Blow up a bus knowing you're going to kill 20 people on it.
Drop a bomb on a suspected terrorist safe house, knowing there could be 20 people unconnected to your target affected.
Difference? One is called terrorism, one is called collateral damage.
Okay, much shorter and simpler:
- Trying to kill innocent civilians
versus
- Trying not to kill innocent civilians
I can't get any simpler without having to start drawing pictures. That I can't get a moral distinction across that an eight-year-old would get is a bit disturbing, and says something about a modern culture where the very concept of moral judgment has been confused beyond recognition.
Every Marine who is killed and wounded is a testament to the morals of our society, a society that is trying to reform Iraq, not annihilate it. We could have destroyed Fallujah instantly, and have been certain of the deaths of people like Zarqawi and others.
But we're trying not to kill innocent people.
Get it yet?
Flame » in reply to Differences
re: Differences
The whole thread (92 posts)
- A question for Mark Eby: What is your definition of 'terrorist'?
- Someone who DELIBERTATELY targets non-combatants.
- That's George Bush. Read it again. (n/t)
- Your Definition Is Pretty Good
- Swinging intellectually (and wildly)
- Uh, lemme try: someone with a rag on their head? (n/t)
- My definition is a bit simpler.
- Opposed to.............?
- re: My definition is a bit simpler.
- Differences
- re: Differences
- A seven year old responds
- You're right, as far as it goes.
- Old Trick
- Another Old Trick
- Same Old Anti-war Rubbish
- re: Another Old Trick
- Maybe the point is...
- Same Old Dem Lies And Stupid Posturing
- And what would the same war have cost ten years from now?
- I didn't say there was a better way.
- Maybe the point is...
- Another Old Trick
- re: You're right, as far as it goes. (n/t)
- good bump (n/t)
- Old Trick
- You're right, as far as it goes.
- A seven year old responds
- re: Differences
