You could argue that the Iron Dome has allowed the Israelis to perpetuate the conflict. If Israel citizens were faced with actually dying, they might push for a peaceful resolution faster.
Flamebait like this is totally unacceptable on HN, regardless of how you feel about the underlying topic. We ban accounts that damage the site this way. No more of this please.
I've been here a long time. This may actually win the award for most ridiculous comment ever written on HN. To argue that a main should willingly sacrifice their people for... what exactly? Why do you think these systems were built? To keep their people from "actually dying." Another route could be to indiscriminately return 10x fire for every indiscriminately fired inbound rocket. Would that be an appropriate response? I mean, it could "push for a peaceful resolution faster."
> This may actually win the award for most ridiculous comment ever written on HN.
In that case you broke the site guidelines by replying, and so perpetuating the flamewar, leading to hellish places like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26460291. Please note:
"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."
That's our version of "Please don't feed the trolls". The GP comment was egregious and deservedly flagged. Discussion can and should stop there. It's the reasonable and/or semi-reasonable replies to egregious comments that actually turn these threads into conflagrations.
It wasn't an argument that one side should allow people to die, it was an argument that high mutual cost deters conflict and encourages diplomatic engagement. Which is true, see: nukes.
This came up way back in the 1980s with the "Star Wars" project. What is the purpose of an anti-ballistic missile defense system? Is it intended to protect our citizens from enemy aggression, or to protect our citizens from the results of our aggression?
Why would the Israeli government want to do anything to resolve the Palestinian situation when they gain so much from allowing it to continue at a low level?
>proportionate response, narrow targeting, and trying not to kill civilians are good things.
How is it better to only respond with proportionate responses? If you were known as generally a good country, but could go mad at the drop of a hat, other countries would take even more steps to avoid harming you, wouldn't they?
At the same time, if you were known of flattening neighborhods or even entire cities, your enemies wouldn't be able to hide among civilians.
In either case you trade of more deaths now, for fewer dead in the future.
What you just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
dang|5 years ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
unknown|5 years ago
[deleted]
siculars|5 years ago
dang|5 years ago
In that case you broke the site guidelines by replying, and so perpetuating the flamewar, leading to hellish places like https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26460291. Please note:
"Don't feed egregious comments by replying; flag them instead."
That's our version of "Please don't feed the trolls". The GP comment was egregious and deservedly flagged. Discussion can and should stop there. It's the reasonable and/or semi-reasonable replies to egregious comments that actually turn these threads into conflagrations.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
BobbyJo|5 years ago
mcguire|5 years ago
Why would the Israeli government want to do anything to resolve the Palestinian situation when they gain so much from allowing it to continue at a low level?
gonehome|5 years ago
This topic is too political to have a nuanced internet discussion and quickly dissolved into weird anti-semitism most of the time.
https://samharris.org/podcasts/why-dont-i-criticize-israel/
tomjen3|5 years ago
How is it better to only respond with proportionate responses? If you were known as generally a good country, but could go mad at the drop of a hat, other countries would take even more steps to avoid harming you, wouldn't they?
At the same time, if you were known of flattening neighborhods or even entire cities, your enemies wouldn't be able to hide among civilians.
In either case you trade of more deaths now, for fewer dead in the future.
philwelch|5 years ago
venomsnake|5 years ago
[deleted]
Papirola|5 years ago