Double standard in the 'War on Terror'?

Question

Why is it that when all those Americans died on 9/11 the country called it a terrible act of war (and it was a terrible act of war, no doubt), but when our military kills Iraqi, Afghan, and in one instance Pakistani civilians in the pursuit of terrorists, it is passed off as merely a reality of war? Are we not as accountable for the wrongful deaths of others as the terrorists are???

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/americancommunitarianparty/

Answer 1

every human being who is a reason for killing others is answerable in the presence of Lord is sure, no matter what the situations are.

Love one another is the message Jesus Christ brought to the world, it will be better ,if we cannot love one another we can refrain from being the reason to kill one another ,

if oneperson is the reason for killing or agonizing other human is certainly accountable ,
if u call terrorism it is nothing but deviation the principle of love one another , the basis of Christianity.
in worldly words we call double standards , but eternally front of Lord it is single standard for all on the judgment day , every one have to be present with their credit in this world accountable whatever they do!!!!

Answer 2

The difference here, and I'm sure this has been pointed out to you over and over again (but here it goes), is this: The terrorist that were responsible for 9/11 killed innocent civilians INTENTIONALLY. The innocent civilians killed in war are UNINTENDED consequenses, usually due to the fact that the terroists INTENTIONALLY hide in heavily civilian populated areas. Many times we, or the Israllis will notify the population, in advance, that they had better clear the area if they are not part of the terroist movement or they will be bombed. I know I would be upset if someone told me to move or be bombed, but I think I would still rather move than be blown to bits. The terroists did not give anyone this warning beforehand. Yes, it's sad when anyone's life is ended before they had a chance to live a full life. It's also sad to think that there are people in America who would rather give the terroists a safe place to hide, regroup and replan other attacks than see the terroist's poor little rights being violated.

Having said all this, I realize that you have your mind set on us being the bad guys in this situation so I'm sure I will get my share of "thumbs-downs". So be it. It won't be because what I say is wrong. It will just be because what I say doesn't fit into your hatred of Bush and his administration ideas. Then, after rating me thumbs down, I'm sure you will step away thinking how good it made you feel to downgrade another close-minded war-monger. But if what I say is true, who's close minded?

Answer 3

It IS a double-standard because our U.S. government has ulterior motives behind an illegal and unconstitutional war in Iraq. The Bush family had a personal vendetta against Hussein, and Dick Cheney wants all that OIL for his buddies at Exxon-Mobil so they can all get richer and richer and richer. That's the only reason we used the "terrorist attack" on 9-11 as an excuse for attacking Iraq, a sovereign nation that in no way threatened, provoked or attacked the U.S.A.
Bush has killed or injured 655,000 Iraqi citizens and 22,000 U.S. soldiers all to "settle a score" with Hussein and acquire all the OIL swimming underneath Iraq's sands.
He will kill thousands more once he goes to war with Iran in the spring of 2007 for the same reason: rich fields of easily-accessible OIL.
War is extremely profitable for our giant military-industrial complex, and our armaments manufacturers have bought and paid for politicians, hired pricey lobbyists, and formed special interest groups to encourage war and murder, all in the name of profit. They have led us into the Korean Conflict, the Cold War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, Vietnam, and Desert Storm - all 'wars' that were not declared by Congress, and were unconstitutional.
There is considerable speculation that the Bush handlers knew about the 9-11 disaster, but intentionally did nothing to stop it, knowing that it would create emotions in this country that would allow Bush to attack Iraq (as much nonsense as it is, when Americans' emotions run high, government can con us into anything).
Prediction: If it appears that a Democratic landslide is imminent in 2008, Bush handlers will fabricate yet another 'terrorist attack' on U.S. soil (this time in the Midwest, killing a few thousand innocent civilians; probably in Chicago, St. Louis or Indianapolis). They will then order Bush to declare martial law, claiming that a change in administration would not be in the best interests of national security.
Prediction: Bush will attack Iran as soon as his handlers can come up with a plausible excuse that they can 'sell' to the brainless conservative ditto heads. Probably by spring, 2007.
Prediction: With less than a month before what appears to be a devastating loss for Republicans in the mid-term elections, a new terrorist threat will be foiled (similar to the Heathrow Airport scam). That's probably what all the hubbub about sports stadiums being targeted is all about right now. -RKO-

Answer 4

There is a difference between the accidental and incidental death of civilians during the conduct of military operations against an armed enemy and the deliberate targeting of civilians.

Please take the time to think about this and discern the difference.

Nobody likes or wants war, nobody likes or wants innocent civilian casualties. But let's can this simplistic equivalence crap that is NOT evidence of any level of equivalence.

Answer 5

the purpose is thoroughly diverse thay need an section to call residing house no longer assimilation it is the purpose of the muslim extremists p.s the conflict on terror also incorporates jimah islamiah, it isn't in basic terms al quada and also you received't listen each and every thing in the archives The assasination in no way impacts the technique of life for brittish american or australian yet i imagine 1 hundred eighty australians lifeless by technique of muslim extremists might want to ensue to make human beings offended and consequently be centred

Answer 6

The attack on New York was unprovoked. The other attacks were to eliminate the terrorist and the nations that support terrorism. In the long run it will cost less lives. The fanatical Islamists have said they want to destroy the West. Simply ignoring them will not make the problem go away. Do we wait until they have the bomb and turn New York into a crater? Isn’t it better to take the battle to their home turf and not ours?

Answer 7

The difference between your examples is that ALL the Americans were non-combatants AND there were no military targets (at least the WTC) involved with NYC.

However, innocents killed in war are as much tragedy as 9/11.

Answer 8

I do not believe that we should be accountable for the "wrongful" deaths of others, when most of the others and what the news perseives as "wrongful and innocent people" are carrying and pointing weapons at us too...

I just don't understand how people are able to say that it is sad that our people died in 9/11, but when we are over there those same people are quick to say that we are murderers and are wrong and stuff like that,... Are we not protecting our country for further terrorist attacks???

Answer 9

The horrible truth is, this is not a war where soldier fight soldier. I do not think we will ever see that again. Terrorists do not follow rules of engagement. They hide among civilians, and use them as shields. If we back off--they will have won. We have to fight the war that is given to us. And, this is what has been given.

Answer 10

Obviously , you've never been in a firefight in a populated area .
People just naturally get in the way , trying to get away , run into the line of fire .
Truth be known , both sides have unintentionally hit civilians .
At least we get medical attention for the victims