TTP Leader Reportedly Killed In US Drone Strike In Kunar

[khushal]

Well if you agree TTP took responsibility, then I'm not sure what the contention is, Firdousi rightly called out their immoral behavior. First blood or last immoral is immoral.

I never said that they were both, but shared traits of both.

Your changing goal posts. the argument is cause and effect not what is immoral or not. The immoral behavior and action is an effect but you keep side stepping and changing goal posts.


You said they were sociopaths and then realized that you misused the term and changed to saying they are both or shared traits of both dont want to admit you were wrong. Its OK to make a mistake. We are human.

[maneatinglizard]

khushal's point is that the attack was a reaction to something, and not just a random act of evil.

I don't think anyone argues that the attack was moral. Even the TTP didn't outright say that from what I can remember, and many of their supporters/members don't even believe that they were the perpetrators (a lot of people think the army itself had a hand in it).

The issue is that Pakistan portrays it not as an act of revenge, but just one of random evil. Just like the way terrorist attacks in the West are portrayed. This allows people to ignore the underlying causes behind these terrorist attacks while taking the moral high ground, despite the terrorists often being the victims of greater injustices than they commit themselves.

Until the aggressors understand and accept that their side is bad as well (and often worse than the terrorists), these attacks will continue. Nothing is actually solved by carpet bombing Waziristan or occupying countries for decades. It just creates a new generation of people with the exact same problems as the previous one, which will result in further terrorist attacks in the future.

You can't kill your way out of an insurgency. A lot of dumb Pakistanis actually think they've defeated the TTP, but it'll come back soon enough because the reasons the TTP formed in the first place never was solved, and the attempt at solving them peacefully right now (PTM) is being met with hostility from the establishment.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Your changing goal posts. the argument is cause and effect not what is immoral or not. The immoral behavior and action is an effect but you keep side stepping and changing goal posts.


You said they were sociopaths and then realized that you misused the term and changed to saying they are both or shared traits of both dont want to admit you were wrong. Its OK to make a mistake. We are human.

Which goal post did I change exactly? I didn't introduce the "first blood clause". That isn't even relevant in my position.

Even if I misused the term sociopath, which I don't believe I did, I'm sure a strong case could be made in both cases, their behavior reflects patterns that resemble embody these personality disorders, we can be pedantic if you'd like, but it's largely splitting hairs.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

khushal's point is that the attack was a reaction to something, and not just a random act of evil.

I don't think anyone argues that the attack was moral. Even the TTP didn't outright say that from what I can remember, and many of their supporters/members don't even believe that they were the perpetrators (a lot of people think the army itself had a hand in it).

The issue is that Pakistan portrays it not as an act of revenge, but just one of random evil. Just like the way terrorist attacks in the West are portrayed. This allows people to ignore the underlying causes behind these terrorist attacks while taking the moral high ground, despite the terrorists often being the victims of greater injustices than they commit themselves.

Until the aggressors understand and accept that their side is bad as well (and often worse than the terrorists), these attacks will continue. Nothing is actually solved by carpet bombing Waziristan or occupying countries for decades. It just creates a new generation of people with the exact same problems as the previous one, which will result in further terrorist attacks in the future.

You can't kill your way out of an insurgency. A lot of dumb Pakistanis actually think they've defeated the TTP, but it'll come back soon enough because the reasons the TTP formed in the first place never was solved, and the attempt at solving them peacefully right now (PTM) is being met with hostility from the establishment.

Whether if it was a "random" act of evil, we can agree it's evil and it's evil that doesn't reflect how normal humans react to situations, it wasn't an impulsive crime of passion. It was a calculated, concerted, and intended attack on kids...one they even gloated about and tried to argue as "retaliatory". Now he maybe right about how I used sociopath/psychopath but that's almost a nonissue, in either case, their antics demonstrate they have warped moral compass.

The debate here isn't whether their opponents are immoral or not. The debate here is the moral validity of the Taliban, no amount of carpet bombing justifies targeting the vulnerable ....none, this is consistent with human psychology and Islam.

