Reply #50: A common theme around here is [View All]

[breakaleg]

that if someone is going to set off some form of arms that have the ability to kill a lot of people, then giving a warning of some kind somehow lessons their responsibility. I don't buy that when it's put forth as a defense for the IDF, nor do I buy it in this case.

If a guy were going to rob a bank with a gun, and that gun accidentally went off, he'd be charged with murder. Why? Because carrying a gun into that situation, it is foreseeable that it could kill someone. I think this scenario is closer to what goes on in Israel. You set off bombs, or you fire onto an apartment building, it's foreseeable, even likely, that civilians will get hurt. The intent happened when they went ahead with the assault.

My point here, is that it seems because of the "we tried to warn them" excuse, no matter how many civilians are killed by Israel, it's never intentional and therefore always "less" than what is done by the other side.