Quote:
Originally Posted by raymr
By saying we need to be more of what the terrorists are, you are suggesting, for example, we abandon conventional rules of engagement and start bombing civilian centers whereever we think the enemy is hiding? Should we temporarily suspend our notions of decency and human sanctity to deal with them at their level? If we are going to adopt ruthless eye-for-an-eye measures to kill the enemy, why not just drop a few big ones and save a bunch of American lives in the process?
|
If we want to preserve our western way of life we need to do whatever it takes to win a war that has been going on and off for almost a thousand years. The difference today is that our "enemies" are developing global WMD and will use them without hesistation, whereas we will sit on the stump and ponder about being a civilized society playing by some self induced sense of morality. Our Islamic enemies don't differentiate between our military and civilian population. We are all the enemy to them and therefore we should all be killed. There are no innocent civilians when it comes to nationalistic war, as all citizens are subjected to supporting their countries military on opposing sides, wheather they like it or not. War is brutal, bloody and barbaric, it has always been that way and will always be that way. Are we fighting for our lives, that is what determines how far we should go to defend ourselves.
Should we wait until our enemies develope nuclear weapons and use them against us before we respond? Or should we take preemtive action to eliminate their threat? Tough choice for a morally civilized society. Have we gotten to that point of "survival of the fittest" mentality? IMHO not yet, but we are approaching it and will soon have to make that decision. It's similar to the decision to nuke Japan in WW2. I think we made the right choice then, and I believe if it comes down to it again, we do it, nuke them into oblivion. They will do it to us one day if we allow it to happen.
