Yes, Anthony, I can just see me now: Strapping a bomb on my child and turning him into a suicide bomber.
Get real.
2007-04-15 05:37:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 7
·
3⤊
8⤋
If we've been pleased with our elected government and fought back, no we would not be the terrorists yet while the Canadians snuk in and commenced bombing church homes and department shops to get the invaders out so as that they might take over, they may be insurgents and terrorists. BTW, the rustic of Afghanistan did no longer assaults the USA the two. the USA became into attacked via Islamic Fundamentalists that had their "HQ" in the Afghan mountains yet they have been getting the help of everywhere in the middle East because of the fact the 1960's. Islamic countries are actually not nationalistic in the comparable way that westerners are. they are Moslem's first. To defeat them we additionally would desire to attend to hose that are maximum in all danger to help them for one reason or the different.
2016-10-22 05:42:38
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The right wing extremists seem to be saying that as long as we target other soldiers, we're in the clear.
That's nice. Except we don't. We haven't targeted just soldiers in a long time. Apparently they aren't familiar with the term Total Warfare.
We attack cities. We carpet bomb, we cluster bomb, we napalm. Our strategic nuclear plans target industrial centers, civilian centers, as well as military installations.
Even with our precision guided munitions (of which only a small fraction of our arsenal is), we've killed thousands of Iraqi civilians.
If someone defines terrorism as targeting civilians, then they haven't been paying attention to the armed conflicts of the past 100 years or so.
~X~
2007-04-15 05:52:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by X 4
·
4⤊
2⤋
IF we targeted Women and Children YES. If we just went after military targets no. You seem not to know the difference and never will. We were in a war like condition with IRAQ long before 9/11. Osama himself said 9/11 was because the USA was in Islamic lands. Yes we know what you seemingly never will.
2007-04-15 05:49:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by ThorGirl 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
To the invaders, certainly. One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Hitler saw the French resistance (who may well have killed innocent people as well as French people they viewed as being collaborators) as terrorists - Roosevelt, De Gaulle and Churchill saw them as freedom fighters.
2007-04-15 05:45:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by Mordent 7
·
3⤊
1⤋
That all depends on HOW we fight back! If we attack soldiers, then we're freedom fighters. If we hijack civilian planes, bomb markets, target women and children and other civilians then we would be terrorists. I hope you have the morality and intellect to make this distinction.
2007-04-15 05:41:06
·
answer #6
·
answered by oogabooga37 6
·
3⤊
1⤋
We would be "freedom fighters" if we only fought the enemy. Now if we went blew up our own people because they spoke different or for someother trivial manner like religion, then we would be terrorists. (I see shaving off that mullet didn't help increase the gray matter!
2007-04-15 05:45:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Boredstiff 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
No... We will be Patriotic, Freedom Fighting Americans... Makes you sick these 26% of idiotic lemmings that have never left their States let alone know where Iraq is.
2007-04-15 06:24:02
·
answer #8
·
answered by Blessed 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
I would be a terrorist if the Christian Righ ever took control of our country. I got guns here in Montana.
2007-04-15 11:04:48
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Only if it was Paraguay after Bush retires and moves to his new Ranch there.
Go Team Bush Go
2007-04-15 05:48:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
In reply to Ruth - no, the Americans simply drop their bombs from 3000 feet - more damage, more killing...and a better view of the slaughter.
2007-04-15 05:39:20
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
1⤋