The Iran Nuclear Deal

[deleted126335]

Winning a war doesn't determine whether you are right or wrong, nor does your ability to defend yourself. Ethics determine what is right and wrong, and ethics have no place for the religious nonsense that has led to the current situation.

Take a look at old maps sometime. You think those maps were redrawn due to ethical considerations?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Mad Jack]

Take a look at old maps sometime. You think those maps were redrawn due to ethical considerations?

We live in a post-colonial world. If humanity is to have any future, we need to objectively look at issues like this, by detaching ourselves, stripping away all the religious and ethnic concerns, and deciding what is objectively ethically correct.

 

[deleted126335]

We live in a post-colonial world. If humanity is to have any future, we need to objectively look at issues like this, by detaching ourselves, stripping away all the religious and ethnic concerns, and deciding what is objectively ethically correct.

objectively ethically correct?
Who decides?

 

[Planktonmd]

Take a look at old maps sometime. You think those maps were redrawn due to ethical considerations?

You are right... maps are always redrawn by those who win a war, and that's absolutely fine, but attempting to convince the ignorant masses that the map was redrawn based on some religious or magical destiny is what distinguishes this situation.

 

[Mad Jack]

objectively ethically correct?
Who decides?

That's the whole point of ethics dude. Read some books on it.

 

[deleted126335]

That's the whole point of ethics dude. Read some books on it.

read the thread on gay marriage about what people think is ethical. Abortion. Gun control.
Send your books on ethics to those who treat women as pieces of chattel and think that it is OK to chop off peoples heads for violating some ancient text.

 

[deleted126335]

You are right... maps are always redrawn by those who win a war, and that's absolutely fine, but attempting to convince the ignorant masses that the map was redrawn based on some religious or magical destiny is what distinguishes this situation.

To me that the religious position is an ancillary argument in support of a thing that I care about.
What arguments do those who don't support Israel use to convince "the ignorant masses"?

 

[Planktonmd]

To me that the religious position is an ancillary argument in support of a thing that I care about.
What arguments do those who don't support Israel use to convince "the ignorant masses"?

Those who don't support Israel don't own the media outlets and don't control the religious institutions that educate (brain wash) these ignorant masses.
So their arguments are irrelevant!

 

[Mad Jack]

To me that the religious position is an ancillary argument in support of a thing that I care about.
What arguments do those who don't support Israel use to convince "the ignorant masses"?

The arguments we've been making this entire thread. Human rights violations, illegal land acquisition, disproportionate use of force against civilians, etc.

 

[doctalaughs]

A historical population density of over 250 people per square mile is hardly "sparsely populated."

Its much more accurate than your analogy of long island which has a population density of 5000+ per square mile. The region as a whole might have had a population density of 250 per square mile but the main areas of jewish settlement were rather barren leading to most areas partitioned into Israel in 1948 as 70-80% jewish.

In any case all the arguments above don't really matter at this point. I fully understand why a Palestinian youth raised in gaza and indoctrinated by seeing relatives killed would hate Israel. However the Israelis have NO choice- they have tried to make peace with a 2 state solution over and over with no cooperation from the other side.

As stated above the other side will only accept the total destruction of Israel.

 

[pgg]

The arguments we've been making this entire thread. Human rights violations, illegal land acquisition, disproportionate use of force against civilians, etc.

Ah, but those arguments are poor, misguided, and wrong.

Blade's religious arguments are weird and disturbing, totally bonkers, I grant you that.

 

[deleted126335]

Winning a war doesn't determine whether you are right or wrong, nor does your ability to defend yourself. Ethics determine what is right and wrong, and ethics have no place for the religious nonsense that has led to the current situation.

Winning a war changes the status quo going and perception of "ethics" going forward. Was Manifest Destiny and the slaughter of the indians wrong? According to you it was. What is the ethically objective thing that we should do to correct this situation?

Also consider my post a correction of your inaccurate statement about Israel being "given a pass". That is "objectively incorrect"

 

[Mad Jack]

Winning a war changes the status quo going and perception of "ethics" going forward. Was Manifest Destiny and the slaughter of the indians wrong? According to you it was. What is the ethically objective thing that we should do to correct this situation?

Also consider my post a correction of your inaccurate statement about Israel being "given a pass". That is "objectively incorrect"

What we did top the Native Americans was pretty damn wrong by any measure of ethics. We did it because we felt entitled to take what we wanted due to this land being our supposedly God-given right.

