UN Panel: Israeli Settlements Are Illegal

[OneSheep]

Evidently so.

Then there is no right or wrong, no just reward or punishment, no ramifications for one’s actions. One can sin one’s entire life with no fear. De facto, there would be no difference between Hitler and Mother Theresa. How can that possibly be?

Jesus’ followers asked the same questions. He responded with the story of the vineyard workers, where all the workers were paid the same wage even though they worked different numbers of hours. He also said “the last will be first, and the first will be last”. Both the parable and the saying focus our attention away from our striving for justice in the form of fairness. His emphasis was on love and forgiveness. When we all love and forgive one another, justice happens right along with it. Jesus said “the law is written in your hearts”. He commanded us to love God and one another, and after that everything falls into place.

It would endanger troops. At the moment when it’s either you or them, you might hesitate, and in the heat of battle, that is the difference between life and death.

A soldier has to work it out ahead of time. It is no act of love to endanger your fellow soldiers or to endanger yourself when you are truly fighting to protect your people.

According to you, that is the Christian way. That being the case, I would like to know if Christians, including fighting on behalf of the Church and the Pope, ever actually did that. I myself am not aware of any such cases, but am always open to learn.

Much of the history of Christians fighting for the Pope is so much about people not knowing how to reconcile and solve their problems by other means. That was a long time ago. It’s like the inquisition, it is a period in the Church’s history that I am not fond of.

I am still wondering what you think about what I wrote earlier:

" … you would have to agree that a lot of progress would be made if Palestinians who hate Israelis would take the time and effort to forgive. If Palestinians loved and forgave their enemies, then we would see more peaceful demonstrations and no bombings."

The drive for justice can be a very subjective thing. Can you see what I am saying? If we all learn to forgive unconditionally, the problem is nearly solved. Why require repentance for forgiveness when the repentance will naturally follow the forgiveness? If the Palestinians can find it in themselves to forgive unconditionally, their repentance will be part of the package. When we require repentance as a precondition for forgiveness, both sides could fight for generations without ever resolving anything. Forgiveness opens our hearts to considering the needs of the other. The rest is working out the details on who gets what.

Don’t forget that Jesus was talking mainly to His brethren. The thought of forgiving the Romans was atrocious. What would Israelis think if some guy on the streets of Tel Aviv called for forgiveness of the Palestinians? Would they think He was crazy? Would they despise Him? Would they want to hang Him on a cross? All those responses would be quite natural. A few Israelis, though, would agree with Him, wouldn’t they?

 

[OneSheep]

I do not equate forgiveness with failing to ascribe responsibility.

Are you actually saying that if someone hits me on the head, and I forgive him for doing it, that I cannot thereafter say he is to blame for hitting me on the head? I have to deny causation? More, I cannot condemn the act of one person hitting another on the head? I must not judge the objective rightness or wrongness of an act?

You may recall that we covered this territory already. “Blame” is defined as both ascribing responsibility and holding something against a person. In the case of the Israelis and Palestinians, both parties, and even myself, are partly responsible. The other part of blame is holding the act against the person. The question is, have we forgiven the sinner, or have we not? A person says this with their tone. I think we are on the same page on all this now. It boils down to definitions of terms.

We have also already covered the “judging” part, and the same criteria apply. I will repeat it. If we can judge an act without judging a person (which is extremely hard to do) then we can be acting out of love. If I have disdain for the person too, which is quite natural, then we are called to forgive.

I think of it this way: Joe hit Bill on the head because Joe was angry at Bill. I cannot hold it against Joe, because who am I to condemn him? I am just as capable of such an act. Because of anger, Joe was temporarily blinded to Bill’s goodness, his empathy was blocked by the anger. So his act was understandable. However, this does not excuse Joe’s behavior, for regardless of blindness, we are to uphold the law of the land.

In the case of the UN, it is immaterial whether I forgive the UN or not. It has done nothing to me. But if I see that its judgments vis a vis Israel are not only unfair but harmful, I am not obliged to somehow “forgive” it as if it was a human being. It’s only a human institution that is acting wrongfully.

Human institutions are made of humans. If we hold an act of the U.N. against them, then it is time to forgive. If we don’t hold any act against them, then there is no call for forgiveness, we can freely love the people who make up the U.N.

