If someone breaks into your house and tries to murder you, and then when you fight back has reason to fear for their life, they’re not then allowed to kill you in “self-defense”—their intention to kill you relinquishes their right to protect themselves at the cost of your life.
https://twitter.com/abolachian/status/1365495133781786625
In other words, only one of two parties ever has the right to kill in self-defense, and that’s the first party to have legitimate reason to fear for their life if the other lives. The US military is a constant threat to the entire world.
You could go further and stipulate that the intention and justice behind the threat matter—you can’t kill and cannibalize the other person on the lifeboat just because their living denies you sustenance—but that doesn’t change US culpability because it’s an oppressive power.
The initial decision for the use of violence involves an acceptance of the risk of counter-violence being done to you. The aggressor always opens themselves up to resistance.
Sorry I got a little high.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
