Quote Originally Posted by stroller View Post
Quote Originally Posted by ADare
Is either one any more barbaric that the other?
For sure, one is accepting that there will be unintended "collateral damage", which is a questionable attitude, a reason some oppose all war, the other is the intentional seeking out of innocents to kill for reasons of revenge.

I am surprised this is even raised as a question.

I was not thinking of revenge, I was thinking that this would be the only way for these people to get the US to stop the bombing and thus the colateral damage.

If it was done only for revenge, then this would be more barbaric.

If it was done with a purpose to stop the collateral damage, then the damage they do, is just further collateral damage in the "War on Terror".