[dmz]

I would say the obvious premeditation in this case alone is enough to safely say that judgement was, in fact, rendered.

Attempting to compare a US soldier involved in a firefight in Tikrit to the actions of cowardly Paul Hill really demeans the US soldier.

Perhaps you would use the same argument to defend Tim McVeigh's actions. Collateral damage is a fact of war, y'know.

[Alberta's Child]

I would say the obvious premeditation in this case alone is enough to safely say that judgement was, in fact, rendered.

Premeditation has nothing to do with it. If Hill killed the abortionist with the intent of punishing him for his actions, then "judgement" was certainly rendered. If Hill killed the abortionist for the purpose of eliminating a threat to human beings, then no "judgement" was rendered.

Attempting to compare a US soldier involved in a firefight in Tikrit to the actions of cowardly Paul Hill really demeans the US soldier.

My comparison is a legitimate one -- the U.S. soldier can kill hundreds of enemy soldiers without ever being in a position of rendering judgement upon them. And nothing demeans a U.S. soldier more than having him risk his life and kill others in the "defense" of a morally depraved nation.

Perhaps you would use the same argument to defend Tim McVeigh's actions. Collateral damage is a fact of war, y'know.

Tim McVeigh's target was a bit more random than Paul Hill's, wouldn't you say?