06-21-2004, 03:47 PM
|
#68
|
|
Guest
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Chewbacca:
Are people lining up to become new recruits military targets? I do wonder because the definition of the word terrorist, I thought, was people who attacked civilian targets.
If this bombing was against a military target than would not the use of the word terrorist to describe the perpretators and their fictional and factual supports be incorrect?
|
People who are lining up to BECOME recruits ARE still civilians BY definition....do you not see that? and oh by the way, the people who worked in the shops surrounding this line..they were civilians too...and the passers by on the street? Yep civilians too...
So Im Confused here...
Are you really siding with the terrorists on these abominable attacks? If you support these kinds of indiscriminate attacks where civilians are being killed...how in heck could you sit there and condemn American troops during the "Actual War" against the "Real" army of Saddam Hussein when there were reletively few civilian casualties...versus the terrorists/insurgents or whatever where the primary casulaty list IS civilians...
I am just trying to figure your view point out...seems like if it is American Soldiers doing their damndest to avoid "colatteral damage" It's a horrible act of unreasoned violence......If it is an Attack against women, Children, or men who may one day become military members...it is excusable....Or have I missed something in your argument?
Or perhaps maybe TL titled his thread correctly? Or maybe I just don't understand your view.
[ 06-21-2004, 03:49 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]
|
|
|
|