Interesting scenario

[Don Corleone]

I DO KNOW that they haven't been going on for 20 years.
But they have Don , the Pejac ones not the PKK ones , they started soon after the revolutionary groups split and the Shia gained the ascendancy , same as the Mujahadeen al khalk have been operating from Iraq in the same time frame .
The PKK cross border activity only really started to any extent with the creation of the terrorists safe havens 15 years ago .

I always know I've done a good job tapdancing on the landmine that is discussing current events with Tribesman when he focuses on a minor detail and not the major tenets of my argument. Whew!!!

[Tribesman]

I always know I've done a good job tapdancing on the landmine that is discussing current events with Tribesman when he focuses on a minor detail and not the major tenets of my argument. Whew!!!
That is because you have put forward a good post Don , one minor historical flaw , plus the failure to tackle the thorny issue of shelling civilian areas .
Thanks for you effort and thoughts on the issue .

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I always know I've done a good job tapdancing on the landmine that is discussing current events with Tribesman when he focuses on a minor detail and not the major tenets of my argument. Whew!!!
That is because you have put forward a good post Don , one minor historical flaw , plus the failure to tackle the thorny issue of shelling civilian areas .
Thanks for you effort and thoughts on the issue .

Counter question, Tribes'.

In your opinion, is it ever acceptable for non-involved individuals to become casualties from an act of violence?

[Tribesman]

No Seamus , it is never acceptable to kill or maim innocent people .

[Seamus Fermanagh]

No Seamus , it is never acceptable to kill or maim innocent people .

Extending on this question:

Assuming that the "actor" in question is putting considerable effort into avoiding such casualties among the innocent, does the occurrence of such casualties become less of a wrongful act, or should the actor refrain from any and all acts of violence which might produce such casualties because they are never tolerable under any circumstances?

[Tribesman]

What would you call considerable effort Seamus given both the power and the often unpredictability of modern weaponry . Not to mention the repeated failures of intelligence over locating targets .

[Don Corleone]

I think you have to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater, Tribesman. No weapons system is 100% guaranteed to avoid collateral damage. If the rule is 0% collateral damage, a lot of bad men are going to get away with a lot of bad actions, simply by hiding among civilians. Even domestic police forces cannot guarantee no civilian casualties.

The Israelis have done a horrible, woefully inadequate job of target selection. I've said this numerous times, and I do not consider them to be employing reasonable restraint. Their own people don't even seem to think so, and Mr. Olmert has a lot of explaining to do, at home and abroad.

So yes, in response to your 'interesting scenario that in no way mirrors other current event threads', of course Turkey, Iran and Syria would be held accountable if they did not take all rational precautions to limit if not outright avoid civilian casualities.

I think where we all get stuck is what is a rational precaution.... no firing at all if your enemy chooses to hide among civlians? Looks like the enemy automatically wins, no? So, if I want to conquer Mexico, should I just send paramilitary units down there to take over a couple of appartment buildings and fire out of the buildings since I know no action can be taken against me?