Quote:
Originally posted by Rudey
The difference is that the terrorist should simply not exist.
The terrorist, to begin with, is not the same as the soldier and hence to try and judge their actions on the same level is beyond ridiculous.
-Rudey
|
So you know that this man was a terrorist? not an insurgent, or a freedom fighter, or a patriot, or a conscript, or a Baathist? Because there is more than one type of "enemy", and unfortunately the distinction is quite important in the strategic and tactical battle because each is motivated by different impulses.
The great thing about this thread is the irony that the people that are/where soldiers are arguing for the rule of law, and the adherance to ethical and moral standards... while the arm-chair generals are the ones advocating the lower of those standards.
Hybrid Mode
