Civilians are legitimate targets

[Ian]

Ian, I know this won't go through your Homeland Insecurity anal probes, but as long as Americans see themselves as separate from any wars they start, then you will always be wondering why there is so much "terrorism". How about we fight a war in New York City for a change? Then, we could bomb ALL the buildings there and show the Americans what they really do over seas.

Have you ever wondered why all those "terrorists" just don't just mow down some schools full of children? It'd be much easier and they could have killed way more people. The reason is that all the 9/11 targets were essential to the American war efforts. The people in those buildings were and are legitimate targets.

Again, you're nothing but a sociopath. That's not ad hominem: that's my analysis of your state of mind. Your views offer no other good analysis.

How about the bus attacks in Britain? Or the nightclub in Bali? Or the trains in Madrid? Or the would-be attacks on Times Square, or attempted explosions in airplanes? And aside from all that, I fail to see how everyone in the WTC was "essential to American war efforts." Most offices were private companies.

[Gawd]

Gawd and sandi - We've been saying nothing because that's what is warranted.

But if I need to spell it out... Gawd doesn't seem to understand the difference between collateral damage (yes, this is awful under any circumstances) and deliberate targeting. By his logic, a deliberate genocide of a hundred million American taxpayers would be a "legitimate target". Or, if someone who hated the US decided to break into my house and cut my wife's throat, she'd be a "legitimate target" because she pays her taxes. And of course, sandi jumps to his defense, trying to blur the lines between deliberate targeting and other casualties, as if there's no such thing as intentions. You guys aren't doing much to lower your ratings on the Sociopath-O-Mater.

You could always stop bombing the homes of people in other countries.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Gawd and sandi - We've been saying nothing because that's what is warranted.

But if I need to spell it out... Gawd doesn't seem to understand the difference between collateral damage (yes, this is awful under any circumstances) and deliberate targeting. By his logic, a deliberate genocide of a hundred million American taxpayers would be a "legitimate target". Or, if someone who hated the US decided to break into my house and cut my wife's throat, she'd be a "legitimate target" because she pays her taxes. And of course, sandi jumps to his defense, trying to blur the lines between deliberate targeting and other casualties, as if there's no such thing as intentions. You guys aren't doing much to lower your ratings on the Sociopath-O-Mater.

You could always stop bombing the homes of people in other countries.

[Blondie]

Sure, and all those Palestinian civilians are legitimate targets of Israeli oppression. They shouldn't expect to stand idly by while their fellow tribesmen bomb Israeli bars and busses.

Gawd, you're actively hurting the Palestinian people by alienating those who would be sympathetic towards them.

He never claimed he was smart.

I wouldn't claim either of you are as well.

By the same logic, the um.. 100 Isreali civilians killed by homemade rockets in the past um.. 7 years are legitimate targets just as much as the thousands of Palestinian civilians killed by GBUs dropped by ISF F-18s on them in um... 3 weeks.

[sandinista]

Gawd and sandi - We've been saying nothing because that's what is warranted.

But if I need to spell it out... Gawd doesn't seem to understand the difference between collateral damage (yes, this is awful under any circumstances) and deliberate targeting. By his logic, a deliberate genocide of a hundred million American taxpayers would be a "legitimate target". Or, if someone who hated the US decided to break into my house and cut my wife's throat, she'd be a "legitimate target" because she pays her taxes. And of course, sandi jumps to his defense, trying to blur the lines between deliberate targeting and other casualties, as if there's no such thing as intentions. You guys aren't doing much to lower your ratings on the Sociopath-O-Mater.

Because nothing is warranted? Than why bother making a post at all? Whats the point? Collateral damage? Targeting? So, when an american soldier kicks down an Iraqi's door and pulls a family outside at gunpoint that is "legitimate"? You can blah blah on about " ratings and Sociopath-O-Mater's", childish. Doesn't matter, you are still saying that america's "enemies" are legitimate and american targets are not. Like I've said before, I, personally think neither are legitimate but thats beside the point.

[Gawd]

Ian, I know this won't go through your Homeland Insecurity anal probes, but as long as Americans see themselves as separate from any wars they start, then you will always be wondering why there is so much "terrorism". How about we fight a war in New York City for a change? Then, we could bomb ALL the buildings there and show the Americans what they really do over seas.

Have you ever wondered why all those "terrorists" just don't just mow down some schools full of children? It'd be much easier and they could have killed way more people. The reason is that all the 9/11 targets were essential to the American war efforts. The people in those buildings were and are legitimate targets.

Again, you're nothing but a sociopath. That's not ad hominem: that's my analysis of your state of mind. Your views offer no other good analysis.

How about the bus attacks in Britain? Or the nightclub in Bali? Or the trains in Madrid? Or the would-be attacks on Times Square, or attempted explosions in airplanes? And aside from all that, I fail to see how everyone in the WTC was "essential to American war efforts." Most offices were private companies.

Depending on whether there was a war involved in those attacks, then they too could be legit.

And as for the WTC, are you talking about "Private companies" like General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Halliburton, and Boeing? Gee, I wonder if the WTC ever does business with weapons manufacturers? Gee, I wonder?

[Blondie]

Gawd and sandi - We've been saying nothing because that's what is warranted by our utter incompetence in forming a cogent counter-argument that is internally consistent and not fully of gov't issue doubletalk.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The WTC was two office buildings. They did business with the renters.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Gawd and sandi - We've been saying nothing because that's what is warranted by our utter incompetence to form a cogent counter-argument.

Okay, let me get a lobotomy and I'll formulate something they can relate to. BRB.

[Gawd]

The WTC was two office buildings. They did business with the renters.

Know shit.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The WTC was two office buildings. They did business with the renters.

Know shit.

Gee, I wonder if the WTC ever does business with weapons manufacturers? Gee, I wonder?

No shit.

[Ian]

Doesn't matter, you are still saying that america's "enemies" are legitimate and american targets are not. Like I've said before, I, personally think neither are legitimate but thats beside the point.

So you're slightly less indifferent to innocent bloodshed than Gawd. Good for you.

And I would never claim that America's enemies are legitmate targets and Americans are not. Don't put words in my mouth. It hinges on the definition of "enemies". Afghani civilian men, women and children: not legitimate targets. Taliban and especially al Qaeda fighters: targets. Now... try asking an al Qaeda member (or maybe Gawd) to make that distinction!

Sandi and Anthro - I think you need to pick your battles better. Look what Gawd just said about other victims around the world - do you really want to stand by this guy? He's genuinely sick. Gawd jumped in a bigger load of bullshit than normal with this thread, and you had no obligation to come to his defense. Sometimes, you do yourself a favor by saying nothing at all.

[Gawd]

And just to throw a curve ball at the Americans, those "terrorists" were also trying to take down the Pentagon building on the same day.

[Gawd]

The WTC was two office buildings. They did business with the renters.

Know shit.

Gee, I wonder if the WTC ever does business with weapons manufacturers? Gee, I wonder?

No shit.

I'm telling you to know the shit that dwelled in those buildings.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The WTC was two office buildings. They did business with the renters.

Know shit.

Gee, I wonder if the WTC ever does business with weapons manufacturers? Gee, I wonder?

No shit.

I'm telling you to know the shit that dwelled in those buildings.

I don't really care what you are telling me. A conversation with you will never happen.