Right, so if you go for 'Shock and Awe', MOAB and tactical nuclear weapons, it won't kill civilians in Iraq? Puh-lease.
BTW, how many US servicemen died in Afghanistan? How many Afghani civilians?
Now, don't try and cast this as me being in the wrong. You're the one arguing for killing, for raining down bombs on a country quite unable to resist, not me... if it makes you feel bad, so it should.
Don't try accusing me of defending Saddam or OBL, either. It's a pure and blatant lie - try and find anything where I have. You won't, because I never have, and never would. Care to retract your lie?
[In case it's too complex for you, pointing out what is wrong and vile about the US approach is not at all the same as defending Saddam. Let's just say I wouldn't cure cancer by blowing up the patient and stealing his wallet, either.]
And don't make half-witted comments about my motivation. You're plainly far too unintelligent to have the least notion of what I feel.
You're so keen to kill, answer this... if you could shoot your own children, and thereby guarantee Saddam would die, would you? If not (and who would...) then don't be so quick to berate those who see a certain inhumanity in doing the same to others' children, when it's not even certain you'll get Saddam.
Last point. There is no significant connection between Saddam and Bin Laden. If you believe there is, then you're even more gullible than you are foolish.
Still, no need for you to reply... |
