View Single Post
  #68  
Old December 22nd 03, 03:27 PM
Matt Wiser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"weary" wrote:

"Alan Minyard" wrote
in message
.. .
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:08:15 GMT, "weary"

wrote:


"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: "weary"

Do you think Saddam Hussein had the same

right to use WMD to save the
lives of Iraqi servicemen while fighting

Iran and internal rebellion?
Did Al-Qaeda have the same right to deliberately

target civilians in
their
war with the USA, specifically WTC?

If Saddam hadn't invaded Iran there would

not have been a need to
defend
"Iraqi
servicemen."

Complaints about his use of WMD relate to

uses considerably pre-dating
his invasion of Kuwait.


As for the attacks on the WTC there was

no military value there. An
argument
could be made for the strike on the Pentagon

being a military attack.

Nagasaki and Hiroshima each had valid military

targets within the
cities.

The odds are that there were Reservists in

the WTC at the time of the
attack.
The poster I was replying to advocated using

"ANY MEANS" to end the war.
He also wrote "If that means incinerating

two, three, or however many
Japanese Cities
by the bombs carried by the 509th's B-29s,

so be it." He made no mention
of
destroying military assets. His choice of

words clearly states that the
destruction of
cities was what would produce a Japanese

surrender, not destruction of
military
assets.



Destruction of Japan, by whatever means possible,

was warranted.

That's what AQ thinks of the USA

The
barbarity of their military was an abomination,

and it was continuing
daily


That's what AQ thinks of the USA.

in China, Korea, etc. If incinerating every

building in Japan would
have ended the war, it would have been completely

justified.

The only thing that the US did that was "wrong"

was not hanging the
******* Hirohito from the nearest tree.

Al Minyard



So why do you apologize for them? Dropping the bombs and 9-11 were two
different events under vastly different circumstances. In case you forgot:
Pearl Harbor's treachery was rewarded at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 9-11's treachery
has been partially rewarded with the Taliban who sheltered AQ and OBL reduced
to a low-level insurgency. And OBL and his inner circle (those still alive
and free) running for their worthless lives. AQ will be harder to kill. But
killed they will be: no quarter given. They didn't give any to the airline
passengers and crew on 9-11. So why should they expect any when they are
found and given one chance to give up? If they do give up-military tribunal
for violating the laws and customs of war, followed by either a needle or
noose. If they don't... well, KIA works for me.

Posted via
www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!