Ahhhhh.
I so love it when we are worried about OFFENDING someone. Remember this "In America he who is offended first is right."
If you are offended that I'm calling your "Freedom Fighter" a "Terrorist" the problem is yours not mine.
I think that the US Code sums it up. [U.S. Code Title 18, Section 2331]
The following is an excerpt. The specifics define the differences between international terrorism and domestic terrorism.
(B)(i) is the most relevant part I think. Terrorists target civilians. Irregular forces do not (else they become terrorists).
In my mind it is very simple. The minute you begin targeting civilians you are a terrorist. This is irrespective of the fact that "they did it first".
Yes I know that the US bombed german cities during WW2 and we dropped nuclear weapons on Japan.
Does it suck for those civilians? Absolutely.
Do I think we should prosecute the military members for participating? No I do not.
It is a very fine line to walk, but the fundamental difference is that when the US did this, it was the regular military, not irregular forces that performed the acts.
Don't even think about comparing what is happening in Iraq to the Revolutionary war in the US. They are NOT the same.
During the revolutionary war, the US forces did not target civilians.
US forces did not use children and women as suicide bombers.
US forces did not coerce cooperation by fear and intimidation of the local population.
The Bottom line: The terrorists in Iraq act just like the Viet Cong. They hide amongst the civilians, initiate an attack on US forces. When US forces attempt to defend themselves innocent people become victims.
Who bears the responsibility for the civilian casualties? The terrorists.
I see, but to people it is extremely offensive. Its as if insulting somebodies family to some people. Would you like it if i called Barak Obama a Fascist supporter that should have his tongue cut off, genitals fed and forced to have sexual interaction with his sister [Or, if your a republican, replace him with McCain]
Or if i called Eisenhower a mass murderer, or if i called George Washington the father of racism and hate?
To you, this might not be offensive. But to some other Americans this could make them throttle me where i stand. If you do not respect a persons view, or feelings, then you are a selfish person. Simple.
Well, i beleive that if you target civillians in warfare with a conventional army, you are to be labeled "Criminal of War" [Saddam Hussein is a good example]. If you attack civillians during peacetime you are to be labelled a "Genocidal criminal" [Or similar, i just thought this one up by the spot].
Yes, America bombed German cities in the great patriotic war, which im not happy for [And im not happy about the Germans also bombing cities, dont forget that]. The bombing should have been done on Military areas, such as a base, airfield, AA gun or baracks. Not on churches, schools, homes and hospitals. I dont think they should be charged/trialled, but it is something that should not be practiced again.
But what the US air force SHOULD have been put to trial about is the
Second bombing of Belgrade in 1945 [Or 44]. When the USAF bombed Belgrade to apparently "Destroy remaining German soldiers in the area" when the USA fully well knew that the Fascists have been expelled from Yugoslavia, and that only a tiny amount remained. The civillian deaths in the bombings: 1,200-500
Axis deaths in bombings: 18
Once you figure out the average of the two numbers i put up for civillian deaths, thats 75 civilians for each of the 18 German soldiers. That is something im EXTREMELY not happy about.
The nuclear weapons dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a move in self defence, but i think a unnecesary one. What the USA should have done is film a test of one [Or photograph it or similar] and send it to the Japanese. That might have caused a surrender.
And the reason Japan surrendered wasnt because of the Nuclear weapons, but because the USSR declared war on Japan aswell, and Japan was afraid of the USSR at the time, and they couldnt afford a two front war. Shame that breif alliance between the USSR and USA didnt last.
Why did you bring up the civil war? It is so painstakingly OBVIOUS that it is nothing like the war in Iraq.
Comparing the terrorists with the Vietcong is like comparing wine to Vodka. The Vietcong didnt hide with the civillians [Not in the North], they WERE the civillians [Not in the actual army, but supporters]. Also, America did burn down many undefended civillian villages.
A fair amount of people in Iraq arent happy about the US presence there. Neither would I. Democracy cannot be forced onto a nation, it must be developed slowly. If America wasnt there for the oil, the best they could have done is silence Hussein, and establish a new government which would get funded by the USA [Perhaps other countries] to rebuild the country economically.
]
