..well in that case I'm gonna bomb YOUR civilians..
..ah, in THAT case, I'M gonna...
repeat ad nauseam.
Is this a good idea?
2006-07-18 08:14:06 · 22 answers · asked by wild_eep 6 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Will, keefer and lou are probably my faves here but there are lots of excellent answers and i can't decide. Vote!
2006-07-20 11:42:02 · update #1
That's pre-9/11 thinking. In today's world I'll bomb your citizens pre-emptively today because you might have bombed mine tomorrow.
2006-07-18 08:16:42 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
This is what happened during World War Two, with the Coventry/Dresden thing. At the time, the British government saw red at this seemingly unprovoked attack on a non-military target, and chose to bomb a similar German city. This retaliation was not the right thing to do, as plenty of innocent people were killed and injured, but in return this does not condone the bombing of Coventry and other cities, on both sides.
It is never a good idea. Innocent people die. If they must bomb the crap out of each other, military targets are the only legitimate targets.
2006-07-18 08:24:18 · answer #2 · answered by ? 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A good deal fairer than that offered by America, which is,
"I reserve the right to bomb anybody who I suspect might attack m, or have the capability to attack me, but no one has any valid right to attack me under any circumstances, including the fact that I have already attacked them".
Well? Isn't it?
If you don't believe it, check out the stuff Condi Rice has said.
2006-07-18 08:26:34 · answer #3 · answered by The Lone Gunman 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.Revenge is not a solution for anything.Just because your enemy is a monster doesn't mean you too must become the same.You should have ample resources and strength to defend yourself but taking revenge and causing damage to civilians is a bad idea.
Good luck.
2006-07-18 08:17:11 · answer #4 · answered by Eternity 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely
The more random and indiscriminate, the better
In fact, it gets best when you have aircraft, tanks, intelligence and military infrastructure. So much better for killing civilians than a few random home made rcockets
2006-07-18 18:02:19 · answer #5 · answered by mnaagar 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No that's a horrible deal.
Most of the time if someone is willing to kill other peoples civilians they don't care that much about their own civilians.
2006-07-18 08:17:31 · answer #6 · answered by The Teacher 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually, terrorist usually HIDE behind there women and children, and try to use them as a shield that they know, or believe, that CIVILIZED people don't bomb women and children purposely, Unlike the terrorist, who don't care that they kill women and children, and they absolutely don't care about their own women and children. I say drop leaflets to tell the people of terrorist nations to get out, because the bombing is a commin'.
2006-07-18 08:21:09 · answer #7 · answered by Dog Mama 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If Jesus Christ was accepted the attitude of bombing anyone would be a thing of the past, It is too bad that cavemen still exsist.
2006-07-18 08:22:11 · answer #8 · answered by theodore r 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Irrelevant.
2006-07-18 08:21:15 · answer #9 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well, in all fairness, Israel did tell advise all citizens of southern Lebanon that it was going to be bombarded... although it seems all the problems are stemming from having idiots in positions of power.
2006-07-18 08:20:59 · answer #10 · answered by Lestat 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