Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeWaters
Depends on what you mean by "allow". Let's say I had killed your parents and your brothers' and sisters' families. I have guns, you have nothing.
Me and my buddies move into your neighborhood. What, pray tell, are you going to do? You are probably going to try and save your family.
You are assuming a position of power and agency that most Iraqis don't have. The people with power and influence and money are long gone. The people remaining are those who can't leave. They are hardly in a position to fight against those that shed blood. This is unfortunate.
What about the VT killings? What are we to think of adult men cowering under their desks while one armed man shot women in the head? Are they not complicit in some way with these killings? And because of their complicity, are we not justified in killing them in our attempt to kill the shooter?
You probably think this is unfair. Those men, individually, were unlikely to overwhelm the shooter. But had they acted in concert they might have. Is it really fair to expect them to have acted in concert?
Is it fair to justify killing Iraqi civilians because they have not risen up against the insurgents/terrorists?
In reality, the reason we are in Iraq is the opposite of genocide. We are there to preserve life, hence our police action. Bush and McCain warn of blood running in the streets if we leave. We have destabilized a country, now we hope to restabilize it. It's a tall order to ask a military, that is being attacked, to sustain and preserve life. It is noble. Whether you think it is worth the sacrifice, no doubt, influences your opinion of whether we should leave or not.
|
If you were to come into my home, I would do all I could to kill you in any way I could.
There was one man on the VT campus that sacrificed himself in order to save the students in his classroom. Had he not stood up to the student with the gun, there would have been more than 31 casualties.