Would an Iraqi be justified in a terrorist attack on the US?
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
Blindly defeating myself would be no victory
I would have to dig around for the exact details and my specific phrasing, but it happened that on one occasion in the early War on Terror, some politician presented to the masses a little girl who lost her parents in the World Trade Center attack on 9/11, and the underlying argument was to tell this little girl that we shouldn't get the people responsible. And I would say still what I felt then: When we go to war, we will leave other little girls and boys without their mothers and fathers.
An eye for an eye leave everybody blind.
If I decide I must fight, I will fight the war.
Remember that Americans call those who would attack our occupying soldiers "terrorists". And if killing a soldier in defense of my country, in revenge against the invaders who killed my innocent family, is terrorism, then yes, that terrorism is justified.
Going overseas and seeking out a man, and making his children orphans—or corpses—will only bring more invaders upon my people. We have enough orphans in the world, and enough invaders running around the region. I would defeat whatever legitimate purpose I might claim, going after him in his own home.
Asguard said:
I would have to dig around for the exact details and my specific phrasing, but it happened that on one occasion in the early War on Terror, some politician presented to the masses a little girl who lost her parents in the World Trade Center attack on 9/11, and the underlying argument was to tell this little girl that we shouldn't get the people responsible. And I would say still what I felt then: When we go to war, we will leave other little girls and boys without their mothers and fathers.
An eye for an eye leave everybody blind.
If I decide I must fight, I will fight the war.
Remember that Americans call those who would attack our occupying soldiers "terrorists". And if killing a soldier in defense of my country, in revenge against the invaders who killed my innocent family, is terrorism, then yes, that terrorism is justified.
Going overseas and seeking out a man, and making his children orphans—or corpses—will only bring more invaders upon my people. We have enough orphans in the world, and enough invaders running around the region. I would defeat whatever legitimate purpose I might claim, going after him in his own home.
Thats the way I see it. But this:
is exactly what the War on Terror is based on. Except of course, seeking the one man with a million others as collateral damages. If it works, does it justify the genocide of all Americans? I mean there is no argument that genocide works, should it then be the modus operandi for all? Should all Iraqis aim for terrorism to get rid of the US troops? Should all Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, Lebanese, Syrians, anyone who is sick and tired of NATO and the US sending their troops to massacre their families take up a weapon against those who elect these governments? Would it be justified?
Thats what I am asking. You could make it personalised. Considering that Australian troops have killed children in both Afghanistan and Iraq, if an Iraqi or Afghani who had lost a child to them, came to Australia and killed several children, would he be justified? If as an Australian, you heard on the news that an Iraqi had paid merceneries [for example] to kill Australian children to avenge his own, what would your reaction be?
1. its to be expected that Iraqis will want revenge since there is no accountability for the war crimes committed against them
2. its unfair to target Australian civilians for what Australian troops have done, they should <insert justified action> instead
3. some other opinion
If you can do it as a thought experiment, make it even more personalised:
You wake up in the morning in the midst of a bomb attack and find yourself spattered with the remains of your family.
What can you do that is justified in response? What action would be acceptable as a reaction to such a tragedy?
I'm trying to figure out what people think is acceptable behaviour under these circumstances.
Last edited:
I think the question is really : when is self defence justified?.
According to domestic and international laws there is justification for self defence . However killing or hurting innocent people in any area of our globe is both illegal and unethical . Sad enough the powerful and the bullies ignore all laws and all human ethics and continue their barbaric killing, bullying, stealing people's resources.....etc .
mike how is the diet coming along?
all you really have to do is eat less.
Thank you John .
My diet is going well . I was drinking lots of water and I read it is not good for the kidneys so I cut on that . So far I lost around 20 pounds ( 9 Kgs ).
I got used to eating less and I have no cravings .
i never heard that drinking a lot of water is bad for the kidney. otoh, i dont believe drinking lots of water is particularly beneficial.
I was drinking 2 litres of water in the morning and 2 litres in the evening plus all the water coming from fruits and vegetables . I googled the water aspect and I was surprised that I read that too much water can even kill you .
There are lots of articles on goggle about drinking lots of water .
.
So it's a real danger then. I'm concerned.
Sam,
Justification is subjective; hence, the answer is whatever you want it to be.
Justification is subjective; hence, the answer is whatever you want it to be.
I was drinking 2 litres of water in the morning and 2 litres in the evening plus all the water coming from fruits and vegetables . I googled the water aspect and I was surprised that I read that too much water can even kill you .
There are lots of articles on goggle about drinking lots of water .
Its called water intoxication.