I'm not overlooking that fact at all. My point is that during neither of those two "very brutal" wars did the West round up all males of fighting age and perform mass executions.
My initial response on this thread was in opposition to the advocacy of just such a tactic.
Thus I maintain my conviction that not doing such things is how we will remain "the West" and continue to occupy the high moral ground.
Anger causes men to do horrendous things, and no side in any war is immune to that impulse. But it should be resisted.
” Thus I maintain my conviction that not doing such things is how we will remain “the West” and continue to occupy the high moral ground.”
Go ahead and occupy your lofty high moral ground, but when they come for you, there may not be any one left to defend you.
As I said you do not understand war, just moral arguments for and against. Which amounts to a hill of beans when someone is about to cut your head off.
You will get the same choices now offered Christians in Mosul, Iraq: convert, pay Jizya (tax amounting to everything you own), or get your head cut off (thereby vacating the high moral ground, but anointing it with your life’s blood). Of course, the female members of your family will be raped while you are forced to watch, then it will be your turn to be raped.
Like so many liberals, you will have stood on principle, feel good about yourself, but will perish none the less in a war you do not and apparently cannot understand.
In the end, you and others like you will have failed to recognize the nature of war, cause too many to die needlessly. Like our Hero, J. Kerry, screaming at the deaths of too many Muslims, while crippling those who would defeat them. This stupid idea that there is a high moral ground in war is what has caused us to lose so many men in Iraq and Afghanistan, while prolonging the war far beyond what was necessary. Same for Korea and Nam.
Take your high moral ground and ...