It reminds me a lot of the situations where Law Enforcement Officers won't follow along for what they know is not right when everyone else is doing it, despite knowing that if they leave that's one less person to stand up to the unethical, there is a point when you can no longer even associate with the group because of the very real blame you'll start to share, and rightfully so. And in the case of LEOs if you're not going along with the rest of the gang, you could very well be in danger.
agitatedpotato
joined 2 years ago
I have little faith in the amount of movement you can actually cause from inside the system personally but Im not going to pretend my way is the only way, it's good that people try. It sounds like this is someone on whom the ethics weighed heavily from the very beginning and their resignation when it became too much supports that. I could be very wrong on my analysis, but someone who's got the moral fortitude to leave at all like this is probably among the better people in those positions for what that's worth. I guess what I'm trying to express is that I feel like most people in positions like theirs are not as ethically inclined as they were, at least from the views I get on the outside.
Understanding is a generous word to use for them I think.
They mean even less when it's just a quote and nothing something that could alter the amount of money he's gonna blindly send to them. It's basically just PR since there's no real enforcement attached to it.
“When I came to this bureau ... I knew it was not without its moral complexity and moral compromises, and I made myself a promise that I would stay for as long as I felt … the harm I might do could be outweighed by the good I could do,” Paul wrote on LinkedIn. “In my 11 years I have made more moral compromises than I can recall, each heavily, but each with my promise to myself in mind, and intact. I am leaving today because I believe that in our current course with regards to the continued – indeed, expanded and expedited – provision of lethal arms to Israel – I have reached the end of that bargain.”
Gutty. Well thanks for trying to change things from the inside, it's a shame things are set up the way they are. Not to mention having the strength to stick to your morals and leave when you realize there's no more good you can do.
Maybe hes just using it to hide something.
B and E, classic combination.
Oh wow, in that case what a horrible editorialized title.
There's also a misconception about equating JDAMs with Israeli bombs in a strict sense, where people start to assume every Israeli bomb is a JDAM but thats not true either.
I mean, I'm not trying to give Isreal, or anyone else right now, the benefit of the doubt but we have reports if Israeli planes using unguided munitions from two days ago. And not to take away from the severity but I wouldn't call the strike dead on as it missed the main structure, however the strike in 2014 that I've refered to elsewhere was also similar in that it hit close but the initial impact was not on the structure itself, so I don't think that alone has too much bearing on who actually did it.
People keep saying this but it's not true. Here's a case from 2014 where the consensus is the munition was Israeli, with the eyewitness account of a NBC reporter. The impact was also indirect. The excuse is even the same, they blamed 'Gaza terrorists', not Hamas directly. That doesn't mean its the same this time but it's not a given that Israeli munitions would simply level the hospital.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/politics/2014/07/gaza-shifa-hospital-bombing
I agree with a systematic approach to problem solving, especially when so many of the large problems are systematic in nature. I don't personally believe too much can be done from the inside, but I'd love to be wrong and have progress come from wherever it may, and I know my way is not the only way. Not gonna spend my time trying to work from the inside though.