by Jack » Sat 12 Aug 2006, 20:51:11
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'N')o, they will *never* be replaced. Tell that to a mother that lost her baby. Should she get pregnant again to make a relacement? We are not machines; we're human beings.
*Every* human life is a treasure. *Every* *single* life is sacred, and it will always be, whether you accept it or not. You do not "own" the truth Jack, eventhough you speak as if you did.
You speak of the team dynamics of war, in which some cheers for nukes and others applaud suicide bombers. That’s the way people are – tribal. It matters not whether the two sides engage in a sporting event or a war. Cheering those one identifies with is amusing. You cheer your side, and they cheer their team; it’s all good, clean fun. Injuries and deaths stimulate the emotions, making the events more engaging to those involved. People love high casualties – on the other side; and sometimes, on their own side as well. It’s always been that way. I suspect it will remain thus.
I see that you assert that every human life is a treasure, and sacred. Surely, you don’t believe that. Our various societies do not, if we are to judge their attitudes by their actions. If one is sick, someone somewhere decides how much medical care to provide; or, they end care. If disaster strikes, those judged more valuable will receive aid; others will not. Even among individuals, we see a refutation of your premise. Largely, we simply do not care about the privations of others; especially those not part of our particular tribe. This evening, some child will starve to death. An adult will succumb to despair and opt for suicide. Murder will occur. We do not even know of their passing. Except for a limited immediate circle, no one cares.
The mother that lost her baby will weep and cry, and go through the traditional drama. If she wants a replacement, she knows the procedure. The loss of the child is of significance to only a few – in this case the mother, and perhaps the father. For the woman’s society, the dead child is a statistic. For the world, it is even less.
You make the claim that I have never been in various situations. You know only what you have seen me post. You assume; we know what assumptions do.
I notice the following statement: “*every* single life that was lost through these war crimes matters.” War crimes are a recent legal construct, properly relegated to whatever trash receptacle we use for absurdities. Those on the losing side seem remarkably fond of howling about war crimes. The winners know the costumed buffoons of the Hague command no divisions. However, since you contend that each individual life matters, you must surely deplore Hezbollah’s violation of international law in which they kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. In addition – since every life matters and is sacred – the Israelis are justified in doing whatever seems best to recover their kidnapped compatriots. If you argue that each life is sacred (whatever that means), you impeach your own arguments against Israel.
Finally, you mention southern Lebanon. Once again, I shall remind you that if one cannot drive out, one should walk out. Those unable to do so are expendable. At least, their families and fellow Lebanese have decided that – for they abandoned them. It seems your fellow Lebanese don’t perceive those lives as valuable or sacred. As for leaving a country, having visas, and all the other legal niceties – try thinking more creatively. Corruption is endemic in the world; one can use it to one’s advantage. As a friend and associate out-of-the-box thinker once said: “I love the poor. It’s cheaper to buy ‘em; and, they’re grateful.” Government officials in many areas of the world are poor. I leave it to you to connect the facts.