Skip to main content

View Diary: If Death is Death... (144 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  You are the one who is proposing (6+ / 0-)

    that the diarist misses the point.  It is only right that YOU should explain precisely why.

    With the Decision Points Theater, the George W. Bush Presidential Library becomes the very first Presidential Library to feature a Fiction Section.

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 11:29:05 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  The diarist misses the point (8+ / 0-)

      in that he mistakes, or deliberately misstates the point Kos was making.

      To wit, Markos was arguing that a retaliatory strike and more will cause death, destruction and "pain and suffering" and absent a better understanding of the objective of the military strikes, or more, the focus on the mechanism of death misses the larger point - the idea is to lessen the pain and suffering AND death.

      The diarist thinks Markos is saying it does not matter how you die. That's not true at all.

      He is saying before you cause more death, destruction and pain and suffering, make sure you have an objective to achieve and the means to achieve it.

      Because the retaliatory death, destruction, pain and suffering is also death, destruction, pain and suffering.

      So do you think the diarist addressed THAT?

      I'm sure he did not.

      •  I quote Kos (10+ / 0-)
        We're seeing it with the neocons and administration officials, who suddenly think its inexcusable that Syria has apparently deployed chemical arms against its populace. And it is! The use of such weaponry is barbaric and beyond the bounds of all civilized behavior. The people pulling the trigger are monsters.

        But they were monsters before they dropped their unholy chemical concoction in that Damascus neighborhood. With over 100,000 dead in the conflict, there have been no shortage of monsters. No lack of uncivilized behavior. No deficit of barbarism.

        So to pretend that a line has been crossed and that this kind of murder is somehow worse than that other kind of murder is bizarre.

        Note that I supply full context.

        Kos quite explicitly argues that chemical weapons are no worse a way to kill than others.

        I'm on a mission! http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1233352/51142428#c520 Testing the new site rules.

        by blue aardvark on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 11:45:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  "That other kind of murder" (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          edrie

          that comes from all wars.

          Including retaliatory strikes.

          I will grant you that the last graf muddies Kos' point, which is, imo, that a retaliatory stirkes, and more, that cause death, destruction and pain and suffering are not cost free in moral terms.

          That "other kind of murder" should be the big issue now.

          How does it help reach the objectives? Is it worht it?

          That was his point.

          I'm sure of it.

          •  And my bigger-than-Markos-picture (0+ / 0-)

            of the whole fucking thing is this:

            the rebels have guns with which to fight back.  "Fair" fight is not a term I would apply to the disgusting concept, but "fairer" for the folks trying to take that country away from the madman who currently runs it.  The  rebels have bigger weapons too....all conventional though.

            But chemicals?  ONLY the government has them.  And the government used them.  Over-the-top disgusting.  There is no antidote for them either.....at least with a gunshot wound you can go to hospital and perhaps recover.  Same with lost limbs and burns.  But chemicals?  You aint' got a chance.

            So THAT is part of why chemical warfare is higher on the murder scale.

            Listening to the NRA on school safety is like listening to the tobacco companies on cigarette safety. (h/t nightsweat)

            by PsychoSavannah on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 12:12:41 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  US ain't firing bullets (0+ / 0-)

              Don;t see the "fair" in your argument even if that is how to measure these things anyway.

              I don;t think it is.

              •  None of it is fair in any way (0+ / 0-)

                That the vast majority of the rebels are civilians means the vast majority of people killed in this civil war are civilians.  ANY action of any kind brings pain and death and suffering - to civilians.

                My personal druthers would be to assassinate Assad.  But we don't do that, and with good reason.  So, we have a choice.....stop him and let the whole world know that there really is a big bright red line, or not.  The pain and death and suffering continues either way.

                We are gunshy after Iraq...understandable, but still.  THIS is the kind of shit we should always be stopping.

                Listening to the NRA on school safety is like listening to the tobacco companies on cigarette safety. (h/t nightsweat)

                by PsychoSavannah on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 02:13:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  there is a small problem here. (0+ / 0-)

                  IF "stopping", you mean cruise missles, then how does that prevent the further spread of chemical weapons.  if we hit them, the chemicals are dispursed in the atmosphere.

                  if we go for assad and his group, then what stops others from using those weapons.

                  negotiated peace - un supervision of the removal of the chemical weapon stock - that is the preferred means that doesn't cause more suffering to those who are innocents.

                  EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

                  by edrie on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 07:44:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  I really think his point was (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          blue aardvark, edrie

          that Assad crossed the "line" long ago, and that the latest chemical attacks pushes them even farther over the "line."  Kos acknowledges that the chemical attacks are horrible, but argues that it can't tip scales that are already out of balance.

          I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use -- Galileo Galilei

          by ccyd on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 12:52:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  blue aardvark, do you really think that those who (0+ / 0-)

          are blinded, had their bodies torn apart, are suffering would say "OH! that isn't CHEMICAL, so it is OKAY!"

          markos' point is very clear to me - for those suffering, it doesn't matter the delivery - they are STILL suffering (OR they are STILL dead).

          as one who has seen firsthand the results of war (markos IS a gulf war vet, btw), i think his opinion is poignantly clear.

          and i agree with him.

          totally.

          EdriesShop Is it kind? is it true? is it necessary?

          by edrie on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 07:41:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Well, tbh, Kos' diary is pretty muddled. (1+ / 0-)

        It definitely isn't his finest piece of writing, to say the least.

        "A candle loses nothing by lighting another candle" - Mohammed Nabbous, R.I.P.

        by Lawrence on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 01:21:46 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I am so glad you could interpret what Markos (1+ / 0-)

        meant to say, even though that's not what he actually said.  

        The greatest glory in living lies not in never falling, but in rising every time we fall. -Nelson Mandela

        by Tchrldy on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 02:17:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  He did say it (0+ / 0-)

          He wrote more than that one muddied paragraph.

          Are you really that intent in thinking ill of Markos?

          Honestly, you really think your unfair and rather ridiculous interpretation of his intent is what he meant?

          Why would you want to believe that is what he meant instead of the interpretation I posit?

          •  Well, I can agree with this statement of yours: (0+ / 0-)
            He wrote more than that one muddied paragraph.
            Honestly, I am not intent about thinking ill of Markos.  I do however, think ill of what he wrote.  It was neither well written nor is it well reasoned.  Chemicals weapons ARE different.  Which is precisely why they have a different status in International Humanitarian Law.  Kos may not have meant to say what he came across as saying, but the fault then lies with the writer NOT with the reader.  And, if another writer points out the logical fallacies in the first writer's work (as has been done here), that is quite legitimate.

            With the Decision Points Theater, the George W. Bush Presidential Library becomes the very first Presidential Library to feature a Fiction Section.

            by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Wed Aug 28, 2013 at 03:33:34 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  to add to Armando's reply (0+ / 0-)

      Kos is talking about "wartime casualties," and says that in the first sentence.

      This diary mentions

      Death is death...whether it happens you are kid shot in an elementary school or an old man of 95 dying in your sleep.  
      as if that is an argument that relates to kos's diary. It isn't.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site