Posted on 10/31/2017 5:19:35 PM PDT by MeneMeneTekelUpharsin
How is the truck attack a cowardly act? I have absolutely no defense for the murderer and think he should be summarily tried and executed. However, really, how was his attack cowardly? He ran over people knowing what the consequences were going to be and jumped out with useless "guns" knowing he would be shot. How is that cowardly? Takes a lot of guts (no pun intended at all), if you ask me.
When law enforcement should be saying we are going to kick asses and take names, all they can say is that this was a "cowardly act". Looks like the real cowards in all of this are the leaders of the NYPD for not rounding up every potential muslim radical in that city and putting intense pressure on them. Then, after finding out at which mosque they worship, going after those leaders. Now, THAT would be a courageous act, but, it would incur radical criticism and the NYPD are too cowardly to do what is right. So, they just call the terrorist a coward. What kind of attack would make him NOT a coward? Please do tell.
But that’s not possible, so it doesn’t make sense.
You really think you can beat an enemy without understanding them?
Good luck with that.
it’s also uncivilized, inhuman, animalistic, barbaric, perverted...etc...
I didn’t say don’t understand them. I said don’t become them.
We’re a western nation. Not a Buddhist nation.
Warriors do not equate dueling with warfare.
In warfare, you do not seek a “fair fight’. You seek to defeat the enemy as efficiently as possible.
In warfare, a lot of “innocent” people are killed. It happened in WWII and in WWI.
Limiting warfare to combatants is pretty much a Western invention limited to Christian enemies.
Muslims make no such distinction. It is unclear if our current stategy of separating “good muslims” from “bad muslims” will be effective in the long term.
I suspect we will have to be a lot more selective of “good Muslims” before it is over.
Just wanted to observe that in warfare, you avoid “fair” fights.
You sound like you want to give that POS a hug or something. 'Da hell's wrong with you?
How effective has it been to elect a U.S. president who simply lets the military do its job?
If you’re not sure, ask isis in Iraq.
A lot more effective than electing one who seems to put Muslims ahead of the U.S., and who goes on a world wide apology tour.
Maybe it would be better to say: “That cowardly son of a bitch had a lot of balls trying to get away with this.” That way you are acknowledging that he is cowardly for killing defenceless people but at the same time saying that it took a lot of balls to do it.
They are cowards as well. But you disagree the jihadi attack was cowardly? They all can be you know.
Asymmetric warfare is prosecuted with purpose, not bravado.
In a different light, I know plenty who would give their lives to protect another, but know no one who would give their life to make a statement, religious or political.
Cowardly is a word I view as an emotional reaction to an event intended to elicit emotion.
If this is the consensus opinion of our enemy, then we have already lost.
Thumbs up on your comment.
It is not really relevant how you view the word. It has its own meaning.
Not the world: Warfare.
If anyone views their enemy as a coward, it could be a fatal assumption.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.