To: BobS
"Good. That means easier targeting."
That's so callous. Children no no better.
It just means another plan will have to be invoked.
This simply delays action.
13 posted on
01/22/2006 10:40:19 AM PST by
AlGone2001
(He's not a baby anymore...)
To: AlGone2001
It won't 'delay' anything.
32 posted on
01/22/2006 10:47:13 AM PST by
johnny7
(“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
To: AlGone2001
The Jihadist would strap bomb belts to them without a qualm.
52 posted on
01/22/2006 10:54:59 AM PST by
TASMANIANRED
(Democrats value the privacy of terrorists higher than the lives of Americans.)
To: AlGone2001
Anyone who'd strap a suicide belt to an innocent don't exactly qualify as parents. If children are going to be used as weapons, they are a target just the same.
62 posted on
01/22/2006 10:57:53 AM PST by
RasterMaster
("Bin Laden shows others the road to Paradise, but never offers to go along for the ride." GWB)
To: AlGone2001
"Good. That means easier targeting."
That's so callous. Children no no better. We have children too.
Sometimes the choices are between bad and worse.
85 posted on
01/22/2006 11:03:15 AM PST by
oldbrowser
(No matter how cynical I get, I can't seem to keep up)
To: AlGone2001
It just means another plan will have to be invoked. This simply delays action.Israel will consider Iran's new tactic. But when it comes to the survival of their nation, they would not allow a ring of children to stop their plans.
To: AlGone2001
it is their Children.......or OUR CHILDREN if we don't grow some really quick.
To: AlGone2001
I think you are wrong. If the choice is between iranian children and isreals own children as well as millions of others if it can be avoided it will, If it can't there will be no choice. No delay.
To: AlGone2001
"Good. That means easier targeting."That's so callous. Children no no better.
No, I think you are misunderstanding the parent poster. He means that the sites that they have put children around indicate they may be more valuable than sites they haven't children around.
However, I doubt that is the case and it is more likely a desception as they would let no cameras broadcast anything of their most valuable sites.
438 posted on
01/23/2006 12:44:17 PM PST by
mbraynard
(I don't even HAVE a mustache!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson