Since I did nothing of the sort - as I don't know or much care what the "Israeli government talking points" are, it's a happy accident if they are applying universal human rights laws consistently and agree with me!
The rules you are proposing are incoherent and self contradictory, I can see that even on my first cup of coffee on a fine c…
Since I did nothing of the sort - as I don't know or much care what the "Israeli government talking points" are, it's a happy accident if they are applying universal human rights laws consistently and agree with me!
The rules you are proposing are incoherent and self contradictory, I can see that even on my first cup of coffee on a fine crisp morning here in Mipples, but let's make you the hypothetical leader of a terrorist state that has seized control of (checks map)
Other terrorists flock to your newly liberated territory. You refuse to allow free elections - in fact, you imprison and frequently execute your fiendish, infidel opposition - how dare they challenge the sacred and holy supreme cause of THUGB? - dragging their bodies through the streets behind motorbikes as hoots and jeers resound, encouraging the youth to emulate you in every way in your prime goal: to seize power in the illegitimate settler nation of Canada, just across Lake Erie.
We can work out the various spurious rationales and some patriarchal sky God's eternally just and immutable decrees and promises (Eternity in Paradise with dancing angel houris on pins of light, plus bonus eternal martyrdom points for fallen fighters sounds about right) on behalf of your goals later, this hypothetical aims to capture and highlight some of the many fatal flaws in the position you've staked out vis-a-vis deploying civilian human shields to render deadly attacks on enemies beyond the reach of lawful retaliation. Which is the kind of license every kidnapping gangster dreams of as well, does that give you pause?
You can question the relevant point-to-point analogical correspondence with HAMAS/GAZA (THUGB/BUFFALO and STATE OF ISRAEL/CANADA) I maintain is valid, and I will endeavor to refute your refutation, maybe we will both learn something!
OK I have a long day ahead Kathryn, so let's cut to the chase: how many missile and mortar platforms can you, should you, legally, morally, ethically, however you want to slice it, be able to site, and how many victims can those platforms slaughter at long range, from locations inside Shea's Performing Arts Center, on the Canisius College campus inside residence halls, and inside these buildings:
"Buffalo's architecture is diverse, with a collection of 19th- and 20th-century buildings.[68] Downtown Buffalo landmarks include Louis Sullivan's Guaranty Building, an early skyscraper;[69][70] the Ellicott Square Building, once one of the largest of its kind in the world;[71] the Art Deco Buffalo City Hall and the McKinley Monument, and the Electric Tower. Beyond downtown, the Buffalo Central Terminal was built in the Broadway-Fillmore neighborhood in 1929; the Richardson Olmsted Complex, built in 1881, was an insane asylum[72] until its closure in the 1970s.[73] Urban renewal from the 1950s to the 1970s spawned the Brutalist-style Buffalo City Court Building and Seneca One Tower, the city's tallest building.[74] In the city's Parkside neighborhood, the Darwin D. Martin House was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright in his Prairie School style.[75] Since 2016, Washington DC real estate developer Douglas Jemal has been acquiring, and redeveloping iconic properties throughout the city.[76]" [Wikipedia]
Just think: you are able to hit downtown Toronto from these sites, you're counting in the rep burnished over the years Buffalo as "The City of Good Neighbors" to help out only at first, since unfortunately you've had well over a decade in power systematically diverting international aid monies from the civilian population of Buffalo's desperate needs, to arm and train your terrorist fighters. And purchase guns, lots and lots of guns.
How long before Canada or the city authorities in Toronto, in concert with Canadian and international allies, are legally allowed to target the missile and mortar platforms? If your answer is "never," because innocent civilians' right to life trumps absolutely all other human rights, what's to stop the The Holy Unafraid Government of Buffalo - "THUGB," for short - from mobilizing this shield motif more ambitiously, and organizing an armada to sail up Lake Erie for an amphibious landing operation, to liberate Toronto in the sacred cause of (Insert sacred cause here)?
My move? It’s not a chess game, and since I fundamentally disagree with a number of premises behind your long post, I will not engage with you. Also, your first sentence says all too much about your worldview. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the notion that the neo-fascists who make up Netanyahu’s egregious coalition apply “universal human rights laws consistently.” If you have any liberal friends in Israel, ask them what they think of that statement. I will not reply to you after this.
It's just an expression, and since you cannot even be bothered to take this seriously enough to explain one single " fundamental disagreement with a number of premises behind your long post" you're not even arguing in good faith! That's likely because you CANNOT explain why the Hamas terrorists (or any other group anywhere, at any time, for any purpose - none of this has anything to do with Hamas, Israel, Netanyahu, Neo-Fascism per se, whether on the part of Hamas, which would be much too charitable a description, and I AGREE THAT NETANYAHU IS HORRENDOUS, BACKWARDS, A TERRIBLE LEADER, but so what?