 

[Planktonmd]

Ah, but those arguments are poor, misguided, and wrong.

Blade's religious arguments are weird and disturbing, totally bonkers, I grant you that.

Why are these arguments poor , misguided and wrong?
Your perception of what's right and what's wrong is the result of your education, your environment and the information injected in you since you were born, what if all that was influenced by someone who wants you to believe certain things? What if everything you were taught was a little biased?

 

[deleted126335]

Why are these arguments poor , misguided and wrong?
Your perception of what's right and what's wrong is the result of your education, your environment and the information injected in you since you were born, what if all that was influenced by someone who wants you to believe certain things? What if everything you were taught was a little biased?

Maybe everything that you were taught too? Nobody is objective.

 

[Mad Jack]

Maybe everything that you were taught too? Nobody is objective.

I don't care about either population more than the other. I'd say that gives me a pretty objective view of things.

 

[FollowTheMoney]

I don't care about either population more than the other. I'd say that gives me a pretty objective view of things.

Hold on there cowboy! You almost married a Persian woman...

 

[FollowTheMoney]

I can only imagine what the doctor's lounge breakfast would look like if everyone here was at the same hospital.

 

[Mad Jack]

Hold on there cowboy! You almost married a Persian woman...

And her and I hate each others' guts today, what's that matter? Her and her family didn't give two ****s about the Palestinians or Israelis, and they certainly don't support the current Iranian regime, given the whole "My family fled the revolution" thing. They loved America though, that was for sure.

I mean, I've dated girls of all stripes- Indian, Iranian, Filipino, black, Puerto Rican, Polish, Jewish- who I sleep with doesn't affect how I feel about Israel or Iran or issues in the South China Sea lol.

 

[sleepallday]

Israel, and Jerusalem in particular, is the spiritual battle ground between the forces of good and evil.

Good lawd...good and evil is usually a matter of perception.

 

[Pooh & Annie]

GD multi quote...

 

[Pooh & Annie]

.

 

[doctalaughs]

I can only imagine what the doctor's lounge breakfast would look like if everyone here was at the same hospital.

Haha im sure there would be some heated discussions

 

[Pooh & Annie]

Some people are evil. Some people need killing. I'd rather be on the killing side than the dying side, and I'm not interested in fair fights.

I like your philosophy and I have to say it is the only one that is worth having!

If it's ok for you to have this philosophy than it's also ok for the Israeli's.

I don't support Israeli neocons, I just think you sound a bit biased against the Israeli's. Not to mention hypocritical.

 

[doctalaughs]

What we did top the Native Americans was pretty damn wrong by any measure of ethics. We did it because we felt entitled to take what we wanted due to this land being our supposedly God-given right.

I agree what we did to the Native Americans was wrong. We killed 95% of their population - men women and children and forced them from their land with little provocation. Still, no one is suggesting we move out of the US now and let the Native Americans have their land back.

On the other hand the Israelis COULD do the same thing we did. Do you deny they COULD easily kill/ displace the population in gaza/west bank? They could but they don't. They also don't want to kill innocent civilians- they do so accidentally while defending themselves. Can't say the same thing for organizations like Hamas who you call "freedom fighters" but use tactics like suicide bombs in crowded civilian areas and rockets launched indiscriminately.

 

[doctalaughs]

I don't care about either population more than the other. I'd say that gives me a pretty objective view of things.

You don't sound very objective given you seem to assign no blame to various Arab nations/groups while laying all the blame with the Israelis (even for patently ridiculous things like Asad massacring his own people).

Despite your assertion that hardliners on either side are running the show preventing peace, I don't see any orthodox jews or zionists suicide bombing buses/malls, flying airplanes into commercial buildings, selling women for sex slaves, beheading families and declaring they will utterly annihilate other nations. Yet your only moral and ethical objections I hear are againt the Israelis. Right.... Objective.

 

[Mad Jack]

You don't sound very objective given you seem to assign no blame to various Arab nations/groups while laying all the blame with the Israelis (even for patently ridiculous things like Asad massacring his own people).

Despite your assertion that hardliners on either side are running the show preventing peace, I don't see any orthodox jews or zionists suicide bombing buses/malls, flying airplanes into commercial buildings, selling women for sex slaves, beheading families and declaring they will utterly annihilate other nations. Yet your only moral and ethical objections I hear are againt the Israelis. Right.... Objective.

