycophants like to pretend.
   1576. Ray (RDP) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 10:44 PM (#4766805)
Yes you ####### can. That's the whole point of the 900/2 ratio. Israelis don't care enough about Palestinian Civilians. They need to care more than Hamas, because Hamas views Palestinian deaths as a recruitment opportunity.


And so it's true: 900/900 would be a preferable ratio to you, since then it would prove that Israelis are showing the requisite "caring" of the Palestinian Civilians.

This. Is. Batshit.

(Which is probably why people are denying the fundamental point of their "ratio" remarks. As Andy likes to say, "I'm not sayin'... I'm just sayin'")
   1577. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:05 PM (#4766819)
This. Is. Batshit.


Only you and your goofy interpretation is. The adults know what we are talking about. Go back to watching cartoons dude.
   1578. tshipman Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:08 PM (#4766821)
And so it's true: 900/900 would be a preferable ratio to you, since then it would prove that Israelis are showing the requisite "caring" of the Palestinian Civilians.


It's a mat, and you Leap to conclusions.
Get it?
   1579. GregD Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:22 PM (#4766833)
Cue conservative outrage at air strikes in 3...2...1...
   1580. spike Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:28 PM (#4766836)
You can't expect Israeli soldiers facing death in combat to care more about Gazan civilians than the Gazan's own Gov't does.

That wasn't what you were asserting, which was that somehow using a mortar with a 150 yard diameter kill zone was some sort of civilian saving gesture, which it flat ain't. The lighter caliber mortars don't have GPS guidance, and in any event, aren't what they use for this sort of operation

Meet Morty

This is what they shoot at hiding terrorists. It's an air detonated shrapnel device specifically designed to over-penetrate. It is no scalpel, slim. "Targeted mortar fire is highly unlikely to cause civilian casualties" is a bad joke. I wish you'd stop making it.
   1581. zenbitz Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:28 PM (#4766837)
I would feel better about Israel killing civilians if was actually going to cause less death in the long run.
   1582. JE (Jason) Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:34 PM (#4766840)
Cue conservative outrage at air strikes in 3...2...1...

Had we paid attention to ISIS many months ago and, at minimum, resumed our military cooperation with the Kurds, there's a pretty good chance we wouldn't need to contemplate airstrikes today.
   1583. The Yankee Clapper Posted: August 07, 2014 at 11:50 PM (#4766846)
Cue conservative outrage at air strikes in 3...2...1...

Published reports seem to indicate that all the air strikes thus far have been conducted by the Iraqis & Turks. Obama indicated that he had authorized "targeted" air strikes if the ISIS moves on Erbil. It's not clear he'll do anything if they just hunker down. So, yeah, there might be some criticism by conservatives, and others, if Obama continues to lag behind the Turks and the Pope when it comes to taking action.
   1584. CrosbyBird Posted: August 08, 2014 at 01:32 AM (#4766879)
In general, I think reducing it down to just the theological dispute makes it sound like a fight among eggheads, which really mistakes the breadth of the disagreement. I guess what I would compare it to would be the disagreement in the late 19th century in this country over the Silver vs. Gold standard. It was the defining issue in several elections. It seems silly now, but it was a huge deal. Maybe in 500 years they'll think abortion or gay marriage or gun control disagreements were similarly frivolous.

Whether you're on a silver or gold standard makes a difference based on the scarcity and practical uses of each metal. Gold is really stable because it has very little value outside of its rarity. Silver not only is more common, but has other uses that make its value more volatile.

Abortion is an issue where different decisions actually will affect people's lives. A future society might, with greater knowledge or scientific advances, be able to eliminate the need for a debate (such as developing perfect birth control with universal distribution and universal acceptance, so abortion becomes entirely unnecessary to argue about). But even then, people looking backwards would be able to recognize a set of competing concerns that could absolutely matter enough to fight about. I'm pro-choice but I recognize that a society with legal abortion faces some real-world consequences and that a society with illegal abortion faces some different real-world consequences... it's worth fighting about.

