Comments on: U.S. “Occupation” of Iraq http://www.californiaconservative.org/liberals/us-occupation-of-iraq/ Speaking Out For The Silent Majority (TM) Sat, 26 May 2012 15:29:47 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: Anonymous Q http://www.californiaconservative.org/liberals/us-occupation-of-iraq/comment-page-1/#comment-180883 Anonymous Q Tue, 13 Jun 2006 07:20:07 +0000 http://www.californiaconservative.org/?p=3279#comment-180883 So our airstrikes that killed thousands of Iraqi civilians during our invasion of Baghdad doesn't make us terrorists? I guess so long as we didn't directly target them, despite knowing that many civilians were likely going to die, it's ok? So having a couple thousand Iraqi civilians (women, children, and yes even men) die is ok, but killing 50 kids is terrorism. I just find it interesting that the word terrorist has such pejorative connotations. I tend to judge things by intent and outcome. A so-called "terrorist" decides he wants to pay back U.S. forces for bombing his home accident and killing his family, but he knows it's suicide to just attack them head-on. So he decides to build an IED and uses it to kill a couple Iraqi translators because he seems them as sympathizers. Congratulations, he is now officially a "terrorist" for having slain civilians to make a political statement. On the other hand, U.S. leaders decide it would be wise to attack Iraq, knowing that in such a war, at least hundreds of Iraqi civilians will be killed, not to mention thousands of Iraqi troops (I know, they're soldiers, but damn they're still people, right? Do they deserve to live any less than civilians? Just like our soldiers. An American soldier shouldn't be treated like his life isn't as important just b/c he signed on for a dangerous job). So what is a terrorist then? I would argue that the distinction between terrorist and freedom fighter or soldier is mere semantics and point of view. So our airstrikes that killed thousands of Iraqi civilians during our invasion of Baghdad doesn’t make us terrorists? I guess so long as we didn’t directly target them, despite knowing that many civilians were likely going to die, it’s ok? So having a couple thousand Iraqi civilians (women, children, and yes even men) die is ok, but killing 50 kids is terrorism. I just find it interesting that the word terrorist has such pejorative connotations. I tend to judge things by intent and outcome. A so-called “terrorist” decides he wants to pay back U.S. forces for bombing his home accident and killing his family, but he knows it’s suicide to just attack them head-on. So he decides to build an IED and uses it to kill a couple Iraqi translators because he seems them as sympathizers. Congratulations, he is now officially a “terrorist” for having slain civilians to make a political statement. On the other hand, U.S. leaders decide it would be wise to attack Iraq, knowing that in such a war, at least hundreds of Iraqi civilians will be killed, not to mention thousands of Iraqi troops (I know, they’re soldiers, but damn they’re still people, right? Do they deserve to live any less than civilians? Just like our soldiers. An American soldier shouldn’t be treated like his life isn’t as important just b/c he signed on for a dangerous job). So what is a terrorist then? I would argue that the distinction between terrorist and freedom fighter or soldier is mere semantics and point of view.

]]> By: simon http://www.californiaconservative.org/liberals/us-occupation-of-iraq/comment-page-1/#comment-179978 simon Mon, 12 Jun 2006 18:17:55 +0000 http://www.californiaconservative.org/?p=3279#comment-179978 <em>Furthermore, is Mr. Conger serious about the United Nations? Whose “acceptable” forces continually rape women, trade aid supplies for sex with underage girls,</em> I think you will find it is the minority of soldiers with the UN as well. But good post I agree with the rest Furthermore, is Mr. Conger serious about the United Nations? Whose “acceptable” forces continually rape women, trade aid supplies for sex with underage girls,
I think you will find it is the minority of soldiers with the UN as well.

But good post I agree with the rest

]]>