• 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -51 year ago

    They didn’t put the kids in with the terrorists, the terrorists did. They don’t get to dictate the terms of battle because it makes a small minority of westerners too sad to see any nuance or larger picture.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      “They have to kill the children because there are terrorists next to them” is really not a moral defense for killing children. If anything, it makes it seem like the terrorists have a point.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          fedilink
          English
          11 year ago

          “The terrorism came first” is also not a moral defense for killing children, sorry. I get that you really like the idea of killing people, but that doesn’t make it morally defensible.

            • Flying Squid
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              Ah, so now Hamas is letting children die from Israeli bombs and bullets.

              Boy do you do some pretzels trying to avoid connecting the victim with the killer.

              • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】
                link
                fedilink
                English
                0
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                They have always been content with letting children die, and with killing children. No pretzels. I have a consistent model. Happy to try and explain any distinction for you.

                • Flying Squid
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  11 year ago

                  You are also content with letting children die. You already said it was justified because they were indoctrinated.

                  So I guess you’re as bad as they are. Congratulations.