| OneToughHerring |
06-01-10 04:14 PM |
Oh all right then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by tater
(Post 1408620)
Again, you fail to answer. What is your point other than attacking the US?
|
To bring attention to the civilian casualties of the war in Afghanistan. Is that allowed?
Quote:
Who here said that they deserved to die or that it was a good thing at any level?
|
By they you mean the victims mentioned in the OP? I think the action that led to their death may have been accidental. Unfortunately this doesn't change the fact that they are dead.
And yes I know the saying "you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs". Really, is that your defence here, and for all (there are a lot more then just the ones in this strike) the victims of the Afghanistan war?
Quote:
It is not US policy to intentionally kill civilians, or we'd have already wiped all of them out.
|
Like I said, I don't believe it is. The military doctrine isn't an absolute thing. Sometimes killing civilians might be allowed. You might be surprised how lax the rules are governing this.
Quote:
It is not in US interest to kill civilians for political/geopolitical reasons.
|
How about military reasons? You think the boots on the ground will phone up Obama when they have to decide whether to kill some civilians they think might be aiding the Taliban?
Quote:
It is not in the interest of individual US troops to kill civilians, because as decent human beings, they don't like to do this.
|
You sure about that? |
