 | | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) Just because the man should be dead or the world is better off with him dead doesn't mean Isreal was justified in killing him. In fact I would postulate that this will lead to much more killing that it will prevent. This is why a open policy (...) (21 years ago, 23-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) His organization has declared war on Israel. He was a completely legitimate target. (...) I think the Israelis believed that at one time, too, because the fact is that they probably could have snuffed out his pathetic existence any time that (...) (21 years ago, 23-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) I have a doubt, then. If he was under Israeli custody prior to 1997, and he was released, doesn't it imply the israelis accepted he was no longer fair game? Or was he released to become fair game? Pedro (21 years ago, 23-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) I don't get your logic. If killing him means nothing in the grand scheme of things then why was he killed? In fact, based on your above statement, I'd say that this was less of an act of self defense and more of an act of cold blooded murder. (...) (21 years ago, 23-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) I agree with the above. However I think that it raises a number of questions. Remember that I don't believe in the initiation of the use of force... but I have questions nonetheless. 1) When exactly is a country in a "state of war" with an (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) I'll try to answer the best I can, please let me know if anything does not satisfy you entirely; these are purely my *current* answers. (...) I am of the opinion one can not fight a war against a non-territorial entity, but I will admit this (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
"Pedro Silva" <el_gordo@netc.pt> wrote in message news:Hv2BF5.vt0@lugnet.com... (...) entity? (...) or (...) but if (...) to act (...) organization that (...) are yes, (...) entity, (...) used (...) metaphor. (...) 19th (...) is no (...) be (...) (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) I don't think terrorism is hard to define-- it's just that people use the term incorrectly or indiscriminately and therefore its definition is muddied. Terrorism is the targeted killing of innocent civilians by a person or group in order to (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
Don't make the mistake of assessing this event in isolation. The precedent has already been set; Israel has already apprehended a number of individuals (from Hamas members to Nazi war criminals) and put them on trial. Sharon did this because he does (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) All? It's just a wild guess. Of course both sides of a war will present arguments saying they're right, so they won't be of much help. Wars usually begin once conflicting interests can no longer be settled thru diplomatic channels, which are (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
"Pedro Silva" <el_gordo@netc.pt> wrote in message news:Hv3IF7.BuF@lugnet.com... (...) old (...) terrorism: "act (...) Hmm, by that definition, almost all acts of war are acts of terrorism. It is not practical in a military action to eliminate all (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) The nuance is that terrorism is performed by violence exclusively, but you can break an enemy's morale using other tactics. Not to mention a great deal in fighting a war has to do with destroying the opponents' ability to inflict damage on (...) (21 years ago, 24-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Sheikh Yassin
|
|
(...) This is just American popular historical fantasy of the sort the Japanese would be proud of. There was nothing indiscriminate about the targetting of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the intent was not taking out factories and infrastructure. (URL) (...) (21 years ago, 25-Mar-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