To what little extent I, as an ordinary voter, have the slightest effect on the UN, I am not in any manner obliged to forget that it has done wrong. On thecontrary, I am obliged to remember a pattern of wrongfulness and, with my vote, (for instance) support those who would politically act to prevent it from doing so in the future.

I agree. This is the way I think toward Hillary Clinton, for example. I forgive her, but I would never vote for her unless she did a big turn-about in her thinking and actions.

 

[OneSheep]

Again forgiveness has nothing to do with whether Israeli settlements are legal or whether the UN has the right to declare them illegal.

I am not sure you read this, estesbob, so I will post it again:

"The way I see it, I can go to any foreign policy website or look at the comments following any world news article and read the posts of people angrily pointing their fingers at each other or at each others’ opinions or “ingroup”. I can hear it on radio or any number of other places where love and forgiveness are not the guiding factor.

To me, this forum is to be a place where the bottom line is how to find the Catholic Answers to the world’s problems, and the Catholic is to begin from the position of forgiveness. So, legality is an issue, but we Catholics are to come to the discussion table having already forgiven all the parties involved. This is how I began with Ridgerunner, and that is where our discussion took us. He brought up a lot of very important points to consider, but I think the Gospel is clear on what we are called to do.

I look at CAF to be a totally different forum, a forum that truly shines forth a Christian approach. People can argue anywhere else about who is to blame. Here, let’s start with how to reconcile and take it from there. What do you think?

So, have you forgiven the Israelis and Palestinians, or instead, have you never held anything against either party?"

This thread has gone into a discussion about solving the problems between Israelis and Palestinians. Since we Catholics are called to forgive, this must enter the discussion because this is a Catholic website. The impact of whether or not we forgive the U.N., for example, is going to color opinions about whether or not we think the U.N. has the “right” to do something. If a person doesn’t forgive the U.N., then they will almost certainly not want the U.N. to have any power. However, a person could very well forgive the U.N. and still not want them to have the “right” to point out a violation of international law.

Forgiveness plays a huge role in the tone of the discussion. Do you forgive the U.N. for pointing out the violation? Or do you hold against the U.N. what may appear to be their negative thinking toward the Israelis?

 

[YKohen]

Jesus’ followers asked the same questions. He responded with the story of the vineyard workers, where all the workers were paid the same wage even though they worked different numbers of hours. He also said “the last will be first, and the first will be last”. Both the parable and the saying focus our attention away from our striving for justice in the form of fairness. His emphasis was on love and forgiveness. When we all love and forgive one another, justice happens right along with it. Jesus said “the law is written in your hearts”. He commanded us to love God and one another, and after that everything falls into place.

But it doesn’t fall into place. What happens is that there is lawlessness and tyranny. There is no good and evil, no reward and punishment, and no justice. Again, by your line of reasoning, Hitler and Mother Theresa are the same. I can’t possibly accept that.

As our sages taught: "He who is merciful to the cruel will become cruel to the merciful."

A soldier has to work it out ahead of time. It is no act of love to endanger your fellow soldiers or to endanger yourself when you are truly fighting to protect your people.

It doesn’t work that way. You plan, but once the battle is on, plans often go out the window.

Much of the history of Christians fighting for the Pope is so much about people not knowing how to reconcile and solve their problems by other means. That was a long time ago. It’s like the inquisition, it is a period in the Church’s history that I am not fond of.

Again, as far as I know, it never happened- ever. Your theory has never ever been put into practice- even by the Church. Because it doesn’t work like that in the real world.

I am still wondering what you think about what I wrote earlier…

Again, what you are talking about isn’t reality. It’s a fantasy. And real issues can’t be solved that way.

The drive for justice can be a very subjective thing. Can you see what I am saying?..

Justice isn’t subjective. It is objective. In your construct, it doesn’t exist.

Why require repentance for forgiveness when the repentance will naturally follow the forgiveness?

Because that’s completely bas-ackwards. That is why G-d Himself demands repentance before forgiveness.

Don’t forget that Jesus was talking mainly to His brethren. The thought of forgiving the Romans was atrocious. What would Israelis think if some guy on the streets of Tel Aviv called for forgiveness of the Palestinians? Would they think He was crazy? Would they despise Him? Would they want to hang Him on a cross? All those responses would be quite natural. A few Israelis, though, would agree with Him, wouldn’t they?

