then, do not talk about 'civilian' casualties

then, do not talk about 'civilian' casualties

所有跟贴·加跟贴·新语丝读书论坛

送交者: meiyou 于 2012-11-21, 11:02:12:

回答: like this? 由 ak7O 于 2012-11-21, 09:49:57:

the person said those words had enlisted all his people with just one sentence - that sounds too easy.

这么说面对侵略，平民没有反抗的权力，因为一反抗就不是平民了？ - ak7O (167 bytes) 2012-11-21, 11:32:03 (692178)
- 侵略 is hard to define, it depends on who u ask - grow up, we r talking about - meiyou (426 bytes) 2012-11-21, 12:13:36 (692209)
- That is actually the most sensible conventions at war time. - steven (346 bytes) 2012-11-21, 12:00:17 (692199)
  - 你的这个说法，是站在“参与者”的角度思考。但我们不是参与者，而是 - ak7O (72 bytes) 2012-11-21, 12:10:08 (692206)
    - you mean Geneva Conventions 很难让人接受了，这与人情相悖? - steven (124 bytes) 2012-11-21, 12:15:57 (692210)
      - 什么也不做才是旁观者，动手干预就是参与者了。参与者不必 - ak7O (251 bytes) 2012-11-21, 12:33:19 (692215)
        
        Everything has its cost, no military commander does calculate - steven (255 bytes) 2012-11-21, 12:41:24 (692219)
        
        是有区别，但这区别仅存在于人们的观念之中。 (无内容) - ak7O (0 bytes) 2012-11-21, 16:31:15 (692257)
        
        911毫无疑问是恐怖袭击，与盟军对德国的轰炸毫无可比性，也与哈马斯射火箭不同 (无内容) - ASH (0 bytes) 2012-11-21, 13:47:58 (692238)
        
        站在旁观者的立场上， - ak7O (211 bytes) 2012-11-21, 13:37:18 (692236)