Recent content by Number19

"...The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him...".

Within the context of this thread, it is natural to interpret this article within this narrow context, and the author certainly composes his thoughts within this context. But the article has a broader context on the very nature of war; and can currently be applied, as well, to the Ukraine.

Probably not, although I reserve the right to change my answer. I simply haven't given much thought to this on an international scale. I would ask: who gets to decide these moral codes, or put another way, whose moral codes do you select to be "absolute" ; and who's going to enforce these...

Thanks for this reply. I'll read up on this.

I would appreciate a link to this information, if possible. I'm reasonably well educated in history but this is one that I've never run across. I essentially agree with you on this point. And I believe that a moral nation should do its best to abide by these guide lines when fighting a war. But...

I really don't have a "take" on it as I haven't given any thought to it. But since you ask, my first thought is that what you describe as "Hitler's war against Jews" was really equivalent to "our" war on poverty, or our war against drugs. It really isn't a "war".

I have no problems with what this gentleman has written. In fact I've been writing the same argument for a little over a week now in another thread. I would not use the word "genocide" because this is not actually accurate. But the modern concept of war began to emerge in the late 19th century...

My post #194 was in reply to your post #190. In post #194 I implied that, faced only with a Gazan threat, Israel would respond with conventional weapons. I then stated that, if confronted with a united middle-eastern threat and its existence was threatened, Israel would respond with nuclear...

Yes

I have no disagreement with your commentary. My comments are directed against only those jihadi whose militarism is solely based on their interpretation of the Quran. How much this interpretation may be the result of middle eastern interventionism dating back a hundred years or more is something...

The U.N. has no right or legitimacy to create a nation in the lands of other free people. The United States should withdraw from the United Nations. I accept Israel a a fait accompli. We must move on. No nation has a "right" to exist, not even the United States. Only individuals have rights. By...

I am in agreement with all your comments except for the very last statement that "(this) is the reason the State of Israel was created". I won't go that far although I also will not dismiss the possibility. This gets into conspiracy theory, and while I enjoy reading in this area, I've found...

I don't disagree with anything you posted. But the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907 were followed by the League of Nations (1920-1946). You also had the Geneva Conventions of 1864, 1906 and 1926 and the Geneva Protocol of 1925. You had the Nuremberg Trials of 1945 and the Tokyo War Crimes...

I agree. But what does this have to do with militant Islam.

This is not entirely correct. The Muslim jihadi movement would force Islam on all nations. They hate everything not Islamic.