[khushal]

Whether if it was a "random" act of evil, we can agree it's evil and it's evil that doesn't reflect how normal humans react to situations, it wasn't an impulsive crime of passion. It was a calculated, concerted, and intended attack on kids...one they even gloated about and tried to argue as "retaliatory". Now he maybe right about how I used sociopath/psychopath but that's almost a nonissue, in either case, their antics demonstrate they have warped moral compass.

The debate here isn't whether their opponents are immoral or not. The debate here is the moral validity of the Taliban, no amount of carpet bombing justifies targeting the vulnerable ....none, this is consistent with human psychology and Islam.

Sorry but youre wrong. Almost all Scholars and Gov officials condemned the FBI Attack on the Waco compound of David Koresh. They blamed all wrong on the FBI. Bill Clinton and Attorney General Albright took responsibility and apologized admitted it was wrong. Now you could blame David Koresh for using women and children as human shields and talk about the immoral behavior of David Koresh but those women and children dying was purely on the FBI. They could have handled that more humanly.

Your acting like Trump and AG Session who are separating kids from parents at the Mexican border. Blaming the parents for illegal crossing instead of the immoral policy of the US gov.

Whatever the TTP does is on the policy of the Paki Army. The paki army can end it but they believe they are better off with their policy of duplicity which makes the people of FATA cannon fodder.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Sorry but youre wrong. Almost all Scholars and Gov officials condemned the FBI Attack on the Waco compound of David Koresh. They blamed all wrong on the FBI. Bill Clinton and Attorney General Albright took responsibility and apologized admitted it was wrong. Now you could blame David Koresh for using women and children as human shields and talk about the immoral behavior of David Koresh but those women and children dying was purely on the FBI. They could have handled that more humanly.

Your acting like Trump and AG Session who are separating kids from parents at the Mexican border. Blaming the parents for illegal crossing instead of the immoral policy of the US gov.

Whatever the TTP does is on the policy of the Paki Army. The paki army can end it but they believe they are better off with their policy of duplicity which makes the people of FATA cannon fodder.

That's a false equivalence. None of the Waco survivors went around shooting kids because of the ATF's actions. Your argument holds only if some similar thing happened.

The Trump child detention situation is also a false equivalence. Since the actor is the Trump's government, the victims are the kids and the parents. If anything your rationale for the Talibs matches theirs as you're exonerating the perpetrators just as those that support Trump. "If Pak Govt policies weren't against us, we Talibs wouldn't kill kids". Compared to "If migrants didn't come, we wouldn't take their kids" . There's a direct bijection between the two propositions

Ethically Taliban can only blame Pakistan for Pakistan's assault on them, which would make retaliation on Pakistani military personnel a consequence of Pakistani policy. The children were bystanders and not guilty parties so Pakistani policy can't be invoked. The burden rests purely on the Taliban. The targeting of non-involved parties is auxiliary to retaliation, so it can't be a valid consequence.

[Firdousi]

Politically and militarily it might make sense for the TTP to attack a school.. but from a moral point of view, it was a disgusting, inhuman and anti-islamic attack. Paki prostitute government started it, its true. They backstabbed their own allies and committed horrible crimes.. but still killing 130 kids in cold blood its beyond me. I have come across some fellowe Afghans who make claims like "more Afghan kids have been killed because the Pakistani terrorism". This might be true. But still killing Pakistani kids just because Afghan kids were killed its crazy.

[khushal]

Politically and militarily it might make sense for the TTP to attack a school.. but from a moral point of view, it was a disgusting, inhuman and anti-islamic attack. Paki prostitute government started it, its true. They backstabbed their own allies and committed horrible crimes.. but still killing 130 kids in cold blood its beyond me. I have come across some fellowe Afghans who make claims like "more Afghan kids have been killed because the Pakistani terrorism". This might be true. But still killing Pakistani kids just because Afghan kids were killed its crazy.

Actually politically it was a mistake since it would justify paki army operations no matter how brutal they may be.