Gay marriage and gun control might seem like stupid things to argue about to a future society, but I expect that it will be more because there ends up being near-universal agreement that there's a right answer and a wrong answer, and the right answer wins. Yet even that society should understand why you had to fight with the wrong-thinkers rather than let them win, even if they couldn't comprehend the reasons any rational human being could be on the wrong side. This is, to me, similar to hearing arguments supporting slavery or Jim Crow. It's shocking that we had to have arguments about this, and that all human beings didn't just recognize how wrong they were. But it wasn't a frivolous argument because people were doing terrible things and it was necessary to stand against them.

Bottom line, I think it's disrespectful to ancients to project modern ideas of what is important on their society.

I don't think it has anything to do with ancient vs. modern ideas. It's about having no practical effect on the lives of any human beings. I'm an atheist and I think religion is ridiculous superstitious nonsense, but I don't really care what other people believe until they act in a way that hurts other people. If you believe apples are possessed by evil spirits and you won't touch them, I might laugh at you a bit but enjoy your particular brand of crazy. If you believe apples are possessed by evil spirits and then try to ban them so nobody can eat them, we're going to have a problem.

And if two people are going to war over whether the evil spirits possessing apples speak English or Klingon in the language that only the spirits can ever perceive, then I'm going to think that's an exceptionally stupid thing to fight over whether it's a fifth-century or twenty-first-century conflict.
   1585. GregD Posted: August 08, 2014 at 02:19 AM (#4766889)
The Times says that Kurdish and Iraqi officials say US planes did the strikes today, though the US so far says no. Will be interesting to see.

On the delay, the reason I see is that the Obama administration wanted al-Maliki to step down and for the three sides to agree on a unity government that the US would then back. And they thought Maliki wouldn't give up unless air strikes were contingent on it. And they thought Iraq couldn't survive with him at the helm.

Are those legitimate strategic concerns? Can Maliki lead a government that will function? Is trying to back a unified Iraq, rather than accepting a three-state solution justified?
   1586. CrosbyBird Posted: August 08, 2014 at 02:54 AM (#4766892)
What do you want? You want Israeli soldiers to just sit there and take fire and casualties?

I want Israeli soldiers to use more discriminate military tactics. Snipers. Ground assaults. Single-target drones.

No nation can ask its combat troops to flat out sacrifice their lives to save enemy civilians.

There is no such thing as an "enemy civilian." Hamas is the enemy. The civilians are innocents. The conflation of Hamas and Palestinians in general is a huge, huge part of the problem.

Snapper, I would expect you, of all people, to reject collateral damage as morally acceptable.
   1587. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 06:58 AM (#4766897)
Snapper, I would expect you, of all people, to reject collateral damage as morally acceptable.

I wouldn't. By now it's clear snapper is 100% angry, vengeful, punishing Jesus.
   1588. Bitter Mouse Posted: August 08, 2014 at 07:25 AM (#4766902)
I wouldn't. By now it's clear snapper is 100% angry, vengeful, punishing Jesus.


You know, the old testament Jesus.
   1589. Jolly Old St. Nick Is A Jolly Old St. Crip Posted: August 08, 2014 at 07:28 AM (#4766904)
The best news yesterday is that the voters in Tennessee gave the Koch Brothers a kick in the nuts, when they voted by 56% - 44% to retain three state supreme court judges who'd been appointed by a Democratic governor and who'd all been subject to the usual flood of outside attack ads from "Americans for Prosperity" and the like. All three judges were re-elected to new eight year terms, thus preserving the Democratic majority on the bench in a hard core Republican state.

The justices were all appointed by the governor at the time, Phil Bredesen, a Democrat. Conservative groups targeted them for defeat in this summer’s retention elections, which are normally pro forma votes.

Their critics, including the Republican State Leadership Committee and Americans for Prosperity, affiliated with Charles G. and David H. Koch, mounted a high-profile campaign claiming the justices had been “soft on crime” and hostile to business interests. The justices were also criticized for obliquely supporting the Affordable Care Act because the court in 2006 appointed a Democrat, Robert E. Cooper Jr., as state attorney general; Mr. Cooper later refused to join a lawsuit challenging the measure. (The court itself never ruled on a case concerning the health law.)

The justices, joined by many members of the state’s legal community, said the attacks were baseless and raised more than $1 million, a formidable sum in a state of modest television markets. Their opponents responded by pouring hundreds of thousands of dollars into the race.

Speaking to supporters in Nashville after declaring victory, Justice Clark said, “We have shown citizens of this state and other states that we can’t be bought, that we want fair and impartial courts and that we do not want any outside people messing in the judicial system in Tennessee.”
   1590. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 08:38 AM (#4766923)
From the BBC of all places:
There has been some research suggesting that men in general are more likely to die in conflict than women, although no typical ratio is given.

Nonetheless, if the Israeli attacks have been "indiscriminate", as the UN Human Rights Council says, it is hard to work out why they have killed so many more civilian men than women. …

Matthias Behnk, from OHCHR, told BBC News that the organisation would not want to speculate about why there had been so many adult male casualties, adding that because they were having to deal with a lot of casualties in a short time, they had "focused primarily on recording the casualties”. …

The list of names and ages of the dead published by al-Jazeera also found men aged between 20 and 29 to be significantly overrepresented.

The IDF say they have killed at least 253 Hamas operatives, 147 Islamic Jihad operatives, 65 "operatives of various organisations" and 603 "operatives whose affiliation is unknown", although they also stress that this is not a final number.

Spokesman Capt Eytan Buchman told BBC News that "the UN numbers being reported are, by and by large, based on the Gaza health ministry, a Hamas-run organisation".

He said that part of the reason for the discrepancy between the figures was "when militants are brought to hospitals, they are brought in civilian clothing, obscuring terrorist affiliations".

"Hamas also has given local residents directives to obscure militant identities," he said.

"It's important to bear in mind that in Operation Cast Lead [the last Israeli ground offensive in December 2008-January 2009], Hamas and Gaza-based organisations claimed that only 50 combatants were killed, admitting yea
   1591. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 08:44 AM (#4766924)
Snapper, I would expect you, of all people, to reject collateral damage as morally acceptable.

I expect Israel to do better but it's outrageous to believe that the IDF isn't doing everything in its power to limit the number of civilian casualties. Name another army anywhere in the world -- and yes, that includes our own -- which has taken more precautions in similar situations.
   1592. bunyon Posted: August 08, 2014 at 08:51 AM (#4766928)
If a civilian population accepts armed men masquerading as civilians in their midst launching attacks against other civilians, they aren't "innocent". The entire situation is intolerable but the problem the Israelis face is that the guys they need to fight are pretending to be civilians.


Generally, wars end when one side accepts defeat or both (all) sides mutually agree that the cost no longer outweighs the possible benefits of victory. Given the details here, it's hard seeing either scenario occuring soon.

It's hard to see a negotiated settlement as one side wants the other annhilated and the other side wants the first side neutered to the point of posing zero threat. Hard to negotiate around that. I guess my point is, defeatist as it is, is it might be better for the long run to let the region slug it out to a natural equilibrium. Europe had to do that. Yes, it was ugly and took a long time, but that's how humans seem to do this stuff. I'm hopeful that people like many here will keep trying to find another way but after a long time thinking it over, I've yet to think up an alternative.
   1593. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 08:54 AM (#4766929)
   1594. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 08:56 AM (#4766931)
If a civilian population accepts armed men masquerading as civilians in their midst launching attacks against other civilians, they aren't "innocent". The entire situation is intolerable but the problem the Israelis face is that the guys they need to fight are pretending to be civilians.