I never blamed the Israelis for Assad lol. Read again, please. I merely said their stance on the issue made our lack of involvement more politically palatable for our leaders. Russia is the reason we've left him be, not Israel.

I've assigned blame to the people that fire the rockets and drop the bombs. Each civilian death is equally as untenable. Israel has caused far more of them than Hamas, so they get a substantially larger share of the blame, because a dead civilian is a dead civilian regardless of ideology.

 

[deleted126335]

I never blamed the Israelis for Assad lol. Read again, please. I merely said their stance on the issue made our lack of involvement more politically palatable for our leaders. Russia is the reason we've left him be, not Israel.

I've assigned blame to the people that fire the rockets and drop the bombs. Each civilian death is equally as untenable. Israel has caused far more of them than Hamas, so they get a substantially larger share of the blame, because a dead civilian is a dead civilian regardless of ideology.

I guess since US cities were never touched and Japanese and German ones were incinerated we were the bad guys in WW2?

 

[Planktonmd]

If it's ok for you to have this philosophy than it's also ok for the Israeli's.

I don't support Israeli neocons, I just think you sound a bit biased against the Israeli's. Not to mention hypocritical.

if you are saying that I am biased against the Israeli's then you are correct!
I am biased and I have good reasons to be biased!
But hypocritical is a bit harsh... I agree with what PGG said because that's how the world functions, not because I chose it to be this way, but because that's the way it is and no one can change it.

 

[deleted126335]

I can only imagine what the doctor's lounge breakfast would look like if everyone here was at the same hospital.

Never a good idea to talk politics at work unless you are sure of your audience.

 

[Mad Jack]

I guess since US cities were never touched and Japanese and German ones were incinerated we were the bad guys in WW2?

I already explained why that was a very different situation. In WWII, the ares bombed were those of the factory workers that were heavily involved in the war effort if the Japanese and Germans. I believe deploying the bomb, however, was the wrong thing to do. It was a historically necessary evil, but evil nonetheless.

 

[doctalaughs]

I already explained why that was a very different situation. In WWII, the ares bombed were those of the factory workers that were heavily involved in the war effort if the Japanese and Germans. I believe deploying the bomb, however, was the wrong thing to do. It was a historically necessary evil, but evil nonetheless.

And the areas bombed by the Israelis dont contain rocket launchers and suicide tunnels? Your logic breaks down - please explain how this is different in your mind.

 

[Mad Jack]

And the areas bombed by the Israelis dont contain rocket launchers and suicide tunnels? Your logic breaks down - please explain how this is different in your mind.

The areas often do, but the civilians are uninvolved in the manufacture of storage of those rockets, unlike the Japanese and German situations, in which the civilians targeted were those that worked to manufacture the weapons themselves. It is a very different set of circumstances. Civilians killed in WWII largely aided the effort by reducing the capability of those countries to engage in further weapons construction, while civilians killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict largely work against the Israelis by further radicalizing their enemies and increasing their number of recruits.

 

[deleted126335]

I already explained why that was a very different situation. In WWII, the ares bombed were those of the factory workers that were heavily involved in the war effort if the Japanese and Germans. I believe deploying the bomb, however, was the wrong thing to do. It was a historically necessary evil, but evil nonetheless.

Except Germany and Japan had ZERO ability to project force beyond their borders.
Why was the bombing of Japan a "necessary evil"? At that point they were contained in their home islands. Yes an invasion would have cost many Japanese and American lives. But did we need to invade? But did we need to go for unconditional surrender? The threat had been neutralized. Why wasn't that enough? Where is your outrage for that philosophy? Wouldn't that have been "objectively more ethical"?


Israeli conduct in war will always be more heinous for people like you. Civilian Blood spilled by Israeli military action will always be more precious than blood spilled in any other conflict won't it?

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB124027104509836989
Few places on earth have been as systematically brutalized over the past decade as Chechnya. So you might have thought that the Russian government's decision last week to declare an end to its "counterterrorism" operations in the territory would have been an occasion for somber reflection in the Western media. Forget it. It's a 600-word news item at best.

Here's a contrast to ponder. Since the beginning of the second intifada in the autumn of 2000, roughly 6,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli fire. That figure includes combatants, as well as those killed in January's fighting in Gaza.

As for Chechnya, there are no solid figures for the number of civilians killed since the second war began in late 1999; estimates range anywhere between 25,000 and 200,000. Chechnya's population, at a little over one million, is about one-third or one-fourth that of the Palestinians. That works out to between 25 to 200 Chechen deaths per 1,000, as against 1.5 to 2 Palestinian deaths per 1,000.

