From: Smigrodzki, Rafal (SmigrodzkiR@msx.upmc.edu)
Date: Fri Apr 12 2002 - 20:27:35 MDT
CurtAdams@aol.com [mailto:CurtAdams@aol.com] wrote:
Why is being a "closed military zone" of any ethical relevance?
### If you agree that a group of humans have the right to organize
self-defence, then this includes for practical purposes the need to control
information flow, under certain limited circumstances.
----
If the Chinese declared their re-education camps "closed military
zones" should we stop investigating them?
### In contrast to the current Israeli actions, the Chinese re-education
camps are not elements of a morally justified offensive against
mass-murderers, but rather the expression of a brutal state tyranny
depriving many innocent persons of freedom or life. Any attendant news
black-out is then immoral as well.
-----
The Israeli army lacks
the ethical credibility to be allowed to do what it wishes without
some sort of accountability.
### Now, here you do have a point. The Israelis have a long history of
improper behavior, starting with the ethnic cleansing which established the
state of Israel, through attacks on non-combatants (the case of USS
Liberty), all the way to non-market control of water resources in the
occupied areas. As I wrote before, while I can understand a temporary news
blackout during combat, we (the US, UN, whoever) need to insist on full
investigation as soon as possible.
Both sides in the conflict are dirty. In the current round the Israelis have
a slight ethical edge (as well as better guns)over the suicide bombers, but
this doesn't mean they deserve unqualified support.
Rafal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:13:28 MST