Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: one_less who wrote (588131)	9/29/2010 8:22:28 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571413

In what way(s) are they culpable outside #1 and #2? I didn't imply "outside of #1 and #2, inside of that statement, since those points alone would be enough to make them more culpable. The extra culpability would be a separate point, but it could reasonably be derived from the higher numbers intentionally killed and those accidentally killed, esp. the former. But having pointed that out, I will not directly say that they are more culpable outside of those points. They make less of an effort to avoid killing civilians when they target us, or our allies, but are not specifically targeting civilians. Also they make an effort to create a situation where our targeting them is more likely to result in civilian deaths. They are morally culpable for their decisions in this regard. I would even say that sometimes they are more morally culpable for the civilian deaths caused by our attacks than we are. If they fire at us with civilians around, esp. if they do so with the intention of trying to cause us to kill civilians, then they have responsibility even if our bullets kill the civilians.