I dream of living in ... a World Without Dictators! I'm a Libertarian Paternalist in Slovakia - Freedom with Responsibility - 10% of income into your own Pension; Tax Loans for education, health, housing; now supporting Employment Maximizing Companies!
Name: Tom Grey
Now a libertarian paternalist - progressive Conservative. I want lots of choices for people, with very responsible oriented defaults. Political, smaller gov't oriented, pro- Christian with tolerance and against changes reducing Christian influence.
Mo'nonymous on Real Life Business L...
Mo'nonymous on Real Life Business L...
3-d Analysis to Election Results
A family video - Grey Squirrels
Bush hate, Jew hate, Success hate
Fantasy Bush speech on Sudan as Genocide
Fantasy Condi speech at the NAACP
Harry Potter, Ender Wiggin, (no) Help for Iraqi People
Kerry's Lie -- the Moral Superiority War
Lessons to be learned from Abu Ghraib and Stanford
Money grubbing hate leads to Jew hate
NATO Human Rights Enforcement Group - HReg
Tax Loans
Tax Loans to Solve Immigration
Three Loves plus a New Heart
Will Iraq become a bloodbath?
zee AEI-Brookings papers on Libertarian Paternalism
today
April 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
un
abortion
africa
aid
blogs
cartoon war
christianity
corruption
darfur
democracy
economics
envy
europe
euston
free press
gas tax
gays
genocide
greys
harry potter
hearts and minds
human rights
immigration
innovation
iran
iraq
islamofascism
israel palestine
jobs
justice
katrina
leftist
maximum employment
media
military
moral hazard
morality
mortgages
music
pajamas media
peace
politics
poverty
property rights
reform
responsibility
secular
singularity ai
supreme court
tax loans
technology
terrorism
torture
troop withdrawal
unreal perfection
vietnam
world cop
wot
visited *loading* times
Marc Cooper is absolutely right:
"Nothing – not even the U.S. Army—more threatens the future of a democratic, pluralistic and (dare we wish, secular)
It struck in reading the comments that you, and many Leftists, fail to see that secularism comes AFTER a market oriented economy has both created lots of wealth AND has made "the customer, king". The kingship feelings of buyers, and their reduced acceptance of religious restrictions, is not well understood, nor talked about.
Some commenters are pretty irresponsible to call for the
http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2004/08/the_state_of_th.html
Marc Cooper has some good posts about the Left, and Norm’s idea that in pursuit of anti-imperialism, the left has lost its morality.
http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2004/08/two_good_antiwa.html
Norm follows Marc and laughs at Naomi Klein’s article.
http://marccooper.typepad.com/marccooper/2004/08/pimps_and_wimps.html
Then Marc describes the Swifties: “the SBVT attack on John Kerry is the lowest, filthiest campaign maneuver I’ve seen in my adult life. It’s deeply offensive and intellectually insulting.”
http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/40/dissonance-cooper.php
Marc, where you on May 4, when the Swifties had their Open Letter to Kerry? Where is your outrage that Kerry “the hero” didn’t spend a day in the hospital –and refuses to sign his Form 180 to release his records, nor show his notebook? Do you really believe he told the truth when he said he was illegally in
You actually like his anti-war stances: “The next volley from SBVT is already being prepped. This second onslaught, predictably enough, targets Kerry’s anti-war posture after he came home from
*I* am enraged that the anti-War movement depended on a Kerry assumption that leaving Vietnam would only cost some 3000 Viet lives in recrimination.
The reason Kerry skipped his 1971 Dick Cavett debate with O’Neill, and his Fulbright Senate testimony about Winter Soldier, is because he essentially lied.
Kerry said the costs of staying and fighting in
How many US soldier war crimes? Nobody knows. Most have feelings. I have 95% confidence that it’s between 2 000 – 20 000, innocent civilians targeted by Americans, with a bulge around 6 000 (80% of 4 000 – 8 000), from 1964 – 1974.
Another cost of the war was some 5-30 000 Vietnamese killed in the fighting, each year – just as dead, like manslaughtered, but not targeted, not murdered (like My Lai). Including those killed by the VC.
Actual cost of leaving: about 3 000 000 million Vietnamese and Cambodians killed, and 2 million in re-education internment camps.
When the
Advocating immediate withdrawal in 1971 was not morally superior.
Not many really want to argue the Vietnam war, again, but like all wars it is about using force. When should force be used; when should evil be fought.
