Rarely told American history helps us understand current events

[JohnH]

With that said, I don't think summary execution of a woman at the January 6 protest is a good thing.

I don’t think it’s a good thing when a child with a backpack gets killed in Iraq either but it’s near impossible to know if someone with a backpack is a credible enemy or threat and someone has to make a call. If you enter restricted spaces, you run a risk of death. This is not new and has nothing to do with politics.

Well, the government decided that what they did was wrong and awarded her family millions of dollars and post-humously gave her military honours for her death. So there's that, if we're going to cite governments as an authority on things.

[Soloist]

With that said, I don't think summary execution of a woman at the January 6 protest is a good thing.

I don’t think it’s a good thing when a child with a backpack gets killed in Iraq either but it’s near impossible to know if someone with a backpack is a credible enemy or threat and someone has to make a call. If you enter restricted spaces, you run a risk of death. This is not new and has nothing to do with politics.

Well, the government decided that what they did was wrong and awarded her family millions of dollars and post-humously gave her military honours for her death. So there's that, if we're going to cite governments as an authority on things.

I don’t think the woman or the child cares if the government pays out.

[JohnH]

I don’t think it’s a good thing when a child with a backpack gets killed in Iraq either but it’s near impossible to know if someone with a backpack is a credible enemy or threat and someone has to make a call. If you enter restricted spaces, you run a risk of death. This is not new and has nothing to do with politics.

Well, the government decided that what they did was wrong and awarded her family millions of dollars and post-humously gave her military honours for her death. So there's that, if we're going to cite governments as an authority on things.

I don’t think the woman or the child cares if the government pays out.

I get how suicide attacks are a problem (something the Iranian regime is notorious for using).

The impact on a human soldier of having to stop a child with a backpack with deadly force is horrible though. I know someone who did that. His CO told him to take the kid out. Turned out he was just searching for food. There had been another recent incident where the kid blew himself up and a few troops with him.

Overall this is why regimes like the irgc shouldn’t be tolerated. Szdfan keeps asking for some kind of international law or restrictions on war. I’d suggest completely annihilating any regime that decides to use children as suicide bombers.

[ohio jones]

I’d suggest completely annihilating any regime that decides to use children as suicide bombers.

Ah yes, the pro-life response.

[Wesleyb]

I’d suggest completely annihilating any regime that decides to use children as suicide bombers.

Ah yes, the pro-life response.

Redemptive Violence.

[JohnH]

I’d suggest completely annihilating any regime that decides to use children as suicide bombers.

Ah yes, the pro-life response.

Redemptive Violence.

In context:

Szdfan keeps asking for some kind of international law or restrictions on war. I’d suggest completely annihilating any regime that decides to use children as suicide bombers.

I have already stated I don't think that some kind of global superpower world police can enforce restrictions on war, but if we were going to enforce some, I think stopping regimes that abuse children for suicide bombings would be a good place to start.

[ohio jones]

There's a rather wide gap between "stopping" and "completely annihilating".

[JohnH]

There's a rather wide gap between "stopping" and "completely annihilating".

Stopping a regime that uses things like suicide bombers means completely annihilating that regime from existence, like Sri Lanka finally had to do the LTTE. It is the unfortunate reality of the use of force and of warfare. There is only a victor and the vanquished. There is no middle ground.

[Judas Maccabeus]

Bottom line is that those who violently attacked the seat and institutions of government were found guilty by a jury of their peers.

Why were those who attacked the Supreme Court and was banging on the doors not presecuted? Did they not do the same thing?

Don't know. They probably should have, although the sentence would likely have been less severe than people who injure police.

Remember, MLK spent time in a Birmingham jail.

[JohnH]

Don't know. They probably should have, although the sentence would likely have been less severe than people who injure police.

Hmm. What police were injured?

(Finding their job duties stressful and having ongoing health problems does not count as an "injury".)