The price of cheese. Right.
You said:
Quote:
Kill 'em all
that puts you firmly on the same level as these nice people...
|
The implication is that anyone in favor of attacking targets regardless of civilian deaths in that part of the world is no different than palestinian scumbags. I was not particularly upset when I first saw that video, because I already assumed (correctly, in retrospect, based on polling) that most muslims thought that way about us anyway. Remember that the
point of the 9-11 attacks was to kill civilians, so celebrating that is celebrating that intentional attack. Collateral damage is
unintentional. Motive matters. Who started it matters, too.
My point (which stands) is that in ww2, we (the allies) had precisely the same "bomb the needed targets, damn the casualties" attitude generally as espoused in the post that you responded to. This was a generally held view. The USAAF tried to mitigate civilian deaths with their insistence on "daylight, precision bombing," but they knew full well that "precise" meant 80% of the bombs hit within a few
miles of the aim point. Least they tried, not that anyone with the prospect of fighting on the ground cared. So if that's a "bad" or "wrong" view to have now, it was just as wrong then.
Vs a suicidal enemy that was preparing to use women and children as combatants, and spread it's war industry literally into homes, we gave up on trying to avoid civilians, since the line between combatant and legitimate target became blurry. Even though we are in the same situation now, we still try rather harder than we need to to avoid "spillage."