Because the Left is arguing against even fighting evil, there is too little discussion of the best ways to actually fight the evil when it is fought.
Because the press was so focused on Bush-hate, they ignored the May 4 Swtifties.
The Swifties claim there were far fewer atrocities – not none, fewer than Kerry said.
Reality shows evil triumphant when
Iraq, and the Middle East, have this terrible similarity with Vietnam. In Vietnam in 1971 there was a choice. A hard choice. More war; or "peace". The ones who said "more war AND freedom (eventually)", also said that peace meant "peace AND the commies win, and kill tens-, hundreds- of thousands". The Anti-War folk said S. Vietnam would "never" be free, so war would be never-ending. They also said that peace would cost maybe 3000 lives.
The press is about to disown Kerry; there will then be a deluge of "Iraq slowly getting better" news, to prove they weren't Kerry pimps. Bush will get re-elected, in comfort, likely not a landslide. The Dems will blame the Press for failing to tell them how bad Kerry was.
But the big issue, unlikely to be talked about enough, is Iran. The choice will soon be:
Invade Iran and stop nukes; or "peace AND let Iran get nukes".
With Bush elected, Iran will be faced with a president who is ready to use war, and has a proven willingness to do so. Iran will accept total intrusive inspections, or else Bush will ask for authority to issue invasion orders. Maybe.
The MSM Press is guiltly of enabling Kerry's lying. And it's still blinding them to the importance of the Swifties. The press should have been all over the story of the May 4 SBVT conference when every commanding officer was against Kerry. Had the press NOT FAILED, then (or in 1986), there was still time for Dems to choose Edwards.
Leftist Press failure to get the truth about Kerry is an important part of the story, and the buying/ reading/ watching public wants that truth. And deserves it. Kerry's dead meat. And who is
Jeff says " We stopped our war. "
Yes. You and other well-meaning Leftists did that.
You got the
You think that getting the
Even after the evil commies committed genocide.
The choice was more war, or (
Real choices are tough -- with real results.
The Church problem is the confusion between charity & compassion, and gov't help. The former is peaceful, & voluntary. The latter is based on forced tax collection. The force is justified because "the rich won't pay their fair share" -- the force is based on destructive envy of the rich.
Real charity can't be forced -- but being forced to pay taxes can, and does, reduce real charity.
My own suggested solution: "Jesus was a Carpenter". Create church oriented organizations that are employment maximizing, and offer a job to all poor people. Building wood furniture, if nothing else. Even at a loss, in terms of selling it. Free market corporations are part of the Peaceful Creation of Wealth, that the Church has not yet fully incorporated into its spiritual considerations.
A gov't analogy would be a National Service Corps, offering a military style job (and the UCMJ!) to any and all volunteers, who "need a job". If the gov't is going to be the paternalist provider of cash, they should accept the responsibility to be the provider of "how to live" rules: nightly curfews, 12+ hours/ day duties + limited option recreation. NO obesity "sickness". Etc.
Hire lots of welfare mothers -- including required lifestyle training on chastity, home economics, television monitoring, cleaning of homes, home teaching, reading out loud, etc.
Or not -- have the program, benefits AND duties, voluntary. For those who "need" it, enough to accept the program.
(See Joe Carter)
On May 4, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth signed an UNPRECEDENTED open-letter against John Kerry.
It was ignored by the press; prolly because it wasn't sensational enough. Any objective, responsible press would have looked into the facts, and the factual accusations, and a bit more about the reality. The Main Stream Media failed, utterly, to do so. Because they are Leftists, blind to Kerry's faults out of their own Bush-hate.
No smear – yet devastating. Kerry needs to sign Form 180.
“It is our collective judgment that, upon your return from
As it becomes clear that Kerry is going down, the press will have to turn on him -- and even turn on itself, some. Or a lot. It could be fun press-eating frenzy -- the Press, in covering for Kerry but not enough, have set the Dems up for a huge loss.
Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty " As most attention on Iraq remains focused upon Al-Najaf, significant political events are taking place in Baghdad, where some 1,300 delegates from across the country are meeting to form a "people's" council that will advise the interim government. But the conference itself is turning into a vociferous political convention of a kind unimaginable in the Saddam era. "
A free press, and a Loyal Opposition, and then reasonable disagreement about policy.
