SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Hawkmoon who wrote (119756)11/16/2003 10:40:33 PM
From: Jacob Snyder  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
<Did I ever deny that, during war, men (and women) sometimes commit atrocities, including US soldiers? That's war.. it's ugly and fighters on all sides sometimes deliberately ignore, or break the "rules".>

You consistently minimize, excuse, deny, any terrorist acts committed by U.S. armed forces or our allies. Consistently, you say they are rare exceptions, and not widespread policy approved or condoned at the highest levels. You accept any excuse, no matter how thin, any excuse by our soldiers (and their commanders) to avoid personal responsibility for their actions.

At the same time, you have "zero tolerance" towards equivalent acts committed by America's enemies. I conclude, you aren't really against terrorism. Rather, your outrage at some (only some) terrorism, is to justify a policy of unilaterally disarming our enemies.

But of course, we can't possibly get them to unilaterally disarm. They see our hypocrisy, the whole world does. We can't possibly make Them stop using whatever tools and tactics work. They don't have the tanks and helicopters to make us stop bullying them; they strap explosive belts on their children; they have no other way to Hit Back. So your outrage, so false, so selective, it doesn't lead to any solution.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext