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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (99844)6/2/2003 8:11:02 AM
From: Brumar89  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
I think you have to consider the aim of military actions. And should differentiate between those aimed at a military target which injure civilians incidentally and those which aim at nothing other than civilians.

During the recent war, we targeted what I believe was a restaurant where our intelligence indicated Saddam Hussein was to have a meeting. He was probably killed in this attack. Were there civilian casulties incidental to bombing that restaurant? I'd expect that there may have been a few. I guess that in your view this attack was the moral equivalent of 9/11.



To: Jacob Snyder who wrote (99844)6/2/2003 1:21:41 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
>>everyone understands that the easiest way of winning wars is destroying the will and/or ability of the opposition civilian population, to support their combatants. And, further, that it's a lot easier to find and kill civilians, than combatants. This applies especially to guerrilla wars, like the Intifada, and Vietnam. Everyone knows this, and acts accordingly.<<

Total fabrication.


HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News