MSNBC has more after the 18 Aug selection." The final 19 seats of the 100-member body will be filled by members of the former U.S.-appointed Governing Council who were not included in the interim government. ... Earlier on Wednesday, the 43-member delegation from Basra, Iraq's second-largest city, pulled out of the conference, protesting the number of candidates they were given on the council list, delegation member Isra Saad said. The delegates wanted three slots and were only given one, while Baghdad received four. "
Seems to me Basra should be closer to half of Baghdad, too.
Finance, Schminance.
We need to reform people's minds, and expectations. They mostly vote to get more of Other People's Money, collected by gov't taxes, which are
a) too high (on them), and
b) too low; on the rich (-er than them).
Foolishly supporting big gov't; which is always controlled by the rich and powerful who, on no account, are gonna easily let their cash be used on spoiled middle class entitlements.
(See Katie - The Resplendent Mango
http://resplendentmango.blogspot.com/2004_08_01_resplendentmango_archive.html#109362582089645910
Cambodia Genocide occurred because Leftist morality stopped oppostion to evil.
Such morals are not superior.
[update or duplicate edit? Here's the repeated new form.
There is the beginning of explicit recognition that we are in a Moral Superiority War (not a culture war). All intellectually honest folk SHOULD be enraged at the press, my point #2 below.
http://tomgrey.motime.com/1093544824#329796
The 3 big issues the Kerry Lie brings up (Lies):
1) Kerry’s Lie mean he is unfit to be commander in chief; he will be sunk by the Swifties.
2) The press & academia has been enabling Kerry for years, covering up his lies. The PC beliefs of most press reporters, and their censorship of discussion & cover up of the facts, has been enabling Kerry’s Lie, and most in the press are still trying to. Bush-hate by the press is no excuse for a press cover-up.
3) Kerry’s Lie helped create Political Correctness: “ending the Vietnam war, now” as the morally superior position. This is the Kerry Lie sand that PC is built on, and it is now developing cracks.
What is worth fighting for, what is worth fighting against?
The evil commies deserved to be fought against;
Saddam deserved to be fought against.
To fight means to kill, die, and even kill some innocents. The real alternative is surrender.
The desire to avoid killing innocents is good. That's what war crimes is all about. The evil guys don't have war crimes trials. If Christian based Civilization, Moral Civ, allows war trials to stop us from winning -- we will lose due to our morals.
Such morals are wrong.
From Freekerrybook.com
Today in
The current “Politically Correct” side has, generally, been born out of anti-Vietnam War protests. These anti-War folk believe, strongly, that the
Senator John Kerry is an apt representative of the PC anti-War group, as well as being symptomatic of why the PC folk are so often fundamentally wrong. John Kerry lied about some of the costs of the Vietnam War, and lied about the costs of continuing to be there; and was incompetently foolish, if not willfully lying, about the low cost of leaving
Based on these types of lies, people believed Kerry, and decided that the Vietnam War was not a Just War, and therefore the morally superior action was to leave
To repeat the 3 big issues the Kerry Lie brings up:
1) Kerry’s Lies means Kerry is unfit to be commander in chief; he will be sunk by the Swifties.
2) The press has been enabling Kerry for years, covering up his lies. The PC press beliefs and their censorship of discussion, and cover up of the facts, has been and continues trying to enable Kerry’s Lie.
3) Kerry’s Lie helped create Political Correctness; “ending the Vietnam war, now” as the morally superior position. PC is built on Kerry Lie sand, and it is now developing cracks.
What is worth fighting for, what is worth fighting against? The evil commies deserved to be fought against; Saddam deserved to be fought against. Kerry’s Lie is a loser in the Moral Superiority War.
When the current reality is infused with lies, its comparison to Unreal Perfection, or something near it, looks even worse.
The Kerry Lie in 1971, and Lies after, helped to create Political Correctness, and the global anti-Americanism. To review this requires asking a question explicitly, that nobody seems to want to ask.
What is the morally superior position about the
Two main choices, Stay or Leave.
Stay: continue to support the slow, nation-building Vietnamization strategy
Leave: end the
Stay:
Benefits -- a free and democratic
Costs – more Americans dying (3 000?/year for 5 more years?), more Americans killing (40-90 000 / year?), especially more killing innocents (like Mai Lai; maybe 200 murders/year?), POWs stay in
Leave:
Benefits: end the costs of staying; get POWs home, end Americans killing innocents
Costs –
Kerry estimated a few thousand; AIKEN mentioned some 800 000 “bloodbath”
Kerry’s testimony to Senator Hatfield, and his debate on Dick Cavett with John O'Neill, now part of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
In his 1971 testimony to the US Senate, Kerry testified on the “Winter Soldier” investigation. Here, unnamed veterans related the terrible atrocities they had been committing in
Which is morally superior, stay or leave? Cost of staying in terms of US murders.
1-O’Neill) Stay – costs one Mai Lai every year, some 200
2- Kerry) Stay – costs US atrocities, hundreds of Mai Lai every year, thousands of murders.
When Kerry repeated the Winter Soldier lies, about the atrocities of the
Cost of leaving, in terms of evil commie murders.
1-O’Neill) Leaving – costs hundreds of thousands of SE Asians to evil commies
2-Kerry) Leaving – costs some 3 to 4 thousands killed to NV recrimination
***Actuality – about 2 million Viet boat people, 1 million in re-education camps where hundreds of thousands die, 2 million Cambodians killed, thousands of Viet ***
In 1971, irrespective of the History of
The historians pretty much show that Kerry’s atrocities could not be investigated, that the "witnesses" were unwilling to witness. (*Kerry didn’t want these soldiers investigated, but wanted the leaders to be investigated.)
Kerry was a leader in 1971 of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW) claiming the
The 1971 environment was where four protesters were shot at
(Good military site, great if you like armor)
Normal people were questioning whether the
“Isolated atrocities committed by American soldiers produced torrents of outrage from antiwar critics and the news media while Communist atrocities were so common that they received hardly any attention at all. The
The SBVT Timeline is great about the KGB funded effort to spread lies about American atrocities.
It seems that the media, and even the historians, have not yet examined the moral issues of the US decision to “surrender” and leave SE Asia; meaning the 1973 decision to end funding.
Kerry told a lie about illegally being in
(*Note, O’Neill doesn’t express how many innocents would be murdered, but seems to accept some real mistakes meaning some killed. Accepted that bombing killed innocents, and noted that the
Nation of Islam with PC view of
Where is Lt. Calley today? Selling insurance somewhere in America.
The same lack of human decency shown in prior centuries and decades is only modernized today in Iraq to reflect the perverse degradation that exists in America. The prisoners were tortured and threatened with dogs, electrocution and humiliation. Their faith and culture were mocked on a daily basis in the name of softening them up for interrogators.
The “greatest country in the world’s” tenuous claim to moral authority has once again vanished like the illusion the descendants of slaves know. “Operation Iraqi Freedom” was nothing more than a mirage, a smoke and mirrors trick to get the American public and the world to sanction war.”
Actually he's a jewler, who refuses to talk about My Lai. But he's an icon. Because the US is not perfect, it's terrible.
When and how to fight evil, and when not? The question for the 21st Century, as measured from The Year Of Our Lord; and also the Common Era. “All that is necessary for evil to succeed, is for good men to do nothing”
Kerry LIED about being in
There are three HUGE issues:
1- Kerry’s lies, in and of themselves, with the inescapable conclusion that he is Unfit for Command. The Swifties vs. Kerry are gonna win this issue.
2 – How the Press has been enabling Kerry to lie, even encouraging it, through publicity; and how their censorship of honest criticism has left the Dems with such a loser of a candidate.
3 – How Kerry’s lies, and the Press lies, have created this false PC Leftism which claims Moral Superiority. Yet is not, because it is based on lies.
The Culture War is about the moral high ground. Kerry’s Lie is the sandy foundation for PC moral superiority – and the
The PC house-on-sand is based on Just War theory, and the PC conclusions that the
Yechh – Just War theory; I’m not an expert on this, I don’t want to write about this, (I just want to simply explain why I’m right and those who disagree are wrong) … Additional points related to Sensationalism; Partisanship; Double Standards & Hypocrisy; and PC & The Culture War seem too much for one big blog post. Relevant Just War comments are excerpted separately. With all the blog blather about Kerry, his lies, and even about
John Kerry IS a hero. He fought, was wounded, got medals, was discharged honorably.
John Kerry IS a traitor. He provided comfort to “the Enemy”; and his words were used against
Kerry repeated LIES; not just exaggerations. The minor lies were about himself, his actions to get medals (and be a Hero!). The BIG LIE was about the immorality of the American soldier.
