Some of the juice:
"For the many Americans, the math is pretty simple. Leaders who want to promote the well-being of the people they lead do not launch rockets into neighboring territory from densely populated civilian neighborhoods and people who merely want a state of their own do not go about screaming incessantly about destroying somebody else's."It would be nice if the media were to pick up on that particular point.
"On this score, Christian peacemakers are doing what pacifists have always done - avert their eyes from those aspects of reality would force them to come to grips with human sin in a meaningful manner. "Could be a problem with all religions on that one, but I'll keep that diatribe for another day.
Links
- From the article, US Congress' resolution condemning Hamas.
4 comments:
I can only slowly nod with agreement.
Or risk being arrested on inciting violence charges but ... what if Israel just pushed Gaza off the map?
Proportionality is a key humanitarian principle when it comes to waging war (and the principle of jus in bello needs consideration once the bleeding hearts have fallen by the wayside with jus ad bullem and the generals have their turn) but even today there are very few arguments that state it was wrong to annilate Hiroshima and Nagaski even though "proportionality" could be argued.
It might be terrible at the time but would the means eventually be justified by the ends?
"Jus ad bellum" - sorry, long day and typing fingers aren't working well!
There's good evidence to suggest that the many "peace agreements" pushed on this conflict have not allowed it to resolve itself. And I suspect it won't until things get seriously existentially dangerous (say like when Iran gets the bomb in a year or so....)
More rhetoric from Israel in the weekend papers about a strike.
Post a Comment