[
Welcome to the SDMB, parvenu!
Hi.
I made typos that I can’t edit. I’ll lurk for a bit now.
That is a non sequitur. By the way, non sequitur means “it does not follow” in Latin, which is now a dead language spoken by the Romans. The Roman Empire was big and powerful! 
jiggles keychain
(i.e., stop being condescending, please)
Sheesh. Now you gotta imply that I’m a loser with no life?
You quoted this, from the Washington Post:
You’re telling me you disagree with that, even though you called Yassin merely a “religious leader”?
I believe the death of anyone is cause for mourning.
This isn’t a topic to be taken lightly. Think about it.
Do you mourn Ted Bundy?
I was going to say that it depends on if that soldier is my husband - but then I realized that it doesn’t.
Our soldiers are in harm’s way just because they’re soldiers. You suggest we increase the risk they might not make it home safely?
It’s 2:50 in the morning. I’m awake and alone and I won’t get to see my husband for 14 more months. If he makes it home alive.
Maybe putting a face or story with that concept you have of ‘a single American soldier’ will wake you the fuck up. Those soldiers have families. Many of those families cry themselves to sleep at night, worrying some idiot-in-charge will risk injury to them to appease people like you.
And those of dead Iraqi and Afghan civilians don’t?
agiantdwarf, I have said that if the man was personally and actively engaged in the planning and execution of terrorist acts I would not have a problem with his being targetted because by killing him you hope the attacks will diminish. I have asked for cites proving he was personally and actively engaged in the planning and direction and execution of terrorist acts but none have been forthcoming. If he was in fact doing it, why don’t you provide some evidence? Just because you say so is not going to convince me. It is up to you to support your position and so far you are not doing it.
In any case, if his killing makes matters worse then it just seems like a stupid and irrational act. It seems both sides in this quarrel are acting pretty irrationally and it cannot be solved as long as both sides don’t change.
Blonde, you are condescending as hell to the young man (he is a guy, right? Can’t always be sure…) Telling him to essentially run along to bed so the adults can talk is on par with patting a woman on the head saying “Aw… isn’t it cute? She thinks she’s intelligent. Now run along back to the kitchen, the men have important things to talk about.”
Yes, I think it IS a free speech issue on a certain level. I think advocating the death of anyone is wrong, but there is a great deal of hate between the Palestinians and the Isrealis. Yes, hundreds of Isrealis have been killed in recent years - and thousands of Palestinians. In fact, last time I looked at the statistics the results have been about 10 dead Palestinians for every dead Isreali. A lot of this has to do with the Palestinians largely being armed with rocks and small bombs and the Isrealis having tanks, big guns, big bombs, an air force, and better weaponry in general.
Which is not to side with the Palestinians - EVERYONE involved in this conflict has bloody, bloody hands. Declared or not, it IS a war. It’s also a fucking mess. BOTH sides have multiple grievences against each other and frankly, the rest of the world has zero interest in helping to resolve the problem. In fact, some nations probably benefit from on-going chaos in the Middle East, sick though that is, and might even be stirring shit up behind the scenes. Reality sucks like that.
From my viewpoint, people who dance in the streets celebrating the death of anyone are … indescribably low life forms. I do not, however, advocate wiping them out for doing so. After 9/11/01 there were Palestinians dancing in the streets celebrating the deaths of thousands of Americans. It made me angry - but I couldn’t condone killing them just for expressing their opinion. (Those who fund terrorists, participate in killings, or work to overthrow governments, however, are a different case)
Now, the Yassin character WAS crippled and blind. For those not famillar with the conflict it DOES look pretty low and skanky to take out a blind parapeligiac leaving the mosque. However, if he’s the equivalent of FDR for his people - another parapeligiac leader - then yes, he is a legitimate target. While I think Isreali might have fared better in world opinion if they captured him and put him on trial, Isreali has gotten beaten up so often in the court of world opinion that they just don’t give a damn about it anymore. From an Isreali viewpoint, killing him is quicker and more certain and since they ARE at war (whether anyone officially recongizes that or not) that’s why they picked that route.
Just for anyone who isn’t clear on the concept - war is when you kill people and break things. The ideal is to make sure most of the dying and breaking is on the other side. You don’t win unless your people come home still breathing and your cities are still standing. It’s that brutal and simple.
Yes, I want ALL our boys and girls to come home. Not only come home, but come home in one piece, with sane minds. The absolutely scary thing is that you know, going in, some of them won’t be coming home intact, some won’t be coming home at all. The families of soliders - on both sides of the conflict - have to live with that horrible knowledge every day, not knowing if their loved one will be among the fortunate or not. That’s just one of the reasons war is hell.