The purpose of Kerry’s lies was to DEMONIZE Nixon, and the PRESS was always pretty happy to accept any bad news about Nixon. An unintended consequence was to demonize all Vietnam Vets – which many were enraged at and have been enraged for years.
Kerry’s 72 advice was a QUICK FIX, set a date, get all troops out, accept a little bloodshed in leaving. The O’Neill pro-war alternative was long, slow, S.
[Nixon-hate, by the Press, is an interesting issue about Power & Corruption. Nixon was a crook, and a liar, and really stupid for his own cover-up, instead of an apology. (My first vote was for Jimmy Carter, because Ford pardoned Nixon, before a trial) Unfortunately, in their desire to “get Nixon”, the press gained more power, yet became infected with intellectual corruption – that supporting one-sided lies against a “greater evil” is a good cause. This Press corruption was seen in Reagan-hate, and is in full bloom now with their pimping for Bush-hate. It is part of Political Correctness, and it’s wrong.]
(There’s SO much meat here many won’t even want to taste any!)
Kerry’s BIG LIE was that the
See Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.
http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=KerryinVietnam
and especially
http://swift1.he.net/~swiftvet/index.php?topic=WarCrimes
and http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/ and their key points http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=Keys
http://ice.he.net/~freepnet/kerry/index.php?topic=New
Winter Soldier -- Launched
They nicely highlight that Kerry’s political career was based on his Winter Soldier LIES.
On
In April, the VVAW stormed
But the mass murder of civilians was never American policy in
Also Kerry’s poor judgment: “So what I am saying is that yes, there will be some recrimination but far, far less than the 200,000 a year who are murdered by the United States of America..."
My own hot button is Genocide. In
Another other hot button concerns Bush-hate, and how the Press supports it. The press Bush-hate has blinded them to Kerry’s LIES, and enabled Kerry to promote his political career, based on his big
Kerry was foolish to believe in “some recrimination but far, far less than the 200 000/year”.
He thought giving some 2000 – 3000 S. Viet leaders asylum would be enough to avoid any bloodbath. Is foolishness, blindness to history, evil? No. Kerry wanting to take our S. Viet friends home, and surrender, is not evil.
But it is NOT morally superior, because it’s wrong. Yet I wouldn’t be so upset if “only” 200 000 had been murdered by the evil commies. It would still be wrong, but not so obvious. And, had the commies merely murdered 20 000, ten times more than Kerry’s (foolish little) estimate, I would agree that getting out and stopping the killing was better than continued bombing.
PLEASE read the Dick Cavett show debate! (I *remember* Dick Cavett!!!)
Also remember that, at the time, the US Army was prosecuting Lt. Calley for war crimes at Mai Lai. And the Pentagon Papers had come out, making Johnson’s group, especially, look bad.
Kerry against the third John in this 2004 election, John O’Neill. John Edwards was still in high school? Or less?
Note how John O'Neill near the end called it correctly -- the US leaves and there's a commie bloodbath.
Kerry was totally wrong, expecting no more than a few thousand commie murders (which, I must say, seems a reasonable sacrifice to me, as well, if I believed it). Kerry totally bad, in hindsight.
The anti-War "there will be no bloodbath" claim, as part of moral superiority, and wrong, is almost not noticed in the press.
beliefnet had this in 2002:
“The just war tradition traces its inception from
Yes, Just War is to accept that violence, at times, must be used to stop violence – because force is a feature of a fallen world. The issue is the Just use of force. If we are not fighting for truth and justice, we prolly shouldn’t be fighting – but we need to be honest about the costs of not fighting, too.
Philocrites has two fine views of Christian Just War-- the Soft View, and the Hard View; and then the big question of which is the bigger threat.
“Soft just war theory is characterized by seven key components: a strongly articulated horror of war; a strong presumption against war; a skepticism about government claims; the use of just war theory as a tool for citizen discernment and prophetic critique; a pattern of trusting the efficacy of international treaties, multilateral strategies and the perspectives of global peace and human rights groups and the international press; a quite stringent application of just war criteria; and a claim of common ground with Christian pacifists.
[Hard] A presumption against injustice and disorder rather than against war; an assumption that war is tragic but inevitable in a fallen world and that war is a necessary task of government; a tendency to trust the U.S. government and its claims of need for military action; an emphasis on just war theory as a tool to aid policymakers and military personnel in their decisions; an inclination to distrust the efficacy of international treaties and to downplay the value of international actors and perspectives; a less stringent or differently oriented application of some just war criteria; and no sense of common ground with Christian pacifists.
