|
The thing about terrorist acts is that in asymmetrical warfare (Iraq/Afghanistan) where you have a superior force aligned against an inferior force, the inferior force has many tactics for turning the tide:
-Incite a disproportionate response from the superior force, thus garnering popular support as collateral damage rises
-Use terror tactics to tell the public, "Support us in our fight or we will count you among the enemies"
-Use any and all media possible to disseminate your message
All of these tactics are used to try to win back the population, as well as make the enemy pay such a high price in blood that they will become soured on the fight and retreat.
However, in this instance, they hurt their cause by being cowards and not blowing up themselves. The media can seize this opportunity to show the Iraqis that the insurgents only value power. They don't want the country's freedom from oppressors. They want to be the ones who decide whom to oppress, when, where, and how.
In a lot of these foreign wars, I am able to see both sides of the coin. In this instance, the ends never justify those means. Ever.
Actually, for me, acts that kill or injure noncombatants can never be justified. From either side. This includes the collateral damage caused by bombs dropped by our side. Just because we do it in the pursuit of killing the enemy does not justify it. Just because they did it to us does not condone our methods.
Just my $0.02... cue ustwo and whoever else calling me out as [insert ad hominem here]
__________________
Feh.
|