Well, you are wrong on about every count one can be wrong. There is no just theory of war under which you hijack a civlian airliner and deliberately murder all the civlians on board to achieve a military objective. Second, if you will recall, after we used the military to establish civil jurisdiction in Germany and Japan, we then brought the murderous bastards in the SS and some of the same kinds of senior Japanese military and civilian folks to the bar of justice.
This was not unavoidable collateral damage. It is was directly and simply murder.
What kind of an inhuman soul are you not to see the difference?
What kind of an inhuman soul are you not to see the difference?
Murder is a civilian, criminal act. You send police to arrest accused murderers. You give them a trial. You give them legal representation.
You send the military to KILL the enemy. They have no rights. If they're hidden by a civilian population, you might give the civilians a chance to clear out, or hand over those who attacked you, but if they don't, you kill them all. I'm talking about the sort of things that we did in WWII. Firebomb cities. Wipe cities off the face of the earth.
No, what the terrorists did does not follow the "rules" of warfare. Since they didn't follow those rules, there should be no expectation that we would do the same. The leftists crying about the treatment our "guests" at Gitmo are getting should have never had the chance. If these are "unlawful combattants," the only reason they should still be alive is if they're still giving useful intelligence.
When Israel was attacked by rockets, they should never have responded by doing nothing, or surgical raids. They should have unleashed hell on those firing those rockets. And the fact that they didn't completely anihilate everyone in Lebanon in those areas from which the rockets were being fired was a huge mistake.
No, I don't consider a combined, planned attack like the one staged on September 11, 2001 a murder. It was an act of war. Remember, there are such things as "war crimes." Surviving NAZIs and Japanese leaders were tried, but only after their countries were for all intents and purposes destroyed and completely unable to wage war. We need to do the same thing. Kill the terrorists. Kill their supporters. Kill those who fund them. If there's a terrorist funeral with hundreds or thousands of supporters there, drop a few cluster bombs on them. Faluja should have been razed to the ground. And if Bin Laden is still alive after killing everyone in his organization, and his supporters, and destroying or taking all their property, then we can try him for war crimes too.
Mark
Oh, and I don't agree with the whole concept of "just theory of war." Wars are fought for specific reasons. If one is attacked one fights back. But war is a horrible thing. Which is why is needs to be fought in a brutal, ugly way. You make the enemy pay in ways that they'll never forget. And if they start to forget, you hit them again, only harder. The idea is to make the enemy realize that fighing you was a really bad idea that should have never been considered in the first place. The reason those bastards even considered doing something like this is because we haven't fought a war "correctly" since WWII.
Mark