# Is it OK for nations to use car bombs to kill opponents? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 26, 2004, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192 "2004-09-26T19:46:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/61 "2004-09-27T04:13:57Z")
> [@PaulFitzroy](#): > > I don’t want to argue about it anymore because essentially it comes down to religious belief . . . You’re joking, right? You don’t actually base your political take on any of this on your religious beliefs, do you? ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 4:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/62 "2004-09-27T04:26:06Z")
> [@](#): > > **astro** : Not that it’s particularly concerned about world opinion at this point, but using car bombs to kill opponents? How are you going maintain the moral upper hand when you do stuff like that? How is _anyone_ going to maintain the moral upper hand when we continue to divide ourselves into _us and them_? [quote] **chappachula** : And in war, unfortunately, innocent people get killed along with the legitimate targets. We call it “collateral damage.” Wouldn’t it be more honest to call _them_ what they are – dead mothers, brothers, fathers, sons, lovers, wives, children, babies? A bride on her wedding day must \*never be called “collateral damage.” **Paul** , you kill everyone all again when you speak of ethnic cleansing and deportment. You participate. We all do in some ways. But if you give in to it…I can’t even finish this. Just think about it. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/63 "2004-09-27T04:27:14Z")
From _The Right Nation: Conservative Power in America,_ by John Micklethwait and Adrian Wooldridge (New York: The Penguin Press, 2004), p. 215: > [@](#): > > Indeed, this [the September 11 attacks] reinforced one of the strangest marriages in the conservative movement. The Religious Right has been pro-Israel since at least the 1970s. Evangelicals believe that the Second Coming will take place in Israel – and that it will be preceded by the conversion of the Jews to Christianity; thus, both the Jews and Israel need to be saved in order to fulfill their dual roles in Christian eschatology. The highlight of the Christian Coalition’s 2002 conference was a rally for Israel. Fundamentalist congregations spend millions to subsidize Jewish settlements. Go to fundamentalist churches and you will find prayers to let Israel keep the biblical lands of Judea and Samaria. > > You might think that, as secular intellectuals, the neocons would have found this eschatological brew a bit too strong for their tastes, and that, as Jews, they would balk at being assigned to a bit role in the Christian revelation. But the neocons have always been remarkably good at biting their lips on these subjects, treating Christian fundamentalism as something of a Straussian “noble myth” – it might be nonsense, but it advances the conservative cause. Sometimes they break ranks – Bill Kristol supported John McCain’s attempt to end the Religious Right’s stranglehold on the GOP – but his father’s infinite tolerance for the Religious Right’s peccadilloes was a much more typical neoconservative position. In one essay, Irving Kristol praised the Religious Right for its vital role in creating the Reagan majority – and conveniently forgot to mention the fact that Pat Robertson had said some pretty terrible things about the Jews. That’s not you, is it **Paul?** Please, please tell me that absolutely nothing discussed in the above quote has anything to do with you or your beliefs. Please. ---
**Author:** ![PaulFitzroy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@PaulFitzroy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PaulFitzroy)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/64 "2004-09-27T04:32:34Z")
No, that has nothing to do with my political beliefs. I am a Jew, not a Christian. Here’s what MY Bible has to say about Israel: “On that day, G-d made with Abram a covenant saying, 'To your seed, I have given this land from the river of Egypt to the great river, the river Euphrates.” (Genesis 15:18) Now, I’m not going to sit here and have you trash my religious beliefs or claim that I’m crazy for basing my political views on them. Even if I were atheist, I would think the Jews were entitled to Israel: they have almost nothing, and the Arab Muslims have almost everything in the Middle East. The Jews have created civilization there, created democracy and advanced Western culture. The Arabs have created squalor, savagery, barbaric terrorism and cultural regression. No Bible involved: strictly logical reasoning. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/65 "2004-09-27T04:38:11Z")
> [@PaulFitzroy](#): > > Even if I were atheist, I would think the Jews were entitled to Israel: they have almost nothing, and the Arab Muslims have almost everything in the Middle East. The Jews have created civilization there, created democracy and advanced Western culture. The Arabs have created squalor, savagery, barbaric terrorism and cultural regression. No Bible involved: strictly logical reasoning. All that is perfectly true, but it solves nothing. The Arabs in the Arab states are where they are, the Palestinians are where they are, and no good will come of any further attempts by the Israelis to colonize the Territories or push out the Palestinians. Not even if you try to use the OT to justify it. Doesn’t count to Muslims, you know – to them the OT **is** the word of God but the Koran is a more perfect expression of the same, and trumps the OT in the event of any conflict. ---
**Author:** ![PaulFitzroy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/2acd7d/32.png) [@PaulFitzroy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PaulFitzroy)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 4:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/66 "2004-09-27T04:40:38Z")
Look, here’s my take on it. As long as the Arabs are there, there will be terrorism. No matter what. NOTHING can change it at this point. That’s all I have to say about this. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/67 "2004-09-27T06:09:44Z")
