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: Katelew who wrote (216945)	2/8/2007 1:42:04 PM
From: one_less	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

"So if we define terrorism as the targeting of innocent civilians, then our soldier's actions must be defined as those of a 'terrorist'. To think otherwise, is to not be logically consistent. This is why the mideast views us and and calls us a 'terrorist nation'." I am afraid you have pulled a Ward Churchill on me here. It is easy for someone to twist thier logic into seeing people who are not military enemies as a legitimate target, as Ward did when he labeled the people working in the World Trade Center as Little Eichmans. However, it is a corruption of principle. As far as I know, American targets in Iraq have been Military Enemy targets. ... With a possible few exceptions in which criminal charges have been appropriately filed. If innocents were targeted in some strategy meant to cause the military enemy to lose heart, then I would agree with you that it was an act of terrorism. I don't condone the Nuking of Japan's cities in WWII and I protested the Mei Lei Massacre and sanctions in Iraq for that very reason. Suicide bombers ... indeed much of the Middle East, may well twist logic to justify targeting innocents or Anti-American sentiment in this way, that doesn't make it any less corrupt. Unfortunately the word 'terrorist' has become politicized and subject to frequent abuse (as in the argument you just presented). However, the bottom line is that targeting an innocent person is NEVER justified. It is, in fact, an unforgivable and heinous evil, which would not change even with the endorsement of your commanding officer.

To: Katelew who wrote (216945)	2/8/2007 2:26:33 PM
From: mistermj	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

That is the most disgusting and ignorant post I've read here in quite a while. Its talking points straight from the radical loony left. Nutty.

To: Katelew who wrote (216945)	2/8/2007 5:43:00 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

our soldiers dropped thousands of bombs that killed tens of thousands of civilian men, women, and children. I think you're wrong to think that. Our bombing has gotten pretty precise minimizing the unintended civilian casulties. (I recall concrete bombs were even used when trying to hit Saddam right as Baghdad was falling.) Not eliminating them of course, but I think the tens of thousands of civilians is way too high. Now in WWII we did precisely what you accuse. We did target civilian areas of German and Japanese cities, dropping firebombs to destroy as much as possible. You can condemn that war if you wish. ---------------------------------------------- When an Israeli is targeted, the news gives us lots of pictures, names, background. The event is personalized and we feel great sympathy. Actually they don't do much of that at all.