You can\'t be that thick.
 

Punishment is not the natural disaster. The Punishment is withholding the aid.

The author says that all Germans should be punished (aid withheld) because of the collective guilt of the nation.

One more time, read your article:
"However, because the majority was engaged in genocide, the very few who did not advocate it would have to suffer Nature's wrath along with the genocidal monsters."

Let's break it down:
"suffer Nature's wrath" doesn't refer to the actual natural disaster, how would you suggest we stop that from happening?
the "suffer" part is from the withholding of aid after the fact.

Punish (withhold aid) the innocent along with the guilty, least we help some of the guilty along with the innocent.

Now how about this for an idea?

Supplying things like food and water to a disaster-struck civilian population really isn't supporting the country's political policy and "evilness".

In fact, if the country is truely evil, by denying aid to the civilian population, you weaken it further, letting those in power have a tighter grip and able to increase the ease in which they can carry out their evil policies.

If the civilian population was given food, and water, and much more, even guns, than maybe you wouldn't have to worry about the corrupt evil leaders and their evil policies any more, now would you?

You are a red herring.
 

To completely condense the author's article:

"Kill them all, (or at least deny them aid), and let God sort them out".

I disagree.

Re: You can\'t be that thick.
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Punishment is withholding the aid.


[/ QUOTE ]

Withholding aid is not punishment.

We know what cardcounter and I think. How many of the rest of you think that withholding aid is punishment?

Re: You can\'t be that thick.
 

Wagers anyone?

Re: You are a red herring.
 

[ QUOTE ]
To completely condense the author's article:

"Kill them all, (or at least deny them aid), and let God sort them out".

I disagree.

[/ QUOTE ]

To completely condense the author's article:

"Think about the consequences of your actions, even those that on the face of them seem easy choices. Actions have consequences not only to current disaster victims but also future potential victims of evildoers."

I agree that we must think about such things.

Re: You can\'t be that thick.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Withholding aid is not punishment.

We know what cardcounter and I think. How many of the rest of you think that withholding aid is punishment?

[/ QUOTE ]

Withholding aid is a form of punishment.

Re: If a earthquake/hurricane devastated Nazi Germany, would you send aid?
 

Would the author rethink her premise if a Palestinian wrote the same basic article in opposition of American aid to Israel? Charges of government-sanctioned 'Crimes Against Humanity,' apartheid based on religion, and persecution of the Palestinians are leveled against the Israeli government constantly.

Re: If a earthquake/hurricane devastated Nazi Germany, would you send aid?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Charges of government-sanctioned 'Crimes Against Humanity,' apartheid based on religion, and persecution of the Palestinians are leveled against the Israeli government constantly.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the author's point was that we must think about who we are donating to. In the case of Israel we have had plenty of time to think about the charges made against them, and have made our decision based on the credence we give to such charges.

We haven't really had much chance to think about the tsunami countries. We may think about it and do it anyway, it is just important to think about it.

Re: You can\'t be that thick.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Withholding aid is a form of punishment.

[/ QUOTE ]

So based on both of your posts, if we decided to withhold aid to Israel based on the charges against them, we would be punishing the people of Israel.

This logic would seem to almost compel us to aid Israel so as not to perceive ourselves as punishers of innocent people.

Re: You can\'t be that thick.
 

And we've reached the "I'm going to take two unrelated statements you made and crudely try to force them together to make my point" part of the program.

Aren't you skilled enough in debate to not have to resort to that?