{Which mistake is happening more?}
Hard just war theory can make American Christians too likely to support marginal or unjust wars and in general to be unreflective about our nation's activities in the world. Yet soft just war theory can weaken our moral clarity on those occasions when we must have sufficient resolve to fight truly just wars. Which is the greater problem today? A struggle against groups that fly jetliners into buildings requires the steely resolve that hard just war theory contributes. But if this occurs at the expense of peacemaking efforts mandated by Jesus that can get at the roots of global terrorism, or costs us the ability to think critically, we will go badly astray.”
Yes, the correct, difficult question. Does Christian Civilization support too many unjust wars, or are we too unresolved to fight the truly just wars? The West missed in Cambodia and Rwanda and half of Bosnia; it is missing now in Sudan. My own answer is clear, we are not fighting enough for justice, for human rights, for democracy, for a free press and freedom of worship.
Justice is worth fighting for. But not all fighting is for justice. How to know? Just War Theory. Prior to some
When enemies differ greatly because of different religious beliefs, race, or language, war conventions have rarely been applied. It is only when the enemy is seen to be a people with whom one will do business in the following peace that tacit or explicit rules are formed for how wars should be fought and who they should involve. {asymmetrical war}
It has been the concern of the majority of just war theorists that such asymmetrical morality should be denounced, and that the rules of war should apply to all equally; that is, just war theory should be universal. {universal morality}
Justice of the war: having just cause, being declared by a proper authority, possessing right intention, having a reasonable chance of success, and the end being proportional to the means used.
It is commonly held that aggressive war is only permissible if its purpose is to retaliate against a wrong already committed (e.g., to pursue and punish an aggressor), or to pre-empt an anticipated attack. {anti-aggression }
Putatively, a just war cannot be considered to be just if reasons of national interest are paramount or overwhelm the pretext of fighting aggression. … According to Kant, possessing good intent constitutes the only condition of moral activity, regardless of the consequences envisioned or caused, and regardless, or even in spite, of any self interest in the action the agent may have. {intent }
The next principle is that of reasonable success… Given just cause and right intention, the just war theory asserts that there must be a reasonable probability of success. {***probability of success }
The final guide of jus ad bellum, is that the desired end should be proportional to the means used. … For [country] B to invade and annex regions of [country] A is nominally a disproportionate response, unless (controversially) that is the only method for securing guarantees of no future reprisals. {proportional }
The rules of just conduct fall under the two broad principles of discrimination … who are legitimate targets in war, … and proportionality, …how much force is morally appropriate. {who are targets; how much force }
In waging war it is considered unfair and unjust to attack indiscriminately … [there is some] renouncing of rights by combatants by virtue of their war status, leaving a sphere of immunity for civilians. {immunity }
Targeting a military establishment in the middle of a city is permissible according to the doctrine of double effect, for the target is legitimate. Civilian casualties are a foreseeable but accidental effect. {civilian casualties}
Usually combatants carry arms openly, but guerrillas disguise themselves as civilians. … At a deeper level, one can consider the role that civilians play in supporting an unjust war; to what extent are they morally culpable, and if they are culpable to some extent, does that mean they may become legitimate targets? This invokes the issue of collective versus individuality responsibility that is in itself a complex topic. {non-identifiable}
Any offence should remain strictly proportional to the objective desired….At the battle of Omdurman in the Sudan, six machine gunners killed thousands of dervishes—the gunners may have been in the right to defend themselves, but the principle of proportionality demands that a battle ends before it becomes a massacre. {*I don’t believe this means the machine gunners should have accepted being killed – the dervishes should have stopped attacking! }
Jus In Bello requires that the agents of war be held responsible for their actions. … The issues that arise from this principle include the morality of obeying orders (for example, when one knows those orders to be immoral), as well as the status of ignorance (not knowing of the effects of one’s actions). {responsibility}
Winter Soldier -- Launched
Where were any of the Dems? The Press, pimping for Kerry, didn't look, didn't see, didn't report.
Didn't think it would matter?
This was before the over-covered Abu mess. And the Dems still had a chance to say NO to Kerry -- but the
Bush-hating press was too busy to look at the Dems, and their weaknesses.
Template by Splinder.com | header image credit: Markus Gann © www.begann.de