This is all about different conceptions of UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS, not personalities! AT NO JUNCTURE in this did it ever become my duty to agree with what policies Netanyahu follows, and if you go back and read what I wrote more closely you will see why - moreover I have been thinking and researching this and connected topics since the early 1970s at Macalester, and especially since my Theories of Justice course and work in graduate school at the U. of Minnesota -Twin Cities, and then in law school, have my own views based on those readings and reflections, and am also familiar with the general position you are taking BECAUSE I USED TO BELIEVE IT WAS CORRECT!
"Also, your first sentence says all too much about your worldview."
??????? You cannot be seriously arguing from that kind of egregiously smug and condescending position, can you? Because we deeply disagree about allowing terrorists to be granted carte blanche immunity from as direct a retaliation as possible - maybe it should be emphasized that it would require taking all steps to AVOID killing civilians, thus it might well involve a lengthy campaign of gathering intelligence to insert commandos who would speak fluent Arabic and be able to bluff out a very short-term mission as Gazans, ok, it will be difficult to say the least, but I didn't commit myself to any "mass area bombings," that may be your assumption but that's all it is - it's supposed to ME who is the "bad guy" here?
No, we just sincerely disagree, but it would reflect better on you if you respected someone who disagreed with you, without implying they are so gullible they trust Netanyahu, or are some kind of "crypto-fascist" because they want to be able to retaliate legally and as carefully as possible (after those massive leaflet drops, after soliciting Hamas to release the kidnap victims and unilaterally surrender since they are the genocidal aggressors IN THIS INSTANCE, after exploring all other reasonable means of military engagement that could possibly help kill Hamas leadership, arrest them for war crimes trials if possible, etc.)
So there you have it: you need to either defend your wildly implausible claims or admit you can't consistently apply them - without leading to something bordering on complete surrender by legal authorities all over the planet, to whichever gang or cult or terrorist group or narco-state or drug cartel or ad hoc rebel group, as in my THUGB hypothetical, seizes hostages amongst a civilian population and starts murdering people from behind their human shields.
It's OBVIOUSLY not a "game," except in the sense that all reasoned debates allow disagreeing parties to take turns, and so on. I am playing fair and will defend my views, you seem to want to engage more in smear tactics and unilateral declarations of "moral superiority," so that ends it.
I will be sure to occasionally feature exactly this kind of discussion / debate, on exactly this kind of highly controversial topic on my Substack column - forthcoming, so thanks for at least providing useful data points for further analysis, Kathryn, and we can both cordially ignore each other henceforth, right?
Since I did nothing of the sort - as I don't know or much care what the "Israeli government talking points" are, it's a happy accident if they are applying universal human rights laws consistently and agree with me!
The rules you are proposing are incoherent and self contradictory, I can see that even on my first cup of coffee on a fine crisp morning here in Mipples, but let's make you the hypothetical leader of a terrorist state that has seized control of (checks map)
https://www.visitbuffaloniagara.com/ Buffalo New York
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buffalo,_New_York
Other terrorists flock to your newly liberated territory. You refuse to allow free elections - in fact, you imprison and frequently execute your fiendish, infidel opposition - how dare they challenge the sacred and holy supreme cause of THUGB? - dragging their bodies through the streets behind motorbikes as hoots and jeers resound, encouraging the youth to emulate you in every way in your prime goal: to seize power in the illegitimate settler nation of Canada, just across Lake Erie.
We can work out the various spurious rationales and some patriarchal sky God's eternally just and immutable decrees and promises (Eternity in Paradise with dancing angel houris on pins of light, plus bonus eternal martyrdom points for fallen fighters sounds about right) on behalf of your goals later, this hypothetical aims to capture and highlight some of the many fatal flaws in the position you've staked out vis-a-vis deploying civilian human shields to render deadly attacks on enemies beyond the reach of lawful retaliation. Which is the kind of license every kidnapping gangster dreams of as well, does that give you pause?
You can question the relevant point-to-point analogical correspondence with HAMAS/GAZA (THUGB/BUFFALO and STATE OF ISRAEL/CANADA) I maintain is valid, and I will endeavor to refute your refutation, maybe we will both learn something!
OK I have a long day ahead Kathryn, so let's cut to the chase: how many missile and mortar platforms can you, should you, legally, morally, ethically, however you want to slice it, be able to site, and how many victims can those platforms slaughter at long range, from locations inside Shea's Performing Arts Center, on the Canisius College campus inside residence halls, and inside these buildings:
"Buffalo's architecture is diverse, with a collection of 19th- and 20th-century buildings.[68] Downtown Buffalo landmarks include Louis Sullivan's Guaranty Building, an early skyscraper;[69][70] the Ellicott Square Building, once one of the largest of its kind in the world;[71] the Art Deco Buffalo City Hall and the McKinley Monument, and the Electric Tower. Beyond downtown, the Buffalo Central Terminal was built in the Broadway-Fillmore neighborhood in 1929; the Richardson Olmsted Complex, built in 1881, was an insane asylum[72] until its closure in the 1970s.[73] Urban renewal from the 1950s to the 1970s spawned the Brutalist-style Buffalo City Court Building and Seneca One Tower, the city's tallest building.[74] In the city's Parkside neighborhood, the Darwin D. Martin House was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright in his Prairie School style.[75] Since 2016, Washington DC real estate developer Douglas Jemal has been acquiring, and redeveloping iconic properties throughout the city.[76]" [Wikipedia]
Just think: you are able to hit downtown Toronto from these sites, you're counting in the rep burnished over the years Buffalo as "The City of Good Neighbors" to help out only at first, since unfortunately you've had well over a decade in power systematically diverting international aid monies from the civilian population of Buffalo's desperate needs, to arm and train your terrorist fighters. And purchase guns, lots and lots of guns.
