Ah, yes, the old "According to a study" situation.
Ok, even the most conservative estimates put the civilian fatalities starting at around 10-15,000 with all others going up from there. Does that make it more palatable for you? (BTW, in answer to your question, that particular study attributes roughly 85% of the violent deaths as a direct result of collition actions)
I understand where you are coming from, but what I really wanted to point out was the duality of your statements. You claimed that you unconditionally oppose the killing of innocent people. However, what you have really shown is that you oppose the killing of innocents
when that is the intention (terrorists), but you accept it when it's an
unfortunate side-effect (colliteral damage) of some other purpose and not a direct intent. Since the two are mutually exclusive, you can't claim both.
Heck, Brad, they're chomping at the bit to chop off YOUR head, and you are sympathetic to their cause.
Apparently you don't know me very well, as I can assure you that I'm anything but sympathetic towards any group or individual whos intention is to harm others. Although I have noticed that you tend to fall into that "you are either with us or against us" reasoning that our fearless leader is also so fond of. Fortunately, most things are not so monochromatic, particularly when it comes to human relations.
Along those same lines, I'd like to comment on what others have alluded to, and yourself stated:
While not every Muslim or Follower of Islam is a terrorist, every one of the terrorists who flew the planes on 9/11, or have been caught/identified/made their declarations in the Middle East/Asia ARE/WERE Muslims.
This sentiment is generally expressed, usually along with stating some misconception about Islam/Muslims, to show causality between Islam and a propensity towards terrorism, when in fact there is none. If it were true, then you would expect those countries with the largest Islamic populations to produce most terrorists, however that is not the case.
The largest Islamic population is in Indonesia with some 215 million Muslims. They are followed closely by Pakastan with 160 million, India with 146 million and Bangladesh with 122 million. Iran has only 67 million, Iraq has 26 million, and Saudi Arabia, where the majority of the 911 terrorists came from, has only 22 million (Source:
CIA World Fact Book). If any causality existed, then you would expect Indonesia to be
the hotbed of terrorist activity
As a side note, has anyone else noticed the complete lack of attention towards Saudi Arabia, even though they were a major player in the 911 attacks? Don't suppose it has anything to do with oil now do you?
I know that there is never going to be any "Meeting in the middle" on this. Too many people are anti-US no matter what the facts.
That's a pretty grim position. A person who knows for sure that they can't learn to swim, will never learn to swim (even though humans are predisposed to swimming from birth). By ruling out any peaceful solutions, you certainly have condemed any from ever happening
Hopefully your position will become a little less grim once you get out of your present situation.
Are you going to Sturgis this year? I'd like to buy you a beer.
Alas, I doubt that I'll make Sturgis.. North Georgia is about as adventurous as I'm willing to go, but I'll be there with 'ya in spirit
Cheers,
Brad