Generally, wars end when one side accepts defeat or both (all) sides mutually agree that the cost no longer outweighs the possible benefits of victory. Given the details here, it's hard seeing either scenario occuring soon.

It's hard to see a negotiated settlement as one side wants the other annhilated and the other side wants the first side neutered to the point of posing zero threat. Hard to negotiate around that. I guess my point is, defeatist as it is, is it might be better for the long run to let the region slug it out to a natural equilibrium. Europe had to do that. Yes, it was ugly and took a long time, but that's how humans seem to do this stuff. I'm hopeful that people like many here will keep trying to find another way but after a long time thinking it over, I've yet to think up an alternative.


Hamas's actions are entirely immoral. The end they're fighting for is illegitimate, and they have no real hope of ever attaining it. There is no moral basis for their violent actions. (And no, they aren't "resisting occupation" as their attacks are indiscriminate and extend far beyond the occupying authority. A party has no moral right to kill the civilians of an occupying nation.)
   1595. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 08:59 AM (#4766933)
NYT finally gets around to calling the US's torture of people, "torture," as opposed to some euphemism. Their failure to do so heretofore, in the face of a mountain of evidence, is a nice indicator of the 21st c's corruption of the elite.
   1596. bunyon Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:02 AM (#4766936)
A party has no moral right to kill the civilians of an occupying nation.

Eh. If a nation is occupied by a democratic regime, the civilians are involved. It ain't the 14th century. We're clearly okay with collateral damage. The Israelis are. Part of that is reality - you can't wage war, especially in an urban environment, and not kill civilians. But some of it is also a belief in the superiority of one's own politics. It's okay for US forces to kill some civilians because we believe our cause is just. But the enemy killing civilians for their barbarous politics is evil. Basically, civilians are in play and have been for a long while. You can rend your garments or you can deal with it.

With that said, what I think makes Hamas truly immoral is they have no prayer of winning through arms. All they can do is keep up a slow churn. At some point, a defeated man should make peace.

   1597. Lassus Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:02 AM (#4766937)
Nonetheless, if the Israeli attacks have been "indiscriminate", as the UN Human Rights Council says, it is hard to work out why they have killed so many more civilian men than women. …

With all of these places being "old world" is it simply that young civilian men would be more likely to be out milling about during open hostilities than young civilian women? That reason, plus, men are kind of stupider.


I expect Israel to do better but it's outrageous to believe that the IDF isn't doing everything in its power to limit the number of civilian casualties. Name another army anywhere in the world -- and yes, that includes our own -- which has taken more precautions in similar situations.

This reminds me a bit of a post a friend of mine who lives in Israel made in response to some story of Israel hitting a hospital or a school or whatnot. (I don't remember which, I'm not really tracking the outraged stories because as I said above, I do feel a slant against Israel I'm not comfortable with) Her response to an indignant comment about this was that if there hadn't been reason to bomb the place, they wouldn't have bombed the place. Well, that's not really a reasonable defense, as there isn't an army in the history of modern conflict who hasn't bombed the living shit out of somewhere that didn't deserve it. I don't think that Israel is a special snowflake of an army that only hits bad things.
   1598. snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:03 AM (#4766939)
There is no such thing as an "enemy civilian." Hamas is the enemy. The civilians are innocents. The conflation of Hamas and Palestinians in general is a huge, huge part of the problem.

Snapper, I would expect you, of all people, to reject collateral damage as morally acceptable.


Just war theory does not reject collateral damages as morally unacceptable, I don't see why I would.

You guys must consider pretty much all of WW2 to be a huge war crime by the US and UK; we really effed up that continent, and killed millions (including lots of friendlies) with our "strategic" bombing.

I wouldn't. By now it's clear snapper is 100% angry, vengeful, punishing Jesus.

It's not about punishment. It's about stopping an enemy from firing rockets at your cities, disrupting your entire econmy, and threatening innocent civilians.

