Comment by michaelmrose
2 years ago
The criminal that hides under color of law while killing far more innocents is more odious on multiple fronts. Dead children and austere serious men walking through their blood reeking of offal and rightiousness is a disturbing contrast.
The US ought to disassociate ourselves forever from such undepentant criminals.
So the one that kills openly against the law prescribed by democracy is better? Do continue. The world is listening.
>ourselves
Please don't call yourself American. Your immorality is embarrassing me.
Israel: 10% acceptable civilian casualty as defense against Gaza. (An unsubstantiated claim without a source. But let's pretend it's true since that's what we're commenting on.)
Gaza: 100% intentional civilian casualty as defense... Uh wait, they weren't even defending anything. They were trying to uproot 12 million residents in a neighboring country. That is literally their stated goal.
How is the second one more moral? Don't bother answering because if you can explain that, you belong in prison, or you at least need a psych evaluation.
This post doesn't make any sense no matter how many times I try to parse it. You are part of the 10% I mention who lash out at anything anyone else says. Be well.
Which part didn't make sense? I'm happy to help you.
Start here: Gaza seeks to exterminate 100% of enemy civilians. It's in their charter and it's their stated goal.
Does that part make sense?
Next compare with Israel. According to this article their ugly secret mission is to save at least 90% of enemy civilians.
Which of those is preferable to you?
Lashes out
My commentary shows that desire to be moral does not always make for moral action. You thought you were rooting for the good guy, and it turned out that you're not. That can be upsetting. The right thing to do is to revise your view. I'm not lashing out. You're upset with yourself.
33 replies →