Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

[flagged]



These are the horrifying realities of war. People may die. Borders may move. Atrocities may happen.

Does the defender turn into the aggressor and vice versa, when the „Winning“ side changes? Should war just „end“ at this point?


Does the aggressor change? Yes, absolutely, it can and does. Shouod a war "just" end? Also, a resounding YES, a war should end as soon as possible.

Unless, of course, one side just wants and needs the war to go on and on...


> Should a war "just" end? Also, a resounding YES

Unfortunately, you lose the privilege to call for an end of war when you've (at some point in time) been in the position of the aggressor. War, in itself, is not a number game. You can't just expect the defender of the current conflict to return the favor by doing exactly as much damage as the aggressor did. War is a means to an end and by initiating aggressions, you have to face the very real possibility that the intentions of your opponent may not match your own.


The saw the wind and now reat the worldwind reasoning? Already deeply flawed back when Bomber Harris came up with it.

Yes, once your initial defence is sucessful, you have no justification to turn around and become the aggressor. This is real life and not a game of Civilisation.

In more specific terms regarding the conflict in Palestine: How dar do you want to go back to define the "original" aggressor? Which is utterly pointless, because being attacked is no carte blanche to use whatever means and do whatever you want with the, very loosly defined, "enemy".




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: