Originally Posted by Tyrion
I wonder, though, what counts as terrorism and mass murder. Is mass murder simply many deaths spread over years, or a million deaths within a day? Is terrorism the meticulous removal of all hope and security in a country over dreadful years, or a massive humbling and horrific elimination of two cities within a day?
Mass murder is the unlawful killing of people in large numbers. Check.
Terrorism is the intentional killing of non-combatants for your own purposes. Check.
Wow, and I thought I could count on the liberals of this forum (the self-proclaimed "champions of human rights") to back me up on this.
Originally Posted by Dagobahn Eagle
It didn't work on Cuba, it didn't work on Iraq, and it wouldn't work on Japan.
Didn't work on Cuba?? They didn't get their Soviet missiles and they've never been able to harm the U.S. What hasn't worked against Cuba? They're still Communist? Pfft, why do we care?
Didn't work on Iraq?? They couldn't build WMD and they were a stupid little country that was harmless.
Why couldn't it work on Japan? Just scare the **** out of them (hit some of their unpopulated stuff with atomic bombs if you think that'd work) and destroy their military through bombing campaigns and skirmishes, not a full-scale ground invasion of their cities. So what if they're still Imperial? Without a force to attack anything with, what's the problem? If you want to only fight battles that are necessary, then "Operation Downfall" would certainly not be a necessary one. Nor is murdering their civilians.