> [@PaulFitzroy](#): > > Look, here’s my take on it. As long as the Arabs are there, there will be terrorism. 1. An intractable terrorist problem with no end in sight would still be preferable to the destruction wrought by the general regional war that almost certainly would ensue if the Israelis tried to “ethnically cleanse” the Palestinians. And no matter how that war ended, Israel, as a state, probably would not survive it. 2. If the Palestinians are allowed to stay were they are and to have an independent state with no Israeli settlements and no Israeli military presence in it, Palestinian terrorism against Israelis will end. I say nothing of terrorism perpretrated by other radical Islamic groups. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/68 "2004-09-27T06:43:51Z")
> [@PaulFitzroy](#): > > If you think Judaism is psychotic, I can’t prove or disprove that statement… On the contrary, you are doing a far better job than you realise. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 6:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/69 "2004-09-27T06:46:29Z")
> [@PaulFitzroy](#): > > Look, here’s my take on it. As long as the Arabs are there, there will be terrorism. No matter what. NOTHING can change it at this point. On the contrary there is a perfectly obvious alternative. Fast approaching. ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/70 "2004-09-27T07:53:43Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Some of that stuff’s on the Wik too. I was trying to focus on just this year. Hamas is just beginning to begin to get a little more reasonable . . . and Israel isn’t. Bad response. Horseshit. Hamas seems more “reasonable” because Israel is rightly killing its leadership nearly as fast as the terrorist fuckers can be replaced, a welcome change from their prior policy of letting them mostly live. The very event which precipitated this thread was a direct consequence of a pair of bus-bombings which left 16 civilians dead. Your statement that “Hamas is more sinned against than sinning” is factually incorrect, disgusting and frankly, pro-terrorist. ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 10:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/71 "2004-09-27T10:04:00Z")
> [@manhattan](#): > > Your statement that “Hamas is more sinned against than sinning” is factually incorrect, disgusting and frankly, pro-terrorist. It is interesting you say that because we have it on the authority of **Alessan** no less, an Israeli with military experience I believe, that Israel and Syria are at war. In this very thread in fact: > [@](#): > > Under the rules of war, a country has a right to do anything inside an enemy country. It’s perfectly legitimate. Bombing an enemy is not an atrocity So all this time, Syrian backed suicide bombing of Israelis has been a perfectly legitimate activity. Who would have thought? As to who is more sinned against, perhaps you might furnish the measurements leading to your factual conclusion. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/72 "2004-09-27T10:38:46Z")
Whatever, **Sevastopol**. Syrian backing of terrorists is indeed legitimate, as much as the direct targeting of civilians by anyone, terrorist or army, can be considered legitimate - which is, not at all. Attacking enemy soldiers or leaders is another matter. If the Syrian government decided to kill, say, Ariel Sharon, I’d consider it a perfectly legitimate act, and I’ll continue to consider it legitimate while pissing on the smoldering ruins of what once was Damascus, the razing of which would _also_ be perfectly legitimate as retaliation. Happy? Legitimate does not mean smart, or desireable. Every action has an equal - hell, sometimes an _overwhelming_ - and opposite reaction. Just so you know, Israelis do not react to terrorism in the same shocked and scandalized manner as Americans do; we think of terrorists as enemies, not as monsters. P.S. I’m curious about that fast approaching, perfectly obvious alternative you mentioned earlier. Any hints? ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 10:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/73 "2004-09-27T10:57:41Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Do you have a problem understanding the concept of “state of war”?Under the rules of war, a country has a right to do _anything_ inside an enemy country. Ehm - can’t say I agree with that. If by “rules of war” you mean the Hague and Geneva conventions, there’s any number of things that you’re specifically _not_ allowed to do. Chemical weapons. Targeting civilians, medics, firefighters. Abusing Red Cross markings or otherwise pretend to be a protected noncombatant while maneuvering or gathering intelligence. Booby-trapping food, water or medical supplies. Booby-trapping dead or wounded. IIRC, there’s even a catch-all clause about “usual customs of warfare” or something along these lines. The “using a remote-controlled explosive charge” tactic, however, seems as legit as using a sniper rifle, provided that the persons actually doing so didn’t commit any war crimes in setting up the operation. I believe the only reasons most countries do not use these tactics extensively is that setting up this sort of operation is pretty hard and it opens up for retaliation. For obvious reasons, few politicians push hard for the idea of war being fought by assassinating politicians. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/74 "2004-09-27T11:15:39Z")
> [@Spiny Norman](#): > > Ehm - can’t say I agree with that. If by “rules of war” you mean the Hague and Geneva conventions, there’s any number of things that you’re specifically _not_ allowed to do. Chemical weapons. Targeting civilians, medics, firefighters. Abusing Red Cross markings or otherwise pretend to be a protected noncombatant while maneuvering or gathering intelligence. Booby-trapping food, water or medical supplies. Booby-trapping dead or wounded. > . Granted, althoug modern military medics are often armed as heavily as other fighters, and there’s no way anyone’s going to sucessfully outlaw the use of spies. I’d also like to note that said laws only hold when both sides obey them, because otherwise violaters would have an unfair advantage. But yeah, that’s not what I meant by “rules of war”. I was referring to the fact that one can’t expect nations in conflict with each other to follow the same rules as nations in a state of peace; otherwise, “peace” has no meaning. ---
**Author:** ![Spiny\_Norman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9de0a6/32.png) [@Spiny\_Norman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spiny_Norman)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/75 "2004-09-27T11:18:59Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > But yeah, that’s not what I meant by “rules of war”. I was referring to the fact that one can’t expect nations in conflict with each other to follow the same rules as nations in a state of peace; otherwise, “peace” has no meaning. Ah, that makes sense. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 11:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/76 "2004-09-27T11:24:07Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Some of that stuff’s on the Wik too. I was trying to focus on just this year. Hamas is just beginning to begin to get a little more reasonable . . . and Israel isn’t. Bad response. Just want to back **Manny** up a bit: Hamas hasn’t changed its ways, Israel is just getting much better at stopping them. Only the bombings show up on the international news; you don’t hear about the constant attempts to sneak explosive belts through checkpoints, or of army raids upon explosives workshops. The reason Hamas hasn’t been doing much damage lately is because they’re losing. Look, you noted yourself that withdrawal or no withdrawal, Hamas will continue its attempts to destroy Israel. In which case, they’re a major impediment to peace in the Middle East and should be eliminated sooner or later. Why not sooner? ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 2:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/77 "2004-09-27T14:16:08Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Whatever, **Sevastopol**. Syrian backing of terrorists is indeed legitimate, **as much as the direct targeting of civilians by anyone, terrorist or army, can be considered legitimate - which is, not at all**. Attacking enemy soldiers or leaders is another matter. If the Syrian government decided to kill, say, Ariel Sharon, I’d consider it a perfectly legitimate act, and I’ll continue to consider it legitimate while pissing on the smoldering ruins of what once was Damascus, the razing of which would _also_ be perfectly legitimate as retaliation. Happy? Happy? I’d be delirious if you’d explain how the razing of Damascus could occur without that being “deliberate targetting of civilians.” > [@Alessan](#): > > Look, you noted yourself that withdrawal or no withdrawal, Hamas will continue its attempts to destroy Israel. In which case, they’re a major impediment to peace in the Middle East and should be eliminated sooner or later. Why not sooner? Why not eliminate Israel instead, the argument in favour has lately become at least as strong? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/78 "2004-09-27T14:38:43Z")
> [@sevastopol](#): > > Happy? I’d be delirious if you’d explain how the razing of Damascus could occur without that being “deliberate targetting of civilians.” Through judicious and carefully targeted use of hyperbole. > [@sevastopol](#): > > Why not eliminate Israel instead, the argument in favour has lately become at least as strong? Because the Hamas is an organization, whose members are there by choice, while Israel is a nation, with several million citizens. To destroy Hamas you have to kill several hundred people, at most, all of whom decided to be members; to estroy Israel you’ll need to commit genocid. Are you supporting genocide? ---
**Author:** ![Sevastopol](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/cdc98d/32.png) [@Sevastopol](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sevastopol)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/79 "2004-09-27T14:47:56Z")
> [@Alessan](#): > > Because the Hamas is an organization, whose members are there by choice, while Israel is a nation, with several million citizens. To destroy Hamas you have to kill several hundred people, at most, all of whom decided to be members; to estroy Israel you’ll need to commit genocid. Are you supporting genocide? Actually, you’d want to do a lot of preparatory work in NYC if genocide was really the plan. That quibble aside, being as it is on the cards thanks to Sharon’s latest initiatives, I don’t see why we should close off any options at this stage in our search for Middle Eastern peace. ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [September 27, 2004, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192/80 "2004-09-27T15:41:02Z")
> [@sevastopol](#): > > Actually, you’d want to do a lot of preparatory work in NYC if genocide was really the plan. That quibble aside, being as it is on the cards thanks to Sharon’s latest initiatives, I don’t see why we should close off any options at this stage in our search for Middle Eastern peace. I have no idea what you’re talking about. Care to be a little less opaque? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-it-ok-for-nations-to-use-car-bombs-to-kill-opponents/266192.md?page=5)