30 ms·
That's a good summary of the dangers of normalizing the actions that previously were the domain of only terrorists. The world works because most countries and p
by frabbit 2y ago
That's a good summary of the dangers of normalizing the actions that previously were the domain of only terrorists. The world works because most countries and people rejected amoral results-based reasoning and considered such actions in the light of another dimension: morality. It's difficult to define, but there was some sort of consensus. How long those agreements, formal and simply normative, will last remains to be seen. I do not look forward to their further erosion.
- tptacek 2y agoIt does not make a whole lot of sense to distinguish the explosives packed into the warhead of an AGM-114 Hellfire missile from those of an explosive vest or a compromised pager. What distinguishes terrorism from military action is target selection, not weapons choice.
- frabbit 2y agoI cannot see any comment in the immediate sub-thread making a distinction between explosives per se? Certainly to me I don't see the difference between explosives supplied in a missile produced with US tax-subsidies to arms profiteers or explosives produced by someone else. Except that in the first case US voters have some control over the supply -- not much, but some. The GP comment is clearly talking about the lack of precision or targeting. Here you may have a point if we consider absolute quantities instead of some relative measurement: a US-taxpayer-supplied-with-profits-to-a-private-company Hellfire missile fired into a refugee camp full of women and children might kill 10 obviously-innocent people for 1 presumed-to-be-a-terrorist-without-any-sort-of-trial person; whereas a pager bomb exploding might blow up the we-dont-know-yet-anything-but-he-was-in-Hezbollah and his ten-year old daughter. If I were a moral simpleton I might argue that the Hellfire missile murders were worse than the pager murders. But what do I know? After all hundreds of years of protocols and treaties and norms about this sort of thing are probably just old and in need of being re-envisioned by some clever code jockey.
- tptacek 2y agoDo you honestly believe that "protocols and treaties" established "hundreds of years" ago have any bearing on modern conflict? Do you have any arguments that would be persuasive to those of us who believe them to be more or less irrelevant since the Franco-Prussian War? I'm an American. We firebombed Dresden and Tokyo, then got up the next day and made breakfast. Pick another major combatant nationality anywhere on the globe, and I'll tell you a similar story. By the standards of modern warfare, what happened today was probably weirdly humane.
- frabbit 2y ago[flagged]
- beaglesss 2y agoI wonder what modern humane outcome plays out to a tiny nation state surrounded by arabs they're engaged in these kind of hostilities with. It seems this balance depends on large imbalanced external support, which will be called into question more and more as the USA loses global grip.
- mongol 2y agoThe peace of Westfalia established state sovereignity. That is a cornerstone of international relations, and when it is breached it is usually condemned.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago> peace of Westfalia established state sovereignity. That is a cornerstone of international relations The Westphalian treaties gave France, Sweden and later Russia the explicit right to intercede (i.e. invade) to guarantee the Imperial constitution [1]. (Westphalia was concerned with the Holy Roman Empire.) Westphalian sovereignty is a myth [2]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarantor_of_the_imperial_constitution https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guarantor_of_the_imperial_co... [2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organization/article/abs/sovereignty-international-relations-and-the-westphalian-myth/33B6B7773432BE494F31518952ABE881 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-organi...
- nradov 2y agoHistorically there has never been any such moral consensus in the Middle East. It's been a continuous series of wars, massacres, and terrorism going back millennia — since long before Hezbollah or the modern state of Israel even existed.
- frabbit 2y ago[flagged]
- alephnerd 2y ago> Israel is in the Eurovision So is Azerbaijan, Georgia, Russia until 2022, Turkey until 2012, and weirdly enough Australia.
- tptacek 2y agoIsrael's neighbors are all invited to the Eurovision, and decline to participate because Israel is involved.
- frabbit 2y agoIn a comment by _alphanerd_ in this subthread he points out that problematic states such as Russia, Azerbaijan, Turkey and Australia are in the Eurovision. Maybe Israel's neighbors object to that? Or maybe they can't find bad enough musicians to get an entry together and are afraid of losing?