Subject:
|
Re: Hotel Palestine
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:29:17 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
263 times
|
| |
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Frank Filz writes:
> Pedro Silva wrote:
> > I still maintain the crewmen could have chosen to look more carefully. The
> > hotel has enough side clearance to stand isolated, so there are no
> > distractions to it. e might have wondered what that building was exactly,
> > with balconies in it (they're not that common in office buildings).
> > That's why I argue no common sense was used in the identification of the
> > hotel as a target.
> > Besides, why shoot one person, in a crowde building, with a shell? Why not
> > send in a small spec ops team to do it without risking to hit a non-target?
>
> What if they didn't have a special ops team? You seem to want the
> military to hang its butt out to avoid any possibility of injuring
> non-combatants. If the good guys always fought the way you seem to want
> them to, we wouldn't be living in anything resembling a democracy.
Not hang its butt. Just a little more observation skills, to be put to work
before the shootout.
> > Was it reasonable use of force?
> > If indeed the tank crewman thought he saw a spotter (and I have to give him
> > eagle eyes to choose among all the people with lenses on the balconies),
> > wasn't that whole incident a lot like using a nuke to kill flies?
>
> You just don't get it do you?
If I did, would I have posted?
> This line of debate is rapidly getting pointless.
You said it.
Pedro
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Hotel Palestine
|
| (...) What if they didn't have a special ops team? You seem to want the military to hang its butt out to avoid any possibility of injuring non-combatants. If the good guys always fought the way you seem to want them to, we wouldn't be living in (...) (22 years ago, 10-Apr-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
49 Messages in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|