reply to post by MDDoxs
I don't want Israel gone personally, but I believe most people blame her for everything,
Just wanted to clarify that.
Originally posted by MDDoxs
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by MDDoxs
Would your justification apply to Mexico shelling Texas as well?
Yes it would be similar, but please note that i did not offer this as a means for justifying the actions of either side, but merely to illustrate the history of the area.
The US example would be a similar and valid one. The only thing i can comment is different time and different circumstances. Though similarities are present, I would classify Israels involvement a bit different the US in North America, wouldn't you agree?
Only there is no moral justification for initiating an aggressive posture.
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Shenon
So Israel gets hit in their military base and they fire a warning shot, and they're the bad guys.
Okay.
I suppose if a nuke ever hit Israel, people would want Israel to pay for the radiation cleanup downwind.
![]()
n addition to its strategic importance militarily, the Golan Heights contributes significantly to the water resources of the region. This is true particularly at the higher elevations, which are snow-covered much of the year in the cold months and help to sustain baseflow for rivers and springs during the dry season. The heights receive significantly more precipitation than the surrounding, lower-elevation areas. The occupied sector of the Golan Heights provides or controls a substantial portion of the water in the Jordan River watershed, which in turn provides a portion of Israel's water supply. The Golan Heights are the source of about 15% of Israel's water supply.[37]
Originally posted by MDDoxs
reply to post by beezzer
Only there is no moral justification for initiating an aggressive posture.
Morality, specifically cultural morality, is not international and does not transcend borders I am sad to say.
Our morals are not their morals.
Tricky situation when you are trying to "morally" justify potentially harmful action.
Again, I just comment based on my outside observations. I lack the more in depth knowledge and experience to comment further.
I can't sayI fully understand either
Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Shenon
I can accept that since I can't even find who is a "good guy" in Syria.
What's important is telling both sides of the story not just one.
IMHO of course.