> I am not defending, just reporting.
That I knew.
> I note that you think it's OK for the govt to blow up Afghan children
> to supposedly reduce the the threat of terrorism. It
> is a common case of double standards. Govts with
> armies, especially our govt, can burn people alive,
> blow them to smithereens, machine gun wedding parties,
> and the like. That is just collateral damage. But
> members of weak groups that have not established
> states which can afford cruise missiles and attack
> helicopters, if they kill children and old people to
> further their aims, are totally reprehensible and have
> to be smashed with cruise missles and attack
> helicopters. So you have no basis for
> sanctimoniousness. You just care about different
> groups than Honderich. He cares about the weak and
> powerless, you about the citizens of wealthy nations
> and their clients.
You read too far into what I wrote. BTW, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is probably one of the few geopolitical issues on which we're in substantive agreement.
> Double standards aside, Hondo's argument that
> Palestinean terrorism might an effectivw way to
> promote equality might be wrong, but on your own terms
> -- in principle -- you have no basis that is not
> empirical to object to it. If it promotes the general
> welfare to blow yourself and a bus full of commuters
> to bits, you must regard it as an obligatory act --
> one that commends it, in fact, to yourself.
>
> jks
Which is why I was surprised that an intuitionist like Honderich would accept Pal terrorism and why I wouldn't be particularly surprised if, say, Peter Railton did (although I have no idea what he thinks Pal terrorism). Perhaps you've forgotten, but we discussed the ethics of Palestinian suicide bombing several months ago--you rejected it in (for lack of a better term at the moment) theory while I rejected it in practice.
CGE wrote:
> One could also reasonably reject both Israeli attacks and Palestinian
> suicide bombings while recognizing a Palestinian right to resistance --
> even armed resistance.
I believe this is Justin's position.
-- Luke