[RightCenter]

Probably, but I also believe that using aerial bombing in warfare is different from using death squads and the tactics that Pinochet used. I think that's the majority of opinion, too- it's more humane to bomb during wartime than to round up innocents, falsely charge them, and kill them.

I'm not saying that all of the 3000 were innocent. But some were. And they died because of Pinochet's tactics.

[lqclamar]

I'm not saying that all of the 3000 were innocent. But some were. And they died because of Pinochet's tactics.

Any chance we could trouble you for some specifics?

Genuinely innocent peopley were likely among the victims as with any similar situation (Chile was a mess in the weeks following the coup, which is when the overwhelming majority of the killings happened), but I ask you for specifics because many of the most commonly cited "innocents" by Pinochet's critics were in actuality high ranking insiders of the Allende regime. Among the ones they tried to prosecute him for were Allende's military commander and Allende's personal bodyguards...not exactly the poor villagers dragged off the streets that many would have us believe.

[FreedomPoster]

Probably, but I also believe that using aerial bombing in warfare is different from using death squads and the tactics that Pinochet used. I think that's the majority of opinion, too- it's more humane to bomb during wartime than to round up innocents, falsely charge them, and kill them.

I'm not saying that all of the 3000 were innocent. But some were. And they died because of Pinochet's tactics.

So if it's a mass killing, that's somewhat antiseptic due to distance, you're OK with it. But if the killing of the innocents is up close and personal, you disagree with it?

Is that a correct summation?