re: #46 Absalom, Absalom, Obdicut

I still do not get why people are more upset by these people killed by chemical attack than they are the people killed by indiscriminate shelling.

About a hundred thousand have died in this civil war already.

Yes, and we have seen profound efforts to end this via peaceful means. They failed.

Perhaps, well this is my take for all it’s $.02 worth.
That situation exists because the world at large failed (or did not even try) to draw a line like this in past times when weapons technology leaped up in lethality. Bows. Gunpowder. Air power. Military explosives and missiles.

It’s a worthwhile philosophical exercise to equate a whole bunch of troops or artillery or planes with conventional bombs to MIRV ICBM’s or nerve gas warheads. We are a deadly species and that needs to change. Agreed.

But the reality on the ground is enough explosives won’t fit on a single plane, missile or truck or briefcase as to wreck a city in a single flash of heat and light. We are relatively defenseless against those weapons so our fear drives us accordingly. Opposition to even trying to work up a defense against those weapons is wide right? “Won’t work” “Destabilizing” “Too expensive”

So we as a groups on nations agreed on some rules. The relevance of those rules is proportionate to the enforcement. It’s what we have, right or wrong.

So given the validity of your point, what would you have us do? Intervene based on casualty counts and ignore the weaponry used? If I get your point?