Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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: one_less who wrote (145655)	9/15/2004 12:21:57 PM
From: michael97123	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"However, as GST has noted we are at a war of hearts and minds as much as we are at a war of material power and control. So, perhaps we should be working on documenting these delineations and distinguishing ourselves from our enemies, instead of trying to justify tit for tat actions with evil groups. " slippery slope--sounds like a sensitive war to me--can it work?

To: one_less who wrote (145655)	9/16/2004 9:37:13 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 281500

First, we cannot wage a war without excepting that innocent people will die, even if we are careful to spare them, and the more careful we are, the more we put our own troops at risk. It is reasonable to assume some risk in order to avoid accidents, but we have an obligation to our own troops not to give too much of an advantage to the enemy due to our scruples. As far as I am concerned, if the enemy in effect uses civilians as human shields, or sows too much confusion about who is an enemy and who is not, thus guaranteeing mistakes, he is the one responsible for the civilian casualties that ensue, not us. Second, once engaged in war, we have no means of responding to the outrages of a ruthless enemy except to hit them back hard, in order to discourage their actions against us. I do not mean that we toss away all scruples, but I do think that we need not be as careful not to harm civilians, insofar as it is intolerable to let the enemy behave with impunity. Third, in defending the use of the atomic bombs, I am merely recognizing that in some instances, the alternative to shocking the enemy into surrender might be worse. It is a very unusual circumstance, of course.