Also the attack was not for Afghan kids, its was for kids in FATA which is paki territory.

[khushal]

That's a false equivalence. None of the Waco survivors went around shooting kids because of the ATF's actions. Your argument holds only if some similar thing happened.

The Trump child detention situation is also a false equivalence. Since the actor is the Trump's government, the victims are the kids and the parents. If anything your rationale for the Talibs matches theirs as you're exonerating the perpetrators just as those that support Trump. "If Pak Govt policies weren't against us, we Talibs wouldn't kill kids". Compared to "If migrants didn't come, we wouldn't take their kids" . There's a direct bijection between the two propositions

Ethically Taliban can only blame Pakistan for Pakistan's assault on them, which would make retaliation on Pakistani military personnel a consequence of Pakistani policy. The children were bystanders and not guilty parties so Pakistani policy can't be invoked. The burden rests purely on the Taliban. The targeting of non-involved parties is auxiliary to retaliation, so it can't be a valid consequence.

The point is that the US gov takes responsibility for its policy/actions but your letting the paki gov off the hook by putting blame on the effect rather than the cause, the symptom rather than the virus. The PAki army's treatment of FATA people who are its own citizens as a foreign force. Even they label them as RAW or NDS agents.

You know this and your reaching, your mistake was to try to turn this into a moral or immmoral act argument vs action reaction argument and your every response has been desperately trying to do this. You can not trick.

On a side note; the FBI did label David Koresh as a child raper and polygamist and initially was trying to blame the fire on David Koresh therefore all the murders on him. They tried but the FBI own people criticized their leaders.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

The point is that the US gov takes responsibility for its policy/actions but your letting the paki gov off the hook by putting blame on the effect rather than the cause, the symptom rather than the virus. The PAki army's treatment of FATA people who are its own citizens as a foreign force. Even they label them as RAW or NDS agents.

You know this and your reaching, your mistake was to try to turn this into a moral or immmoral act argument vs action reaction argument and your every response has been desperately trying to do this. You can not trick.

On a side note; the FBI did label David Koresh as a child raper and polygamist and initially was trying to blame the fire on David Koresh therefore all the murders on him. They tried but the FBI own people criticized their leaders.

Not at all, because I don't even view them as relevant factor in Taliban's ultimate decision to target children. Pak government are only culpable in as far as their actions on bystanders in FATA. Action reaction doesn't work here because there's no precedent to have taken such action. There's no logical reactive to target individuals that have nothing to do with the alleged initial action. That's what I meant by "auxiliary to retaliation." Taliban's murders are their own responsibility. In light of evidence such reasoning only acts as an excuse.

Trying to blame and evidential blameworthiness are different things.

[Firdousi]

Actually politically it was a mistake since it would justify paki army operations no matter how brutal they may be.

Also the attack was not for Afghan kids, its was for kids in FATA which is paki territory.

I did not say any of that.

[khushal]

I did not say any of that.

you said politically it made sense.

Politically and militarily it might make sense for the TTP to attack a school..

[khushal]

Not at all, because I don't even view them as relevant factor in Taliban's ultimate decision to target children. Pak government are only culpable in as far as their actions on bystanders in FATA. Action reaction doesn't work here because there's no precedent to have taken such action. There's no logical reactive to target individuals that have nothing to do with the alleged initial action. That's what I meant by "auxiliary to retaliation." Taliban's murders are their own responsibility. In light of evidence such reasoning only acts as an excuse.

Trying to blame and evidential blameworthiness are different things.

You just did it again. Your going into "responsibility" which is not what the argument is about.

When the authorities have a policy, there are 2 possible reactions to such policy. A violent backlash or a neutral reaction. If a violent backlash does happen, the authorities have 2 choices, either change the policy or control the violence. It seems that the pakis cant control the violence (the way they are going about it is immoral) and they seem to be hesitant to change their policy because they making money on it which says that money is more important to them than peace(the lives of their own citizens) which is also immoral.

You don't get it.