Well, I don’t read much international law. But we (America) has been doing this for decades. (Or trying too - as in Castro to Saddam) I would assume that when we are successful, well, there is probably not much public bragging.
I agree. They shouldn’t have killed the bastard. Throw him in jail forever would have been better.
posted by sailor
In 1989 Hamas leader, Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, was arrested by the Israelis and sentenced to life imprisonment for ordering the killing of Palestinians who had allegedly collaborated with the Israeli army And
Yep, another BBC quote
I hope my question will not seem as if I support terrorists but…
I could have used quotes from other posters.
As far as Hamas and PLO are concerned, it does not matter that any Israeli is ‘innocent’ they see all of them as legitimate targets.
We have our point of view as to what might make up a legitimate target, killing this person only widens the gulf of understanding between the combatants.
You can be sure that Hamas will make great play over Yassims piety and his disability, surely this is a wonderful tool for Hamas propagandists to use.
Will it reduce the total number of suicide bombs ? Most unlikely, will it ease tensions in the short to medium terms, not a chance, has this particular person actually triggered the timer or pulled the trigger - probably not.
Maybe Sharon hopes that Hamas leaders will be so busy running in fear of their lives, never staying more than a couple of nights in one place that it will reduce their effectiveness, it has not stopped Hamas bombs yet and there is little reason to believe it will.
In a wider context, Hamas leaders in Syria and in the region will be just as determined, this story will be embroidered beyond belief and retold to Arab children around the world, he will be portrayed as a great leader with only concern for righteousness, he will be shown as a shining example of matrydom, yes, even a disabled man can be killed by a fearful Israel, how much more can a fully able person do against the great Satan …and this is how it will be seen in countries from Morocco right across to the Phillipines.
In the words of the song…
I’m sure they do. However that does not in any diminish the pain for American soldiers and their families. Would you want your spouse going to war? Would it make you sad?
That´s odd, why did the Israelis imprison him for crimes against Palestines?
Sorry, I must have skipped over your post. Here’s a Haaretz article. This makes a convincing argument that Yassin was not just a religious leader, but actively assisted terrorism. In fact, he did not even have a thorough knowledge of the Koran: “Yassin himself used to go to consult religious sages in Gaza about various matters.”
You are probably right. But to condemn his assassanation as murder, I think, is very insulting to the men, women, and children he had a say in killing.
posted by Ale
Because those Palestinians collaborated with the Israeli army? It’s in the quote, you know.
Maybe you missed the point - get some perspective. Yes, you want your loved ones to come home, preferably in one piece. Everyone desires that. I want every single American soldier currently deployed around the world to make it back happy and in perfect health. But that isn’t going to happen.
My spouse going to war would make me sad. But no one made them sign up for this. They know what they’re going into. Selfish as I (quite legitimately!) am, I am aware that there are things which are far to important to jeapardize for the sake of single soldier or even several soldiers’ lives. Protecting the international establishment of law and ethics by TRYING criminals, rather than executing them is one of those things. If ten soldiers had died trying to capture Saddam Hussein, it would have been preferable, from an ethical standpoint, to simply bombing the house where he was hiding. This is one of the reasons why this whole “war on terror” paradigm sucks so much: American (or insert other nationality here) soldiers HAVE to die in order to justify our moral stance in this conflict. If we stop sending in the boys to capture the criminals, and instead just bomb them from above or snipe them from a distance, then we destroy our claim to be fighting for justice, tenuous as it already is.
Are you insane? No it wouldn’t. We know Saddam has commited atrocities against humanities. If we just suspected Saddam of war crimes, then maybe you’re right. But his human rights violations are not a secret.
Our soldiers have to die so you feel all comfy and moral?
That doesn’t even work with policemen and regular-type criminals. If they are holding a gun, cops shoot to protect themselves - as well they should.
If the terrorists surrender, or can be caught without any risk to our soldiers, then they get a fair trial. If they resist, or try to, our soldiers should shoot them down without compunction - taking as much care as they can to avoid innocent bystanders in the way.
We have a moral right to defend ourselves from murderers. Self-defence is not, in and of itself, murder.
In the absence of a world sovereign authority, so-called “international law” is meaningless in the sense of “criminal law”. Powerful contries make the rules and act with breathtaking hypocracy. The receint attempt to censure Israel for assasinating a terrorist on the part of such paragons of human rights and respect for law as China and Russia make this point rather forcefully, I think.
The UN couldn’t condemn the US. We have veto power.