That’s some awesomely fucked up logic, there.
It’s Ok if we kill some innocent civilians, cause the other guys do too.
We shouldn’t apologize if we do, cause the other guys don’t either.
We can be every bit the low-life piece of shit terrorists as they can be, just give us a chance to prove it!
So we give the Afghan people the choice of occupation by Christian foreign assholes or Muslim local assholes. Yeah! We win!
Never said that. Don’t put words in my mouth.
I said if killing civilians will turn the population against the Nato forces, why hasn’t it turned the people against the Taliban?
The Taliban has killed far more civilians in Afghanistan, yet there is no puplic outcry from the populace against the terrorists.
The Nato Commander appologizing for killing civilians shows that Nato are not “low-life pieces of shit”.
You never hear a Taliban or al-qaeda leader appologizing. Why? Because civilians are their main targets.
Maybe the Afghans should take heed of this.
What separates us from our enemies is the fact that we are NOT indifferent toward the deaths of civilians. It’s one thing to apologize, but it’s another entirely to simply write off their deaths as collateral damage or to say “shit happens”. Of course shit happens in war and it’s debatable as to whether or not we should apologize when civilians die. However, it isn’t debatable as to whether or not we should be indifferent to it. Maybe it sounds kind of backwards or pointless, but while we and our enemies kill civilians (intent not withstanding) our enemies show zero regret. But we should rise above them and refuse to treat these deaths as nothing more than an indifferent, inevitable aspect of warfare.