How long before Canada or the city authorities in Toronto, in concert with Canadian and international allies, are legally allowed to target the missile and mortar platforms? If your answer is "never," because innocent civilians' right to life trumps absolutely all other human rights, what's to stop the The Holy Unafraid Government of Buffalo - "THUGB," for short - from mobilizing this shield motif more ambitiously, and organizing an armada to sail up Lake Erie for an amphibious landing operation, to liberate Toronto in the sacred cause of (Insert sacred cause here)?
Your move.
My move? It’s not a chess game, and since I fundamentally disagree with a number of premises behind your long post, I will not engage with you. Also, your first sentence says all too much about your worldview. I don’t know whether to laugh or cry at the notion that the neo-fascists who make up Netanyahu’s egregious coalition apply “universal human rights laws consistently.” If you have any liberal friends in Israel, ask them what they think of that statement. I will not reply to you after this.
It's just an expression, and since you cannot even be bothered to take this seriously enough to explain one single " fundamental disagreement with a number of premises behind your long post" you're not even arguing in good faith! That's likely because you CANNOT explain why the Hamas terrorists (or any other group anywhere, at any time, for any purpose - none of this has anything to do with Hamas, Israel, Netanyahu, Neo-Fascism per se, whether on the part of Hamas, which would be much too charitable a description, and I AGREE THAT NETANYAHU IS HORRENDOUS, BACKWARDS, A TERRIBLE LEADER, but so what?
This is all about different conceptions of UNIVERSAL HUMAN RIGHTS, not personalities! AT NO JUNCTURE in this did it ever become my duty to agree with what policies Netanyahu follows, and if you go back and read what I wrote more closely you will see why - moreover I have been thinking and researching this and connected topics since the early 1970s at Macalester, and especially since my Theories of Justice course and work in graduate school at the U. of Minnesota -Twin Cities, and then in law school, have my own views based on those readings and reflections, and am also familiar with the general position you are taking BECAUSE I USED TO BELIEVE IT WAS CORRECT!
"Also, your first sentence says all too much about your worldview."
??????? You cannot be seriously arguing from that kind of egregiously smug and condescending position, can you? Because we deeply disagree about allowing terrorists to be granted carte blanche immunity from as direct a retaliation as possible - maybe it should be emphasized that it would require taking all steps to AVOID killing civilians, thus it might well involve a lengthy campaign of gathering intelligence to insert commandos who would speak fluent Arabic and be able to bluff out a very short-term mission as Gazans, ok, it will be difficult to say the least, but I didn't commit myself to any "mass area bombings," that may be your assumption but that's all it is - it's supposed to ME who is the "bad guy" here?
No, we just sincerely disagree, but it would reflect better on you if you respected someone who disagreed with you, without implying they are so gullible they trust Netanyahu, or are some kind of "crypto-fascist" because they want to be able to retaliate legally and as carefully as possible (after those massive leaflet drops, after soliciting Hamas to release the kidnap victims and unilaterally surrender since they are the genocidal aggressors IN THIS INSTANCE, after exploring all other reasonable means of military engagement that could possibly help kill Hamas leadership, arrest them for war crimes trials if possible, etc.)
So there you have it: you need to either defend your wildly implausible claims or admit you can't consistently apply them - without leading to something bordering on complete surrender by legal authorities all over the planet, to whichever gang or cult or terrorist group or narco-state or drug cartel or ad hoc rebel group, as in my THUGB hypothetical, seizes hostages amongst a civilian population and starts murdering people from behind their human shields.
It's OBVIOUSLY not a "game," except in the sense that all reasoned debates allow disagreeing parties to take turns, and so on. I am playing fair and will defend my views, you seem to want to engage more in smear tactics and unilateral declarations of "moral superiority," so that ends it.
I will be sure to occasionally feature exactly this kind of discussion / debate, on exactly this kind of highly controversial topic on my Substack column - forthcoming, so thanks for at least providing useful data points for further analysis, Kathryn, and we can both cordially ignore each other henceforth, right?
Shoshana Bryen on closely connected issues:
https://www.sdjewishworld.com/2009/12/28/security-for-israel-by-israel/
Less snark, please.
hahaha