Now type the words "Palestine" and "genocide" into Google. When I did so Monday, I got 1,630,000 results. Next, substitute "Chechnya" for "Palestine." The number is 245,000. Taking the Google results as a crude measure of global outrage, that means the outrage over the Palestinian situation was 6.6 times greater than over the Chechen one. Yet Chechen fatalities were anywhere between 13 to 133 times greater.

Final calculation: With an "outrage" ratio of 6.6 to one, but a proportional kill ratio of one to 13 (at the very low end), it turns out that every Palestinian death receives somewhere in the order of 28 times the attention of every Chechen death. Remember that in both cases we're mainly talking about Muslims being killed by non-Muslims.

I'll admit this math exercise is a bit of a gimmick. But it raises a worthwhile question: Why is Palestinian life so dear in the eyes of the world -- and Chechen life so cheap?

Maybe the answer is that the Palestinian cause is morally worthier than Chechnya's. But that can't be right. Yes, Chechen terrorists have committed spectacular atrocities, notably the 2004 Beslan school massacre. Yet modern terrorism is a genre Palestinians practically invented. As it is, Chechnya has been suffering grievously under Russia's thumb since the 1800s. (Just read Tolstoy's "Hadji Murat.") If colonialism is your beef, the case for Chechen independence is inarguable.

Maybe, then, the answer is that there is no shortage of imagery of Palestinian death, and thus it engages more of the world's attention. By contrast, the Russians imposed a virtual media blockade on Chechnya, and journalists who covered the story, like Anna Politkovskaya, had a way of ending up dead.

But imagery need not simply be televised to be vivid, nor does the world lack for testimonials of Russian brutality. "I remember a Chechen female sniper," a Russian soldier told L.A. Times reporter Maura Reynolds. "We just tore her apart with two armored personnel carriers, having tied her ankles with steel cables. There was a lot of blood, but the boys needed it."

Maybe it's that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is simply more important strategically than Russia's war against Chechnya, in the same way that the attacks of 9/11 mattered more in the scheme of things than, say, Tamil Tiger atrocities in Sri Lanka.

Yet even before 9/11, there was evidence that al Qaeda was feeding money and arms to Chechen fighters, putting Chechnya squarely into the context of what became the global war on terror. Evidence of al Qaeda involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is sparser, and only came to light in 2007.

Of course, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict inflames the Muslim world in a way the Chechen one does not. But why is that, when so many more Muslims are being victimized by Russia?

Then too, why does the wider world participate in the Muslim world's moral priorities? Why, for instance, do high-profile Western writers like Portuguese Nobelist José Saramago make "solidarity" pilgrimages to Ramallah, but not to the Chechen capital of Grozny? Why do British academics organize boycotts of their Israeli counterparts, but not their Russian ones? Why is Palestinian statehood considered a global moral imperative, but statehood for Chechnya is not?

Why does every Israeli prime minister invariably become a global pariah, when not one person in a thousand knows the name of Chechen "President" Ramzan Kadyrov, a man who, by many accounts, keeps a dungeon near his house in order to personally torture his political opponents? And why does the fact that Mr. Kadyrov is Vladimir Putin's handpicked enforcer in Chechnya not cause a shudder of revulsion as the Obama administration reaches for the "reset" button with Russia?

I have a hypothesis. Maybe the world attends to Palestinian grievances but not Chechen ones for the sole reason that Palestinians are, uniquely, the perceived victims of the Jewish state. That is, when they are not being victimized by other Palestinians. Or being expelled en masse from Kuwait. Or being excluded from the labor force in Lebanon. Things you probably didn't know about, either. As for the Chechens, too bad for their cause that no Jew will ever likely become president of Russia.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Good lawd...good and evil is usually a matter of perception.

Yes, and ISIS agrees with your statement. Evil exists in this world no matter how you to try to pretend that it doesn't.

 

[jl lin]

It's amazing how some pseudo christian ******s have been brain washed and became more Zionist than the Zionists themselves.

Why in the world is it acceptable to state something like the above^ here, when, if comments like that were directed toward other races, gays, or those of other religions, it would get hit with a warning for stepping out of the Terms of Service boundaries? It's OK to make obnoxious comments re: Jews and Christians.

But it's not just here. It's all over the place. People can belittle Christians and Jews. . .that's fine--everyone else, it's off limits.

