<p>Thank you, Hunt, for your comments.</p>
<p>The ethics of bombing residential areas such as cities during war can be debated. Largely it has been decided that it is unethical, although this was the norm at least until World War II (e.g., bombings of Dresden and London). However,there is a difference between terrorism (modern definition) and acts of war from a tangible state-nation after war has been declared. The latter, though they can be brutal, is at least civilized On its face it may not matter if people are killed by a nation-state’s act of war or by a terrorist act. However, the difference is that when war is clearly defined, it can be won or lost, and thus, there is the possibility of peace. With terrorism, there is no peace, ever. There is no collective decision to wage war or not; there is only one random individual’s choice.</p>
<p>I agree with you to some extent, collegealum, but I will point out that, so far, a nation-state’s ability to wreak havoc has been much, much greater than terrorists have been able to do–have there been 100,000 people killed in terrorist attacks in history? Of course, that could change horribly at any time, which is what really worries me about terrorism.</p>
<p>Just because it could be debated doesnt mean it isnt a specious position.</p>
<ul>
<li>the WWII residents of cities that were bombed were aware of a declared state of war</li>
<li>the WWII residents of cities that were bombed had been leafleted numerous times</li>
<li>the WWII residents of cities that were bombed were in the same set of people likely to be killed in much greater number if there was a physical invasion. </li>
</ul>
<p>None of these situations hold in Boston. There was no implied assumption of risk in attending the Marathon. </p>
<p>Even assuming that you draw the false equivalency, what is the implication? Clearly the shady Tsarnaev family shouldnt have been let in; having been let in their contact with radical elements should have been monitored; monitoring should have detected their downloading of bomb plans and buying of multiple pressure cookers; active monitoring should have prevented the bombing; even having failed to prevent the bombing, a foreign islamist who had been out of the country and had a jihad youtube channel should have been at the top of the suspect list on day 1 when a bomb goes off a couple of miles from his residence. Instead they waited 4 days before releasing the picture to even id the guys. </p>
<p>The idea is being pushed they they are all lone wolves, nothing could be done, and police and DHS did just a bang up job. In reality there are scores of dead and wounded and the economic cost to Boston is in the hundreds of millions because of the many lost opportunities to take actions which could have prevented these crimes.</p>
<p>I was responding primarily to the idea that Muslims are bad because some of them said that suicide bombing to defend Islam is sometimes justified. You’ve just given your argument for why dropping a nuclear bomb on a populated city is sometimes justified.</p>
<p>Well where is the analogy to another Western group sharing a similar feeling? Even if you want to go back WWII its a materially different situation.</p>
<p>As I said before, I’d be interested in the results if the same poll question were asked in the U.S. with “to defend America” or “to defend Christianity” instead of “to defend Islam.” Are you comfortable predicting what percentage of Americans would answer that suicide bombing would sometimes be justified to defend America or Christianity? After all, it seems pretty clear that there are quite a few Americans who think that torture can be justified to defend America: <a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost;
<p>And what would you deduce from a hypothetical survey of Americans about a hypothetical event?</p>
<p>I would deduce that we’re too quick to condemn others for traits that we may exhibit ourselves.</p>
<p>I’d say someone of us arent quick enough. </p>
<p>In the event that the hypothetical you propose comes to pass we’ll have plenty of opportunity to condemn those positions too.</p>
<p>so Hunt do you think it is ever justifiable to use suicide bombers to defend Christianity?</p>
<p>you can substitute any religion, I don’t think it’s ever justifiable.</p>
<p>I don’t. But I also don’t think it’s ever justifiable to use torture, and a majority of Americans disagree with me. What would those people say about suicide bombing? I wish I was confident that they’d be repulsed by the idea, but they apparently aren’t repulsed by torture.</p>
<p>They would say that in one instance you are talking about people involved in crimes and in the other you talking about innocent bystanders who are being targeted specifically because of their innocence. Therefor your comparison is meaningless.</p>
<p>Maybe not suicide bombings, but there have been Americans who believe it’s ok to bomb churches and abortion clinics, and other places, resulting in the death of some, to preserve the American way. If there wasn’t so much fuss about rejecting him, he could have been quiety buried somewhere, and this could all die down…</p>
<p>I wonder where Robert E. Chambliss is buried - his bomb killed 4 teenage girls…</p>
<p>It can’t cost that much to ship the body back to his parents in the home country. Surely the DHS has the cash for that. Or, unmarked in the pauper’s graveyard could be fine. I haven’t heard that the sisters who live here are involved at all, so I guess they don’t care or are scared to come forward. I think the uncle is a good guy to do what he’s doing–if he cares where the grave is, he can know where the unmarked pauper’s grave is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To whom are you talking when you write that? Who exactly is “supposed” to bury him, and if it’s family and they refuse, with whom does the responsibility lie?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then there’s the problem when the person being tortured turns out to be an innocent bystander…</p>
<p>
He shares a headstone with his wife in Birmingham, AL, but apparently the location of his cremated remains is unknown. At least that’s what the resist.com folks say on their handy list of Ku Klux Klan cemetery plots you can visit (none of them Muslim). If you’re looking for scary people to investigate, argbargy, you might want to include this All-American white group. They think 9/11 was a plot by Jews and the government, too.</p>
<p>
I hope your powers of prophecy are better than mine. I also note that it’s always possible to find some distinction between the atrocity one supports and the atrocity one denounces.</p>
<p>Especially when they are completely obvious distinctions.</p>