None that I have ever met- because it’s completely backwards and unrealistic.

 

[iamrefreshed]

Ah…Arab brotherhood.

Egypt floods Gaza tunnels to cut Palestinian lifeline

news.yahoo.com/egypt-floods-gaza-tunnels-cut-palestinian-lifeline-123746900.html

 

[Darryl1958]

I forgive the Egyptians for bringing the tunnels down on the heads of the Gazans.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ah…Arab brotherhood.

Egypt floods Gaza tunnels to cut Palestinian lifeline

news.yahoo.com/egypt-floods-gaza-tunnels-cut-palestinian-lifeline-123746900.html

I am truly astonished. I realize Palestinian terrorists used the tunnels to kill 16 Egyptians, but would that bring this on?

Or does Morsi perhaps perceive that Hamas’ allegiance is to a rival foreign power, like Iran?

 

[Dakota_Roberts]

The Arabs were refugees of their own doing. They chose war. They tried to ethnically cleanse the Jews. In fact, they did succeed in all of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza- and half of Jerusalem.

And they stole the Jews’ property in those places.

In other areas, some fled. Those who didn’t are citizens of Israel.

Consider this: There were 2.2 million Germans in East Prussia in 1940. More than 2 million were forcibly expelled by 1945.

And this was the case all over. An esimated 12-14 MILLION ethnic Germans were forcibly expelled across Europe; the largest movement or transfer of any population in modern European history.

They were never compensated or allowed to return.

They integrated into the societies where they ended up. They weren’t perpetual refugees.

Like the Arabs, they were the aggressors who lost. Unlike the Arabs, they were forcibly expelled.

And the Jews from Muslim lands? They were NOT the aggressors, there were more of them forcibly expelled, they lost FAR more in assets, and tiny Israel, with very little land and no resources took them in.

The Arab world will once and for all just have to take in their own victims of Arab aggression.

The forcible expulsions of Germans was horrible, especially in areas were they had resided for a very long time (such as the Sudetenland and Prussia).

There were only two post war German countries, Germany and Austria, many of these people integrated into the fabric of the Third Reich when it conquered where they lived.

Many parts of Israel are quite fertile and were such before mass immigration of Jews started, also lots of money was indeed pouring in to Israel.

Most of the Palestinians did nothing except try to escape the spreading war zone.

There are two different things here.

First, Arabs who lived in what is now Israel but fled at the behest of Arab countries who attacked Israel. They are not being allowed to come back and reclaim the land they abandoned. The Arabs who stayed are now Israeli citizens and can own land in Israel to the extent anybody can own land in Israel.

Second, Arabs who owned land in the West Bank, but no longer do because:
-They sold it to Israelis or to other Arabs. I see no reason why they should be allowed to reclaim it.
-It was confiscated because it belonged to terrorists. The U.S. Dept of Justice does the same thing in the case of drug or other criminal operations. Hard to justify them getting it back in either case.
-It was condemned for a public purpose. All countries do this. Hard to see why they should be able to reclaim it if they were compensated for it.

Flight from dangerous situations is pretty normal in situations when you can’t fight and win.

So E-1 despite in effect making peace impossible is entirely peaceful?

Again forgiveness has nothing to do with whether Israeli settlements are legal or whether the UN has the right to declare them illegal.

I’m pretty sure the UN has the right to declare violations of international law illegal.

 

[YKohen]

The forcible expulsions of Germans was horrible, especially in areas were they had resided for a very long time (such as the Sudetenland and Prussia).

That was the price they paid for the war that they chose. They were never compensated or allowed to return.

There were only two post war German countries, Germany and Austria, many of these people integrated into the fabric of the Third Reich when it conquered where they lived.

And there are dozens of Arab countries for the would-have-been “Palestinians” to integrate into now- with tens of millions of square miles of land and trillions of petro-dollars.

Many parts of Israel are quite fertile and were such before mass immigration of Jews started, also lots of money was indeed pouring in to Israel.

Irrelevant. But FYI: Where the Jews lived, they bought every parcel of land- at a high premium. And according to UN 181, the Jewish state would have been 2/3 desert, it would have been a Bantustan state; disjointed, disconnected, indefensible, and no access to Jerusalem where Jews were the majority.