This kind of disparate application of terms is just straight up wrong.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Winning a war doesn't determine whether you are right or wrong, nor does your ability to defend yourself. Ethics determine what is right and wrong, and ethics have no place for the religious nonsense that has led to the current situation.

The very foundation of "ethics" in the USA is based on Judeo-Christian concepts. For you to dismiss this fact from you belief system doesn't make it any less true.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Why in the world is it acceptable to state something like the above^ here, when, if comments like that were directed toward other races, gays, or those of other religions, it would get hit with a warning for stepping out of the Terms of Service boundaries? It's OK to make obnoxious comments re: Jews and Christians.

But it's not just here. It's all over the place. People can belittle Christians and Jews. . .that's fine--everyone else, it's off limits.

This kind of disparate application of terms is just straight up wrong.

And that is exactly why 1/3 of this country despises the Liberal left. They hate God, Christians and those that stand with our Lord. No matter as every human being will face judgment one day. Most Americans believe in a God of some sort but many refuse to believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as they don't like the God of the bible; instead, they choose to invent their own version of a higher power.

I see the war with ISLAM (Fundamentalist, hard core Jihadists) as one waged against the followers of our Holy Bible. How can anyone deny this fact? When one chooses to side with IRAN or ISIS he/she is siding against the God of the Holy Bible in favor of the enemy. Even if you don't believe this fact many, many followers of our LORD certainly do.

 

[jl lin]

Its much more accurate than your analogy of long island which has a population density of 5000+ per square mile. The region as a whole might have had a population density of 250 per square mile but the main areas of jewish settlement were rather barren leading to most areas partitioned into Israel in 1948 as 70-80% jewish.

In any case all the arguments above don't really matter at this point. I fully understand why a Palestinian youth raised in gaza and indoctrinated by seeing relatives killed would hate Israel. However the Israelis have NO choice- they have tried to make peace with a 2 state solution over and over with no cooperation from the other side.

As stated above the other side will only accept the total destruction of Israel.

This is not propaganda. History shows this in the extreme. This is the reality. Israel lives the reality every day. I am sorry, but people are surely drinking Kool Aid, but it is NOT those that support Israel.

Some of the comments I am reading here are not only sad, they are down right disturbing--scary really. How is it that these folks are so ignorant of the history and it's dynamics???


BTW, Biblical insight definitely matters from a historical standpoint. There is much rich and supported information that is valid historically.

Alas, you will see what you will.

I take peace in this one thing. There will be peace in Israel, and Israel will be preserved, as it has been since the beginning of history. At the same time, political foolishness is not what the US should be caught up in; but I expect nothing less from the current administrations and those of it's ilk.

Israel's hope is secure; but it has NEVER been easy for Israel.

 

[BLADEMDA]

Most Christians and Jews pray for the PEACE OF JERUSALEM. We would like nothing more than for the Haters of Gaza to lay down their arms and embrace peace.

 

[jl lin]

And that is exactly why 1/3 of this country despises the Liberal left. They hate God, Christians and those that stand with our Lord. No matter as every human being will face judgment one day. Most Americans believe in a God of some sort but many refuse to believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob as they don't like the God of the bible; instead, they choose to invent their own version of a higher power.

I see the war with ISLAM (Fundamentalist, hard core Jihadists) as one waged against the followers of our Holy Bible. How can anyone deny this fact? When one chooses to side with IRAN or ISIS he/she is siding against the God of the Holy Bible in favor of the enemy. Even if you don't believe this fact many, many followers of our LORD certainly do.

One with God is a majority. This is probably throwing around the pearls, so to speak, but Blade I share this for you:

https://bible.org/seriespage/11-when-one-becomes-majority-1-kings-1819-22

 

[jl lin]

Most Christians and Jews pray for the PEACE OF JERUSALEM. We would like nothing more than for the Haters of Gaza to lay down their arms and embrace peace.

Sha’alu shalom Yerushalayim (tamid)
Ps 122:6a

 

[BLADEMDA]

 

[nimbus]

Wut??

 

[GA8314]

It's amazing how some pseudo christian ******s have been brain washed and became more Zionist than the Zionists themselves.

This.

 

[jl lin]

This.

Repeating a completely offensive post that violates TOS is hateful, bigoted, and idiotic. . .but you know, you've pretty much revealed some things about you and others that reinforce the hateful philosophy that says tolerance and respectfulness should only apply to "other" religions, non-religious person, and other all other groups but not FOR JEWS AND CHRISTIANS. Good job.

