4 ms·

"Borders all over the world" don't typically have Hezbollah shooting rockets over the border into civilian areas on a regular basis. This is a very unique scena

"Borders all over the world" don't typically have Hezbollah shooting rockets over the border into civilian areas on a regular basis. This is a very unique scenario, and the best response to arbitrary rocket fire, if possible, is an automated and precise response. I highly doubt they're inventing these technologies for fun... there is a defensive need. It is a morally complex issue, because the whole scenario is more intricate than it seems you believe it to be.

LorenPechtel 6y ago
Exactly. Roboguns enforcing the border are little different than a minefield except they're much easier to maintain and dismantle, as well as being more reliable and immune to sweeping. It's a no-go zone in either case. Like with a minefield, morally fine when marked, very immoral if not marked.
lucian1900 6y ago
Not all borders are enforced by violent colonisers that force a violent response, either. What’s your point?
- amitport 6y ago
  Sure, Hezbollah has a right to fire at civilians (which include other Muslims BTW). They're the "good guys": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
  - lucian1900 6y ago
    It doesn’t even compares with the war crimes of the IDF alone, without even getting into the other aspects of the occupation of Palestine.
    - amitport 6y ago
      It really doesn't compare. Without even getting into the other aspects of Hezbollah's occupation of lebanon. People reading this, feeling confused, and think this is an actual discussion. Please go on and read about the topic on wikipedia.
      - lucian1900 6y ago
        Are you really unaware of the brutality of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the apartheid established there? Is it unthinkable that at least some Palestinians would resort to defending themselves after their homes were stolen and while being under constant threat of extermination? You’re right that it doesn’t compare. Colonisers have always been far more brutal than any response they received.
        amitport 6y ago
        People reading this, feeling confused, and think this is an actual discussion. Please go on and read about the topic on wikipedia.
        cema 6y ago
        Your line of comments is really our of line here, not related to the substance of discussion but only pushing a political agenda. Please try to stay close to the topic.
amitport 6y ago
That being said. It is important to emphasis that Israel is not automatically responding to rocket fire from Gaza or Lebanon. There are quite a few humans in the loop.
ruined 6y ago
none of these automated guns are shooting down rockets. they already have anti-missile shields that do that. nobody fires those rockets for fun, either. the casualty rate among the people doing it (and any civilians who happen to be in the area) is much higher than that of their targets.
- siculars 6y ago
  Which leads you to wonder if casualty rate is a deterrent to firing rockets. What if it were different? Would that make an impact?
  - meowface 6y ago
    That's a good point. It seems like unless there's not only a 100% counter-attack success rate but also a 100% missile detonation prevention rate, many/most of the attackers will believe that they'll be entering paradise soon anyway, so even a chance of killing civilians means they likely won't be deterred. It might deter some percentage, but considering how many people gladly accept certain death, an increased chance of death isn't a big hurdle.
    - bsanr2 6y ago
      This unnecessarily others the people on that side of the conflict. They are desperate because their credible and civilized protests of apparent apartheid, let alone global recognition of their claim to sovereignty, are ignored.
      - meowface 6y ago
        You may have read some kind of normative judgment into my post which absolutely wasn't present. I wasn't trying to take any kind of side regarding any aspect of the Israel-Palestine situation whatsoever. I'm just thinking in terms of technology and possible outcomes, from a purely pragmatic point of view. You might have just started reading my post by trying to guess which side I was more likely to be on, and then confirmation bias may have just caused you to interpret the way I said things to validate that guess. (I could easily see someone also coming to the opposite conclusion from that post, for example. But you and they would both be wrong.) I don't think the language I used was "othering". I just think sometimes some things are talked about from an abstract, realpolitik-esque, mechanistic perspective, and sometimes things are talked about from a human and moral perspective. It's only a problem if you're trying to do the latter and you end up sounding like the former. However, you do make a valid point. I only brought up the afterlife component, but due to what you say, they may feel cornered, like they have less to lose and are making a last stand of sorts, which might further bolster determination and willingness to risk death. So that's another factor.

LorenPechtel 6y ago

Exactly. Roboguns enforcing the border are little different than a minefield except they're much easier to maintain and dismantle, as well as being more reliable and immune to sweeping. It's a no-go zone in either case. Like with a minefield, morally fine when marked, very immoral if not marked.

lucian1900 6y ago

Not all borders are enforced by violent colonisers that force a violent response, either. What’s your point?

amitport 6y ago
Sure, Hezbollah has a right to fire at civilians (which include other Muslims BTW). They're the "good guys": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah
- lucian1900 6y ago
  It doesn’t even compares with the war crimes of the IDF alone, without even getting into the other aspects of the occupation of Palestine.
  - amitport 6y ago
    It really doesn't compare. Without even getting into the other aspects of Hezbollah's occupation of lebanon. People reading this, feeling confused, and think this is an actual discussion. Please go on and read about the topic on wikipedia.
    - lucian1900 6y ago
      Are you really unaware of the brutality of the Israeli occupation of Palestine and the apartheid established there? Is it unthinkable that at least some Palestinians would resort to defending themselves after their homes were stolen and while being under constant threat of extermination? You’re right that it doesn’t compare. Colonisers have always been far more brutal than any response they received.
      - amitport 6y ago
        People reading this, feeling confused, and think this is an actual discussion. Please go on and read about the topic on wikipedia.
      - cema 6y ago
        Your line of comments is really our of line here, not related to the substance of discussion but only pushing a political agenda. Please try to stay close to the topic.

amitport 6y ago

That being said. It is important to emphasis that Israel is not automatically responding to rocket fire from Gaza or Lebanon. There are quite a few humans in the loop.

ruined 6y ago

none of these automated guns are shooting down rockets. they already have anti-missile shields that do that. nobody fires those rockets for fun, either. the casualty rate among the people doing it (and any civilians who happen to be in the area) is much higher than that of their targets.

siculars 6y ago
Which leads you to wonder if casualty rate is a deterrent to firing rockets. What if it were different? Would that make an impact?
- meowface 6y ago
  That's a good point. It seems like unless there's not only a 100% counter-attack success rate but also a 100% missile detonation prevention rate, many/most of the attackers will believe that they'll be entering paradise soon anyway, so even a chance of killing civilians means they likely won't be deterred. It might deter some percentage, but considering how many people gladly accept certain death, an increased chance of death isn't a big hurdle.
  - bsanr2 6y ago
    This unnecessarily others the people on that side of the conflict. They are desperate because their credible and civilized protests of apparent apartheid, let alone global recognition of their claim to sovereignty, are ignored.
    - meowface 6y ago
      You may have read some kind of normative judgment into my post which absolutely wasn't present. I wasn't trying to take any kind of side regarding any aspect of the Israel-Palestine situation whatsoever. I'm just thinking in terms of technology and possible outcomes, from a purely pragmatic point of view. You might have just started reading my post by trying to guess which side I was more likely to be on, and then confirmation bias may have just caused you to interpret the way I said things to validate that guess. (I could easily see someone also coming to the opposite conclusion from that post, for example. But you and they would both be wrong.) I don't think the language I used was "othering". I just think sometimes some things are talked about from an abstract, realpolitik-esque, mechanistic perspective, and sometimes things are talked about from a human and moral perspective. It's only a problem if you're trying to do the latter and you end up sounding like the former. However, you do make a valid point. I only brought up the afterlife component, but due to what you say, they may feel cornered, like they have less to lose and are making a last stand of sorts, which might further bolster determination and willingness to risk death. So that's another factor.