[Logophile]

It's not only our enemies who believe that terrorism works. During WWII, our own leaders apparently thought that terrorism worked too. Otherwise they wouldn't have firebombed Dresden and Tokyo or atom-bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

They intended to attack military targets; their purpose was not merely to kill or maim civilians. At least that was the official line. (Given the limitations of the weaponry of the day, they may have been fooling themselves.)

If you were to argue that the deliberate bombing of noncombants is immoral, I would agree. And I would point out that the PLO has repeatedly employed such methods against civilians, without even the pretence of attacking military targets. If that works against the Israelis, it will be used against us.

[lavrenti]

Don't be such a fool. The bombing was intended to break the collective will of the Germans and Japanese. Which failed.

Dresden was no accident. It was calculated slaughter. The firebombing of Tokyo was the same.

Not that I am passing moral judgment. Wars are to win, come Hell or high water.

[DentsRun]

If you were to argue that the deliberate bombing of noncombants is immoral, I would agree.

I agree it's immoral. But that it doesn't make it uncommon.

And I would point out that the PLO has repeatedly employed such methods against civilians, without even the pretence of attacking military targets. If that works against the Israelis, it will be used against us.

Here's what I don't understand. You say we have to stop terrorism in Israel or terrorism will be used against us here in the U.S. Well, terrorism had already been used against us here in the U.S. That was what 9/11 about. And the reason it was used was because terrorism was effective. It was effective when we used it in Dresden and it was effective in Nagasaki and Hiroshima too. The killing of civilians in wartime is probably more common than the sparing of them.