Not surprised by the hate, just the tolerance of it.

 

[doctalaughs]

The areas often do, but the civilians are uninvolved in the manufacture of storage of those rockets, unlike the Japanese and German situations, in which the civilians targeted were those that worked to manufacture the weapons themselves. It is a very different set of circumstances. Civilians killed in WWII largely aided the effort by reducing the capability of those countries to engage in further weapons construction, while civilians killed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict largely work against the Israelis by further radicalizing their enemies and increasing their number of recruits.

I call BS. Near a million german citizen non-combatants were killed by the allies in WW2. The carpet bombing of Dresden alone shows estimates of 100,000 men/women/children killed in an area strategically unimportant for the allies:
http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/battle-of-dresden

Again, all historical accounts say these killed citizens had little to do with the Nazi war machine. If you have any objectivity as you claim, you will admit this is FAR MORE ethically suspect in comparison to what the Israeli's have done to defend themselves.

 

[Mad Jack]

I call BS. Near a million german citizen non-combatants were killed by the allies in WW2. The carpet bombing of Dresden alone shows estimates of 100,000 men/women/children killed in an area strategically unimportant for the allies:
http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/battle-of-dresden

Again, all historical accounts say these killed citizens had little to do with the Nazi war machine. If you have any objectivity as you claim, you will admit this is FAR MORE ethically suspect in comparison to what the Israeli's have done to defend themselves.

Us being more wrong doesn't make them less wrong. We haven't been bombing German civilians since before Israel was a country. Israel killed well over a thousand civilians not even thirteen months ago. Like, half a twin tower's worth and then there shocked that Muslims in the region, Iran included, are upset. A greater wrong doesn't make a lesser wrong right. Also keep in mind that we were in a prolonged, continuous, and open war during WWII- if Israel wants to go to war with the whole region and engage in such behavior, I have no problem. It is that they claim to want peace while murdering civilians that offends me.

 

[doctalaughs]

Us being more wrong doesn't make them less wrong. We haven't been bombing German civilians some before Israel was a country. Israel killed well over a thousand civilians not even thirteen months ago. Like, half a twin tower's worth and then there shocked that Muslims in the region, Iran included, are upset. A greater wrong doesn't make a lesser wrong right. Also keep in mind that we were in a prolonged, continuous, and open war during WWII- if Israel wants to go to war with the whole region and engage in such behavior, I have no problem. It is that they claim to want peace while murdering civilians that offends me.

So its morally better to kill civilians in open war than in other times? When Hamas launches 1000 rockets into Israel and digs hundreds of terror tunnels, then Israel responds by a ground invasion to destroy the launch positions you don't call that going to war?

By your own words the number of civilians killed (Palestinians more than Israelis) means Israel is more to blame. Therefore, with you logic the Allies are more to blame than the Axis powers in WW2.

What you won't admit is that INTENT and tactics absolutely matter in determining ethics, right and wrong (as does history).

 

[Mad Jack]

So its morally better to kill civilians in open war than in other times? When Hamas launches 1000 rockets into Israel and digs hundreds of terror tunnels, then Israel responds by a ground invasion to destroy the launch positions you don't call that going to war?

By your own words the number of civilians killed (Palestinians more than Israelis) means Israel is more to blame. Therefore, with you logic the Allies are more to blame than the Axis powers in WW2.

What you won't admit is that INTENT and tactics absolutely matter in determining ethics, right and wrong (as does history).

I never said what we did in WWII was justified. Dresden is considered to be a tragedy by most historians. The only time it was justified was when we were taking out those that were a part of the war machine (such as the firebombings of industrial Japan, which even the Japanese admit were necessary to end the war, as without them their factories could not have been made non-operational). Intent doesn't matter- we committed several atrocities during WWII, and people should have answered for them to prevent their happening in the future. The only reason they weren't considered atrocities largely hinged on the fact that the international laws that determined what constituted unjust warfare has not yet been applied to aerial combat, as such methods of war didn't exist when the treaties were signed. If we did Dresden today, it would be a straight up war crime, as the treaties have been amended.

As to civilians, the Axis powers massacred far more civilians overall than the Allied powers, care of the Holocaust, the raids on London, and many of the fascist going ons in Italy and China by the Italian fascists and the Japanese. There isn't even a comparison in regard to Axis civilians murder- all of our bombings combined, nukes included, measure up to a fraction of the people murdered by the Germans.