Like everyone else, I am still in a state of shock and horror over Tuesday’s events. I thank God that Helen and Inselpeter, the only two people I know in New York, are safe and well and my heart goes out to the families of those who are not.

If anything deserves retaliation this does. But:

Last Christmas Eve some churches in Jakarta were bombed (including the church I go to – by God’s grace that bomb was found and dealt with before it exploded, but the intent was there and other bombs were not found in time). Would the members of the congregations affected be justified in retaliating against whoever planted the bombs or were behind it? Why or why not?

Maluku and Central Sulawesi have been in a state of near anarchy for some time now with fighting between Christians and Muslims. Both sides have committed outrages. Are those affected on either side justified in retaliating? Why or why not?

Suicide bombers have been at work in Israel. Are the Israelis justified in retaliating against the Palestinians they believe are harbouring the organisation responsible? Why or why not? Conversely many innocent Palestinians have died in Israeli attacks. Are Palestinians justified in retaliating? Why or why not?

Irish terrorists have exploded bombs in London. Would Britain be justified in sending in some sort of attack force into Ireland? Why or why not?

What all this is leading up to is this question: if we are drawing lines at what point does retaliation become justified? When we (whoever "we" are) are the ones hurt? When we have the power to do so? When a certain number of people (which is what?) are killed?

I don't know. I'm only asking.

Bingley


Bingley