Would they not get money if the home was not destroyed?
Let me help you.
It is a debating fallacy to accuse a person of having a weak argument because they have not mentioned previous similar issues, whether or not those issues are truly similar or whether or not the person had previously addressed the issues there or elsewhere. It is a fallacy as it is a method of closing down a debate without addressing the real issue. That is what you have done. Maybe you would like to address the specific issue- what is the difference between Arab terrorists and Jewish terrorists that results in different treatment. Whether or not I am appalled by all atrocities is not the question (I am); the question you are avoiding is whether a supposed advanced westernised democracy should have a justice system based on race.
I don’t understand your reasoning or your question. When there were rich benefactors then home demolition was not a punishment as they were restored better than their original state. Now that does not occur with fewer benefactors and tighter financial controls.
It’s not a debating fallacy - I am pointing out that the basis of the thread is skewed morally.
It’s pointing out what the real issue is.
The problem is that your posting history gives no indication that you are appalled by all atrocities - only ones committed against apartment buildings, and not ones committed against women and babies.
Why is your sense of justice based on race, such that you condemn lesser offenses committed by Jews but stay morosely silent at the murder of women and children by Palestinians?
Regards,
Shodan
These are issues of a totally different nature. Court decisions don’t fall in the same category as terrorist attacks.
What is comparable are, indeed, the crimes commited. And it is expected that a fair judicial system would apply the same rules to both.
Besides, punishing the family of the culprit has been a no-no for a very long time in western justice, so even if they were demolishing the house of the Israeli murderers too, it still would be a problem.
No. I think destroying the homes of people not involved in a terrorist attack is unjustifiable and dumb.
Here’s a quote from your linked story about those arrested in the murder of a Palestinian teenager:
Here’s a quote from Netanyahu warning against private acts of revenge, in response to the Israeli synagogue murders.
Here’s Hamas in response to the synagogue murders:
But yeah, I’m against taking revenge on housing.
You obviously do not understand debating. I abhor all such acts but my main interest ii’s in abuse of state power, especially by supposed modern, rule of law governments. Your rather ad nominee attack based on failure to debate to your tune avoids the question posed about how a modern westernised state should treat people.
[quote=“Jackmannii, post:26, topic:705144”]
No. I think destroying the homes of people not involved in a terrorist attack is unjustifiable and dumb.
Here’s a quote from your linked story about those arrested in the murder of a Palestinian teenager:
Here’s a quote from Netanyahu warning against private acts of revenge, in response to the Israeli synagogue murders.
[quote]
"Citizens of Israel, I call on you to demonstrate great vigilance and to respect the law because the state will bring to justice all the terrorists and those who dispatch them.
'It is forbidden for anyone to take the law into their own hands, even if tempers are high and even if you’re burning with anger."[/uqote]Here’s Hamas in response to the synagogue murders:
But is it fair to apply punishments dependent on race/religion?
As I understand it, the policy was the result of noticing that families of attackers were getting rewards after the fact, and seeking to neutralize this as a motivation for people to carry out attacks and their families to support them. It was discontinued because they though that it didn’t work, for both the payments reason and its disputed effectiveness at prevention. Now, as you say, they are claiming that money-wise this is again a punishment, but I thought that this meant that the money the families would have received anyway is no longer enough to cover the punishment, thanks to the reasons you point out. The money, though, is not conditional on the destruction of the home. If Israel hadn’t destroyed the apartment, the family in the first article would have still gotten money. Is this incorrect?
[QUOTE=Der Trihs]
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?
[/QUOTE]
Homes have a psychological value too. If someone destroyed my home but put me up on a hotel and paid for a new one, I would still feel a sense of loss.
This may be in part a cultural thing.
That’s pretty much the point. Why are you primarily interested in relatively minor abuses of state power and silent about much more egregious abuses committed against babies and women? Why is your alleged abhorrence so selectively expressed against Jews?
Regards,
Shodan
It is expressed against rule of law supposedly democratic states which need to be held to higher levels of behaviours than despotic regimes. Whether or not they are Jews is a sideline.
I also abhor the use of the death penalty in the USA and Japan because they are democracies and less concerned about China and Iran.
I expect the CIA and SIS to act more fairly and legally than Iranian or Zimbabwean secret services.
I abhor bribery of public officials as a necessity of life in the USA or UK more than Colombia or Nigeria.
Democratic rule of law states should not destroy the houses of one racial/religious group while not applying that sanction to another.
Shodan are you being purposefully obtuse? No one is failing to condemn the criminals they are commenting on the inequality of sentencing.
Scenario 1: Palistinian commits a murderous terrorist act. Israelis condemn and prosecute him and for good measure knock his parents house down.
Scenario 2: Israelis commits a murderous terrorist act. Israelis condemn and prosecute them but show no interest in knocking anyone’s house down.
Pjen condemns both murderous terrorist acts but wonders why there is the difference in sentencing. Do you somehow believe that the burning of an innocent Palestinian teenager was somehow justified such that it did not deserve the punishment that the Palistinian’s family received?
I can be against raping of women, and at the same time be concerned if black rapists are given the death penalty while white rapists only get life imprisonment.
People are talking like this is a anything new.
Israel has for for decades treated Jews who’ve engaged in “terrorism”(however one defines it) far less severely than it’s treats Palestinians.
In fact, Israel has had two former terrorists and two former war criminals elected PM and for most of the past few decades been run by a political party that grew out of two terrorist groups.
That said, I think in this case the excuse that would be used is that the men in question weren’t Israeli citizens while the Jews were.
There have been Israeli Arabs convicted of such crimes and I’m not aware of any who had their parents’ houses destroyed.
Israel won a war. The Anglo-Saxon nobles didn’t like Norman overlords either, that’s called tough shit.
I abhor people who treat some people like adults and others like children. The Iranian death penalty is just as offensive to me as the American one.