this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
263 points (97.5% liked)
World News
32079 readers
830 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Survey says:?
I didn't say either was morally correct but one is clearly statistically worse as a matter of casualties. Why you think that's attempting justifying either is beyond me and perhaps something you aught to reflect on personally.
Correct.
I never said anything about it's morality but causing a years worth of deaths in Afghanistan/Iraq in a single month with the vast majority being non combatants and over a third being non military aged children.
Perhaps you did, I didn't see it but you certainly haven't reflected on it if you think your argument is sound.
That would be more deaths bud.
Oh "it's just faster" gotcha. Industrialized murder is somehow more ethically sound to you, gotcha.
Its faster, the (still, and hopefully fictional) scenario where Israel continues at tbe same killrate.
Wikipedia says 180,000 in afgahnistan and around 150,000-200,000 in Irak
I dont know why we have this discussion, but both is horrible and there is no justification of killing civillians at any rate.
I used the numbers you provided, if they're wrong it's because you were wrong and similarly a shaker number over a longer period provides more support for my argument not less as you imply.
No one is denying both are horrible. You're the only one who's claimed I've taken a stance on it at all.