Most of the Palestinians did nothing except try to escape the spreading war zone.

To the same extent that most Germans did nothing.

The fact is that THEY chose war.

Flight from dangerous situations is pretty normal in situations when you can’t fight and win.

Again, THEY chose to fight that war. THEY violently rejected the UN resolution that would have given them a state in peace.

They’re like the guy who murders his parents and then cries for mercy from the court on the grounds that he’s an orphan.

So E-1 despite in effect making peace impossible is entirely peaceful?

You clearly aren’t familiar with E-1. I am. When there was no talk about E-1, was there peace? Nope. Know why? Because it’s a red herring.

Here is their “President” Abbas speaking:

"DON’T PRESENT TO US ‘THE JEWISH STATE’. WE WILL NEVER ACCEPT IT. WE WILL NEVER ACCEPT THESE SAYINGS.

youtube.com/watch?v=CdqoMKZaTxU&feature=player_embedded

Abbas vows: No room for Israelis in Palestinian state
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH
12/25/2010

jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=200935

Abbas Zaki of Fatah Admits, “Wiping Out Israel Main Goal”

youtube.com/watch?v=eB9lkfcfKic

memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/3130.htm

PA Religious Official Publicly Calls for Genocide of Jews

israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/151758#.TxO0WoF22So

youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=kDoV8ZL9Xkc

Nabil Shaath: We’ll Never Accept “Two-States for Two Peoples” Solution

youtube.com/watch?v=-CkImOGcHcw

I’m pretty sure the UN has the right to declare violations of international law illegal.

Jews living where Jews always lived isn’t “illegal”. The Arab ethnic cleansing of every last Jew from here for 19 years was. And trying to dictate where Jews can and cannot live now is.

If the UN doesn’t get it, then we will have to teach them the basics. I’m ready.

 

[iamrefreshed]

I am truly astonished. I realize Palestinian terrorists used the tunnels to kill 16 Egyptians, but would that bring this on?

Or does Morsi perhaps perceive that Hamas’ allegiance is to a rival foreign power, like Iran?

Or perhaps the “Palestinian problem” is one enjoyed by the Arab world in general as an excuse to rail against the West?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Or perhaps the “Palestinian problem” is one enjoyed by the Arab world in general as an excuse to rail against the West?

Undoubtedly so. Otherwise some of those countries’ keeping Palestinians in “refugee camps” for decades makes no sense at all.

 

[OneSheep]

But it doesn’t fall into place. What happens is that there is lawlessness and tyranny. There is no good and evil, no reward and punishment, and no justice. Again, by your line of reasoning, Hitler and Mother Theresa are the same. I can’t possibly accept that.

No two people are the same. God forgives. This is the God that Jesus showed us. You don’t have to accept this, we have a difference in doctrines and views toward G-d. Your view is very understandable from a human perspective. Its okay, I don’t hold it against you or your faith-view.

My quote:

" … you would have to agree that a lot of progress would be made if Palestinians who hate Israelis would take the time and effort to forgive. If Palestinians loved and forgave their enemies, then we would see more peaceful demonstrations and no bombings."

Your response:

Again, what you are talking about isn’t reality. It’s a fantasy. And real issues can’t be solved that way.

This is not fantasy. This is what our Lord Jesus calls us to do. We are to be Christ-like, and Christ forgave unconditionally. It is not realistic in the sense that it does not follow the usual way of “might makes right”. But forgiveness is very realistic. I forgave everyone who ever hurt me in any way, regardless of whether or not they repented. I have no ill feelings toward anyone. I am a real person, and I am not the only one who has done this. You could do this, and you would not have to “follow Jesus” to do so. You could do it for your own spiritual/psychological well-being.

Let me be a Palestinian for a moment. YKohen, your people have taken my land and have killed my children. I know you think I have deserved this. I forgive you. I understand your position, and I will no longer hold it against you. You see this land as yours, and you fear us and despise us, especially when we react violently. I am just as capable of wanting your land and despising you, and in fact I am guilty of these things. I have in the past continued to want to continue punishing you for what you have done to me, but I no longer want to do so. I am forgiving you even though you have not repented from taking our land restricting our freedom, and killing us. I am doing so because this is the reconciliation and peace that my soul wants.

What is your response to this rare and unrealistic Palestinian?

Justice isn’t subjective. It is objective. In your construct, it doesn’t exist.

By common justice, Jesus would have allowed the crowd to stone the woman caught in adultery. Justice is objective in the sense that we can (almost) all agree that adultery is wrong or that bombing innocent people is wrong. But we Christians take a different response to the wrong. Because of forgiveness, we don’t seek punishment in the same way. We put people in prison for wrongs done with the hope of rehabilitation and to protect society, not as a form of retribution. We look at a person going to hell not because God sends them there, but as a person choosing to be away from God, knowingly rejecting God. Which, by the way, IMO never happens. Ignorance is one of the most common human conditions.

My quote:

Don’t forget that Jesus was talking mainly to His brethren. The thought of forgiving the Romans was atrocious. What would Israelis think if some guy on the streets of Tel Aviv called for forgiveness of the Palestinians? Would they think He was crazy? Would they despise Him? Would they want to hang Him on a cross? All those responses would be quite natural. A few Israelis, though, would agree with Him, wouldn’t they?

.
None that I have ever met- because it’s completely backwards and unrealistic.

Okay, so G-d as you know Him demands repentance before forgiveness. God as we know Him does not. Jesus forgave the unrepentant crowd from the cross. Jesus is who we see as God incarnate, and all Christians are called to be Christ-like. I am hearing that you see our Jesus as completely backwards and unrealistic. So did many of Jesus’ contemporaries.

I have no issue whatsoever with your view of G-d. Can you accept our approach? Can you see how I believe that our approach, as unrealistic as you say it is, can truly redeem the world? The world way is “might makes right”. The Christian way is “love your enemies”. Are you a person of vision?

 

[YKohen]

My response can be summed up very succinctly:

Yours obviously isn’t the Catholic approach because not even Catholic armies fighting- even on behalf of the Pope, have ever even considered doing as you propose. Catholic leaders- including the Pope, have not done as you propose as policy. There is no such thing as forgiveness without repentance.

The fact is that Catholic history is replete with examples of the exact opposite.

And if you think I am wrong, then feel free to cite examples.

 

[OneSheep]

I’m pretty sure the UN has the right to declare violations of international law illegal.

One question is, if I may interject because I am trying to show YKohen a Catholic view:

How do we forgive the Israelis for their “illegal” action? ( I am putting using quotes because YKohen would disagree on the illegality).

Have you, for example, forgiven the Israelis, or do you hold their acts against them? Perhaps you never felt negatively toward the Israelis because of their actions. I did, and I forgave. I am compelled to assume that you have too, but I am not sure.

Political leaders will not initiate reconciliation. Indeed, John Kerry’s “big hope” is to get peace talks started, which is understandable, but a real let-down in terms of “hopes”.

We can hope for reconciliation, not just more unfruitful talks. Reconciliation has to begin with the people, and can even take place here in this thread.

 

[YKohen]

How can it be a Catholic view if it isn’t the way the Church itself has conducted policy?

Just off the top of my head, the Crusades, the Inquisition, the wars against the Protestants across Europe from 1517-1648, etc.

 

[OneSheep]

My response can be summed up very succinctly:

Yours obviously isn’t the Catholic approach because not even Catholic armies fighting- even on behalf of the Pope, have ever even considered doing as you propose. Catholic leaders- including the Pope, have not done as you propose as policy. There is no such thing as forgiveness without repentance.

The fact is that Catholic history is replete with examples of the exact opposite.

And if you think I am wrong, then feel free to cite examples.

Forgiveness is indeed the Catholic approach, and you can look at all the stuff I posted with Ridgerunner on the matter. Ask another Catholic if you don’t believe me. Read more about our faith. If you refuse to believe it, that is okay, but this is indeed the Christian approach. Jesus gave us a prayer, the “Lord’s prayer” and the only action called for on the praying person’s part is to forgive. We say this prayer at every Mass.

Catholic history is chock-full of examples that go against Jesus’ teachings. You have no argument from me there, YKohen. We all can be ignorant, misguided, and sinful. Catholics have a “just war theory”, but the applications are very limited. It boils down to protecting your people, but using violence as a last resort.

I really wish you would answer this, though:

My quote:

This is not fantasy. This is what our Lord Jesus calls us to do. We are to be Christ-like, and Christ forgave unconditionally. It is not realistic in the sense that it does not follow the usual way of “might makes right”. But forgiveness is very realistic. I forgave everyone who ever hurt me in any way, regardless of whether or not they repented. I have no ill feelings toward anyone. I am a real person, and I am not the only one who has done this. You could do this, and you would not have to “follow Jesus” to do so. You could do it for your own spiritual/psychological well-being.

Let me be a Palestinian for a moment. YKohen, your people have taken my land and have killed my children. I know you think I have deserved this. I forgive you. I understand your position, and I will no longer hold it against you. You see this land as yours, and you fear us and despise us, especially when we react violently. I am just as capable of wanting your land and despising you, and in fact I am guilty of these things too. I have in the past continued to want to continue punishing you for what you have done to me, but I no longer want to do so. I am forgiving you even though you have not repented from taking our land, restricting our freedom, and killing us. I am doing so because this is the reconciliation and peace that my soul wants.

What is your response to this rare and “unrealistic” Palestinian?

 

[YKohen]

Again, the Church itself has never ever practiced what you claim.

Ever.

Not in war and not in policy.

Not the Pope and not Catholic rulers.

How can you make such a claim?

As to your quote, I didn’t answer it because it isn’t like that: Israel didn’t take anyone’s land and kill their children, but rather, we prevented the opposite.Your question is moot.

 

[Darryl1958]

If and when Palestinians are willing to forgive Jews even from imagined grievances, there is no doubt that the Israeli response will be to negotiate peace, even land for peace as was the case for Egypt.

To repent from doing things that you have never done and are not even inclinded to do is relatively easy, of course.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Forgiveness is indeed the Catholic approach, and you can look at all the stuff I posted with Ridgerunner on the matter. Ask another Catholic if you don’t believe me. Read more about our faith. If you refuse to believe it, that is okay, but this is indeed the Christian approach. Jesus gave us a prayer, the “Lord’s prayer” and the only action called for on the praying person’s part is to forgive. We say this prayer at every Mass.

The “Catholic approach” is to forgive those who trespass against us. We all know that. Repentence on the part of the person who has done me wrong is not required as a condition of that forgiveness. In that respect, it is my impression there is a difference between what Catholics think about it and what Jews think about it. Enough said on that score.

But that’s not to say that we are obliged to make excuses for the trespasser or view his conduct as somehow okay if, objectively, it isn’t. That would be mistaking moral relativism for forgiveness, which is an entirely different thing. Nor, as Catholics, are we obliged to hand our lives passively over to an aggressor. And most definitely, we are not obliged or even allowed to hand someone else’s life over to an aggressor.

While forgiveness is certainly a virtue, one has to question whether forgiveness or a sense of having been wronged is a significant part of the motivation in the conflict between Israel and Palestinian Arabs. Are Israelis truly motivated by hatred of Palestinian ARabs? Hard to credit that, since some Palestinian Arabs are Israeli citizens, serve in the IDF and are members of the government of Israel. Rather, Israelis (and Y’Kohen can better address this than I can) are motivated by a desire to keep what they believe is rightfully theirs, and to live, unmolested, in those parts of Palestine in which they lived from time immemorial, which would include the West Bank. If Arabs can live in peace in Israel, why can’t Jews live in peace in what the Jews refer to as Hebron, Judea and Samaria?

Well, because many Arabs don’t want them to live there, or in Israel either. Possibly some Jews forgive them for that, but whether Jews do or not will not change anything. The only thing that can really change the situation would be an acceptance by the Arabs that they would be better off living in cooperation with the Israelis, whether they forgive Jews for anything or not. Some do accept that, but they’re not the ones in power, and it’s probably not safe to say it too widely anyway. But one strongly suspects the 10,000 Arab Palestinians who have a license to trade in Israel think it. And possibly the tens of thousands of other Arab Palestinians who have permits to work in Israel do too.

 

[JustaServant]

Again, the Church itself has never ever practiced what you claim.

Ever.

Not in war and not in policy.

Not the Pope and not Catholic rulers.

How can you make such a claim?

As to your quote, I didn’t answer it because it isn’t like that: Israel didn’t take anyone’s land and kill their children, but rather, we prevented the opposite.Your question is moot.

I was wondering how long it would take for this to come out.