Gaza is an enemy nation to Israel. Its Gov't (Hamas) attacked Israel repeatedly. Israel is responding to destroy their capability for aggression.

In that context, collateral damage is acceptable. If Israel were to target civilians, that would be unacceptable.

I have lots of moral issues with things like carpet bombing cities (e.g. Dresden, Hambyrg, Tokyo) and blockades to starve the population (UK in WW1). This kind of stuff (errant mortar rounds) is completely within the normal realm of warfare: tragic, unfortunate, but not something the Israelis are morally culpable for.
   1599. The Id of SugarBear Blanks Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:08 AM (#4766940)
With that said, what I think makes Hamas truly immoral is they have no prayer of winning through arms.

And that translates into there being no moral basis for any military action by Hamas, against civilians or otherwise. That makes their indiscriminate killing and targeting of civilians, and their medieval rhetoric and actions in celebrations thereof, all the more barbaric.
   1600. JE (Jason) Posted: August 08, 2014 at 09:09 AM (#4766941)
Flip.
Page 16 of 64 pages ‹ First  < 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

BBTF Partner

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Dingbat_Charlie
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogBuster Olney on Twitter: "Sources: Manager Joe Maddon has exercised an opt-out clause in his contract and is leaving the Tampa Bay Rays immediately."
(59 - 5:15pm, Oct 24)
Last: Commissioner Bud Black Beltre Hillman

NewsblogCurt Schilling not hiding his scars - ESPN Boston
(14 - 5:08pm, Oct 24)
Last: Merton Muffley

NewsblogDid Adam Dunn Ruin Baseball? – The Hardball Times
(61 - 5:07pm, Oct 24)
Last: zenbitz

NewsblogOT: Politics, October 2014: Sunshine, Baseball, and Etch A Sketch: How Politicians Use Analogies
(3691 - 5:02pm, Oct 24)
Last: The Yankee Clapper

Newsblog2014 WORLD SERIES GAME 3 OMNICHATTER
(29 - 5:00pm, Oct 24)
Last: Nasty Nate

NewsblogJohn McGrath: The Giants have become the Yankees — obnoxious | The News Tribune
(1 - 4:56pm, Oct 24)
Last: AT-AT at bat@AT&T

NewsblogHow top World Series players ranked as prospects. | SportsonEarth.com : Jim Callis Article
(13 - 4:55pm, Oct 24)
Last: Davo's Favorite Tacos Are Moose Tacos

NewsblogDealing or dueling – what’s a manager to do? | MGL on Baseball
(64 - 4:42pm, Oct 24)
Last: McCoy

Newsblog9 reasons Hunter Pence is the most interesting man in the World (Series) | For The Win
(14 - 3:13pm, Oct 24)
Last: zenbitz

NewsblogWall Street didn't kill sabermetrics - Beyond the Box Score
(5 - 2:36pm, Oct 24)
Last: snapper (history's 42nd greatest monster)

NewsblogBeaneball | Gold Gloves and Coco Crisp's Terrible 2014 Defense
(1 - 2:19pm, Oct 24)
Last: RMc is a fine piece of cheese

NewsblogGleeman: Royals may bench Norichika Aoki for Game 3
(24 - 2:10pm, Oct 24)
Last: Roger McDowell spit on me!

NewsblogOT: The Soccer Thread, September 2014
(914 - 1:52pm, Oct 24)
Last: frannyzoo

NewsblogPittsburgh Pirates prospect Tyler Glasnow captures Starting Pitcher MiLBY Award | MiLB.com
(1 - 1:33pm, Oct 24)
Last: Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad)

NewsblogKen Rosenthal on Twitter: Rays’ Friedman going to Dodgers. Colletti remaining as senior advisor.
(93 - 12:32pm, Oct 24)
Last: RoyalsRetro (AG#1F)

Page rendered in 0.8752 seconds
53 querie(s) executed