UK and US strikes against Houthis under way in Yemen, say US officials • Hacker News Board

Re: UK and US strikes against Houthis under way in Yemen, say US officials

#51

Post by rrook » Sun, Jan 14, 2024, 3:47 PM UTC

racketcon2089 wrote: post #48

rrook wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the US strong armed Israel into a cease fire and to open the blockade on Gaza, two things the US could do if it had the political will, this would stop the Houthi's from attacking ships in the Red Sea. This is advocating that two wrongs can make a right, which I fully reject. The degree to which the human suffering happening in Gaza should be stopped is in NO WAY impacted by more malicious harm being caused to o…

Saying that supporting a government which has made dozens of public statements that convey unambigious genocidal intent with the actions that seem in line with this intent is one wrong. Taking military action to apply pressure the first group to stop is not considered an equal wrong by governments which represent approximately 96% of people on earth. If you think the vast majority of humanity is engaged in passively…

> If you think the vast majority of humanity is engaged in passively or actively allowing a second wrong, is the 4% justified in using violence to stop the second wrong while providing critical military, economic, and political assistance for the first one?

Easy - I don't think that, so it's not justified. The opinions of "the vast majority of humanity" are not part of the decision making process that has resulted in this situation.

> I wonder if it's possible to describe this as a series of logical axioms

I don't wonder, I believe it is! These are the (simplified) axioms along which I form my opinions about not only this, but all geopolitics in general:

- Actions that cause human suffering are bad.

- Actions that reduce human suffering are good.

- Innocent suffering in a conflict is inevitable.

- Force will be required; conflict is inevitable; the world is imperfect.

- The use of force is righteous or not depending on how the resultant innocent suffering is accounted for before, during, and after.

I believe that my opinion is completely consistent with these statements. You asked if using violence to stop other violence is wrong, and my answer is "it depends". If the Houthis were taking action against the those actually committing the atrocities, we'd probably not be having this conversation. Deliberately causing harm to innocents is never acceptable, never right. This is terrorism as a tactic.

If you think that second order violence IS an acceptable course of action, where do you draw the line? How much societal disruption in countries with less food security are we willing to induce?

Re: UK and US strikes against Houthis under way in Yemen, say US officials

#52

Post by racketcon2089 » Mon, Jan 15, 2024, 5:44 AM UTC

rrook wrote: post #51

racketcon2089 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that supporting a government which has made dozens of public statements that convey unambigious genocidal intent with the actions that seem in line with this intent is one wrong. Taking military action to apply pressure the first group to stop is not considered an equal wrong by governments which represent approximately 96% of people on earth. If you think the vast majority of humanity is engaged in passively…

> If you think the vast majority of humanity is engaged in passively or actively allowing a second wrong, is the 4% justified in using violence to stop the second wrong while providing critical military, economic, and political assistance for the first one? Easy - I don't think that, so it's not justified. The opinions of "the vast majority of humanity" are not part of the decision making process that has resulted in…

As you said, innocent suffering in a conflict is inevitable. Is the logical axiom that international shipping which is connected to the US and Israeli economies is more innocent than Palestinian children? Is any cargo ship crew more innocent and less culpable than say, an infant?

If you want to make an argument that some groups of people are inherently evil and subhuman and must be destroyed, just go ahead and make it.

Re: UK and US strikes against Houthis under way in Yemen, say US officials

#53

Post by rrook » Mon, Jan 15, 2024, 3:14 PM UTC

racketcon2089 wrote: post #52

rrook wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you think the vast majority of humanity is engaged in passively or actively allowing a second wrong, is the 4% justified in using violence to stop the second wrong while providing critical military, economic, and political assistance for the first one? Easy - I don't think that, so it's not justified. The opinions of "the vast majority of humanity" are not part of the decision making process that has resulted in…

As you said, innocent suffering in a conflict is inevitable. Is the logical axiom that international shipping which is connected to the US and Israeli economies is more innocent than Palestinian children? Is any cargo ship crew more innocent and less culpable than say, an infant? If you want to make an argument that some groups of people are inherently evil and subhuman and must be destroyed, just go ahead and make i…

> If you want to make an argument that some groups of people are inherently evil and subhuman and must be destroyed, just go ahead and make it.

This is an absurdly bad faith interpretation of what I've said. You and I agree on the conflict in Gaza. The only opinion that I've offered is that terrorism isn't an acceptable response from a third party.

If you agree that there is too much collateral suffering in Gaza, but you're happy with a course of action that is deliberately inflicting more collateral suffering, then you're a moral hypocrite.

Re: UK and US strikes against Houthis under way in Yemen, say US officials

#54

Post by johnnyworker » Tue, Jan 16, 2024, 4:38 PM UTC

wslh wrote: post #47

johnnyworker wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you can't answer the question, instead of making it about me. Called it? So, are you denying it? Here's IDF dancing chanting genocidal stuff. And what they showed is nothing compared to what's out there. As the SA legal team said, the refrained from shock value. Let me know if you need more. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G15NyemgYDM&t=4548s (isn't it "funny" how like 1% of the Western Channels that reported on I…

Let's see what happens in the ICJ which works in the real ruling.

Yes, of course. But that will take years. In the meantime, time is of the essence, due to the nature of the alleged crime.

From the first day of hearings ( https://www.icj-cij.org/sites/default/files/case-related/192... )

> 3. South Africa has come to this Court to prevent genocide and to do so in the discharge of the international obligation that rests on South Africa and all other States under the Convention. The consequences of not indicating clear and particularized, specific, provisional measures - and not taking steps to intervene while Israel disregards its international obligations before our eyes - would, we fear, be very grave indeed: for the Palestinians in Gaza, who remain at real risk of further genocidal acts; for the integrity of the Convention; for the rights of South Africa; and for the reputation of this Court, which is equipped with and must exercise its powers to afford an effective realization of the rights under the Convention.

> 4. That means, we respectfully submit, indicating the provisional measures being sought by South Africa, as well as any others in addition which the Court might deem appropriate. Justice, and equal respect for the rights of Palestinians, points overwhelmingly in favour of these critically required provisional measures.

----

(Oh, and also I'd like to add that I had no idea who Jason Hickel was, just had seen that tweet and agreed with it.. but I checked him out since and I wish I could edit that quote out, because that man is terrible)