Foreign Affairs Discussion Group Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: GST who wrote (201588)	9/6/2006 2:21:08 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) of 281500

A nuclear response to a nuclear attack has not taken place. In your hypothetical scenario we would supposedly be defending ourselves and to the extent that our use of nuclear weapons met that criteria of self-defense it could be justified. Now why is it that you approve of committing "war crimes" by defending the policy of nuclear retaliation in response to a nuclear attack upon our cities?? Yet.. when Hizbullah DELIBERATELY TARGETS CIVILIANS and the Israelis allegedly respond "in kind" the Israelis are suddenly guilty of committing a war crime? In the case of nuclear retaliation, civilians are targeted.. And in the case of retaliation against Katyusha attacks, Israel (according to you) deliberately targets civilians... I don't see the difference, except for the level of retaliatory force being used. Today we have soldiers who will likely face the death penalty for murdering Iraqi civilians if found guilty. If found guilty for the crime they are accused of, they SHOULD BE EXECUTED. I certainly don't want them walking our streets. Hawk

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next