Judy: as my posts have shown (/as they have attempted to show),
I'm attacking the "we're better/they're worse" defence in that
"we" are supposed to be better than they are, and not just
marginally better. My previous posts have explained/tried to
explain this point, I now give up (again).
Eric: And I have argued that we ARE better in that we
deliberately avoid inflicting civilian casualties and they
deliberately try to inflict civilian casualties. That doesn't
strike me as a marginal difference, but as an essential difference.
You seem hung up on the notion of defense. Because you see this
as a defense, and because we have not clearly defined "we" and
"they," there is a lot of talking past each other.
To me, "we" was meant to describe the practices and activities of
the Marines in the Falujah battle. "They" was meant to describe
the activities of the terrorists. To me, this is not a defense of
the Bush administration, or of the decision to go to war.
------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html