Australia's largest stock trading and investment forum Australia's #1 stock forum

The right to respond, page-2

First 2 Last

Share
Profile

Follow
gumUnderfoot

26,791 Posts.

180

01/08/24

14:42

Post #: 75028287
Share

Originally posted by bacci: ↑

When a country is attacked does it have the right to respond? Is responding to the aggressor with consequences a moral imperative?
Alternatively should it "turn the other cheek" so as to avoid "escalating " the situation?

Lets look at history.

When Germany invaded Poland the UK issued an ultimate for Germany to withdraw, the didn't and the UK declared the start of WW2.
When Japan bombed Pearl Harbour the US declared war.
Both of these retaliations resulted in millions of deaths, should the UK and USA have "turned the other cheek".

When Osama Bin Laden co ordinated an attack on the USA the USA, Australia,Canada, UK etc invaded Afghanistan to kill Osama. Was that justified?

Hamas attacked Israelis and took hostages, is retaliation justified?

In my opinion in all these examples it was best to retaliate, otherwise aggression will increase and the world would be worse off.

bacci

Expand

It's just some weird deception where the inhabitants of this tiny speck of dust in the cosmos that spins around itself and around the sun, can't get along.
They have all this stuff going on in their heads thinking they know something about something.
2 Upvote

Reply

Top Stories

GLF

Gemlife used the ASX's new IPO fast-track. Is this the start of a new cycle?

ASX Market Close: Local bourse dips red as CBA profit takers swoop

CCO

The Calmer Co FY25 revenue hits $8 million, up 86% on FY24

Trump chides Powell as Goldman call for calm. The RBA must be nervous

Listen: HotCopper Wire Podcast 016 – FY25 ended up not so bad... but Trump unpause is coming

First 2 Last

SPONSORED BY