You're the same as koheesti; ad hominem tactics when your argument fails to win a debate.

I don't suppose you could produce an example of one of these so-called attacks by me?

(1) In war you have innocent people getting killed including women and children. (2) Innocent people die everyday whether there is a war or not. (3) But it is a sad fact of war and while it can't be 100% avoided, it can be minimized. (4) Western powers - I include Israel here - go to great lengths to limit these deaths, the "collateral damage". (5) That's a great thing because the Western powers are the ones capable of obliterating every living thing in the country they are at war with. (6) Often the other side of the conflict - insurgents, al Qaeda, Taleban, Hamas, Hezbollah to name a few - not only target civilians intentionally,(7) they also hide behind them with the goal of maximizing innocent deaths at the hands of the Western powers so as to win a propaganda war. (8) That propaganda is eaten up by the Leftists of the world as is evident here on this forum.

I wonder what makes people who seem reasonably intelligent - I'm sure they feel they are above average - fall for this propaganda? I'm certain they can see the difference between targeting someone intentionally and killing them by accident. So since they aren't stupid, there must be another reason. Simply trolling? Anti- the country responsible for the deaths? They actually support the cause of the terrorists, insurgents, etc? They are anti-Semites? Or maybe like me, they expect innocent deaths, but hold the Western powers to higher standards. If so, does that mean they think the ones doing the intentional targeting are inferior, lesser developed and civilized and therefore their behaviour can be excused? That would make them sort of like white supremists, wouldn't it?

The examples are obvious, as you well know. For the sake of this thread, let's you and me keep chuck and UG's attempts at hijack at bay. I will ignore them if you don't spur them.

My points against the rest of a clever post by you are (I've numbered your sentences for ease of comprehension):

1. Agree. Accidents will happen. But...What of sending a missile to a target where the person firing the missile knows full well that innocent children will be killed and maimed? What defintion of "accident" is that?

2. Agree. The terrorists use that as a justification too.

3. Indeed. But still, "they" knowingly fire the missiles, send the drones, order the grunts in nonetheless.. That is "minimising" to a particular agenda.

4. Please cite examples where Israel (in particular, but America also) has gone to "great lengths" to limit deaths. I could cite examples where they have been decidedly callous.

5. Your argument is "We could be worse". That's a particularly specious an argument and one loaded with arrogance.

6. Knowingly pulling the trigger when innocents will be killed is tantamount to targeting them.

7. I'm not sure that they have that goal...it seems rather unlikely. Both sides use propaganda.

8. The leftists on this forum are not immune to propaganda, but are probably way more immune than the rightists who only ever see one side.

As for your second paragraph.....more of your "if I say it enough times, maybe more people will believe it" rubbish and spin.

4. Please cite examples where Israel (in particular, but America also) has gone to "great lengths" to limit deaths.

Israel drops leaflets to tell civilians where target areas will be. They call civilians and warn them that they are in target areas. What other country does this?

More here:

the OP states that the man killed, was assumed to be a thief. I have seen street justice in Bali Inod, when a pic pocket was stoned to death immediatly after being caught. imo much of this thread is full of post condeming this kind of behavior but who are any of us to judge what one country does or does not do within their own boarders. quite frankly imo if there was a threat of street justice in the USA there would be a much smaller prison population.

the OP states that the man killed, was assumed to be a thief. I have seen street justice in Bali Inod, when a pic pocket was stoned to death immediatly after being caught. imo much of this thread is full of post condeming this kind of behavior but who are any of us to judge what one country does or does not do within their own boarders. quite frankly imo if there was a threat of street justice in the USA there would be a much smaller prison population.

although i agree in some terms, street justice isnt the way forward, as someone could just ' say ' someone done something because they dont like them !

being a law abidding citizen, i have no issue with theifs and other criminals being shot , but at least give them a fair trail first, but being shot for thieving surly would bring the crime rates down !

This topic is NOT about Israel.

Please stick roughly to the topic in the OP.

being a law abidding citizen, i have no issue with theifs and other criminals being shot , but at least give them a fair trail first, but being shot for thieving surly would bring the crime rates down !

At what level does the 'star chamber', justice kick in? stealing a car, you get shot, nicking someone wallet, you are stoned to death, taking a box of staples from work where there are plenty, street justice a good kicking, a paper clip, your finger nails pulled out.

It is all theft, some are not so serious as others, so when does the shooting start?

The thief (and thieves in general) has probably already stolen many times before being caught so his victims are many. So if caught red-handed with enough evidence I wouldn't lose sleep if he were shot.

The thief (and thieves in general) has probably already stolen many times before being caught so his victims are many. So if caught red-handed with enough evidence I wouldn't lose sleep if he were shot.

So you'd shoot someone just on the basis of probability?

The thief (and thieves in general) has probably already stolen many times before being caught so his victims are many. So if caught red-handed with enough evidence I wouldn't lose sleep if he were shot.

So, as an admitted habitual thief of artistic IP, you would accept being shot?

One post deleted and replies to it.

A series of off-topic, argumentative, inflammatory posts have been removed.

being a law abidding citizen, i have no issue with theifs and other criminals being shot , but at least give them a fair trail first, but being shot for thieving surly would bring the crime rates down !

At what level does the 'star chamber', justice kick in? stealing a car, you get shot, nicking someone wallet, you are stoned to death, taking a box of staples from work where there are plenty, street justice a good kicking, a paper clip, your finger nails pulled out.

It is all theft, some are not so serious as others, so when does the shooting start?

the point is, it is not something that we need to decide as it is already a form of justice being used in many countries, just because we do not agree with it does not make it wrong for them maybe for ourselves but no one else.