Israel has destroyed the apartment of the person who killed pedestrians by driving a vehicle into them:
Should they do the same with these killers:
I think that Israel’s stated justification for its demolition policy is to counter the large payments that families of attackers were regularly receiving from outside groups. If this is the case, then they could decide without hypocrisy that the killers of Mohammed Abu Khdeir were not motivated by a climate of similar promises and therefore there would be no benefit to the state to destroying their homes.
Of course, asserting that this situation is unrelated to “Equal Justice for All” does not defend the justness of any of Israel’s policies in particular.
All it does is reinforce the image the Israelis have helped create for themselves as thieves, vandals and land-grabbers.
It also amuses me that anyone think that people willing to die for their cause are going to be scared of vandalism. What use do dead people have for apartments?
Was the attack against Mohammed Abu Khdeir suicidal? Are the attackers dead??
One doesn’t need to be an Arab-hating Zionist to grasp that deterrences useful against most criminals are ineffective against dead criminals, or criminals intending to die in their attack.
An Israeli minister was interviewed last night on the BBC and gave exactly the opposite view. He said that the policy had been dropped in 2005 because it resulted in a net gain for the families of the targeted people with large payments from other Arab regimes, but they were now calculating that with changes in the Arab world over the last decade there were now fewer individuals and regimes willing to pay such compensation. He said that loss of support from the rest of the democratic world, inflaming the Arab sentiment, and lack of real retributive effect all worked against the policy, but now it was worth taking the risk again.
I believe Israel used this also against the families of surviving terrorists.
Something that sounds mainly effective as a means of manufacturing more terrorists.
I agree. Whether against living or dead suspects it will mainly act to inflame sentiment within and beyond the Arab world. Especially if only applied to one racial group.
When you’re in love, the whole WORLD is Arab-hating Zionist.
I’m not going to klick on those links, but let me guess: “those killers” are Israelis?
Yes. The guys who burned this Palestinian kid for retribution
<checks>
Yes. Not that it really matters to me; this is a mutual cycle of violence, not a good guy versus bad guy conflict. Israelis one day, Palestinians the day after, Israelis again later on.
Some terrorist asshole kills a woman and a baby, and tranquil silence reigns.
But violence against apartment buildings triggers Pjen’s thread-starting finger.
Go figure.
Regards,
Shodan
In all fairness to Pjen, that apartment building did save his ass a dozen times in 'Nam.
Nice point- I forget exactly which debating failure it exhibits but it is amusing.
Now back to the OP. Is it equal justice if Arab terrorist killers are treated differently from Jewish terrorist killers.
Don’t understand the Viet Nam comment.
Just a dumb joke.
Yours.
Regards,
Shodan
So the Palestinian apartment you mentioned in the OP was not destroyed using the stated justification of the payments families of attackers get? Sorry if I’m misunderstanding you, I’m not sure how the Israeli minister contradicted this justification from what you said.
What he was saying was that one of the reasons it was dropped in 2005 was because its net result then was that the home was restored better than it had been before the attack. Now with fewer benefactors it was thought to have increased effect as there will be no net benefit.