Home | About | Donate

Republican Candidates Defend Killing Civilians to Fight Terrorism—and So Do Democrats


Republican Candidates Defend Killing Civilians to Fight Terrorism—and So Do Democrats

Stephen Zunes

There has been a lot of consternation expressed in the media at a series of statements by Republican presidential candidates during their most recent debate and elsewhere in which a number of them appeared to be advocating the large-scale killing of civilians through aerial bombardment as a legitimate means of defeating the so-called “Islamic State.” (ISIS or IS)


This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.


It's quite easy to be brave when one sleeps 6,000 miles from the action and has an air defense system protecting one's homeland able to meet any challenge. Oh wait, never mind; maybe Pogo was right after all...


Racist/religious hatred and intentionally sowing such is both crime and tragedy. For-profit war and those who gain wealth from the hideous suffering and deaths of others is a crime that must confronted or ultimately bring the same to all, even those who consider themselves and their future "safe". It doesn't matter who is doing the killing or who the victim, those who profit from inhumanity will still do so, and they are more guilty than the actual perpetrators.
The ME is the crucible of this evil in today's world as it was centiries ago. "Religion" was and is the evil (or excuse for it) that drives much of the hatred and violence that are destroying our chances to survive. If it's not one brand of vicious intolerant hatred, it's another - if it's not one warmonger, war-profiteer, or purveyor it's another. If it's not one group of victims suffering unspeakable atrocities, it's another, and millions will be lucky just to survive.



Grotesque and barbarous acts by European and US militarism are unbearably ugly. All these countries are expert at removing young children from socialization by their families and friends and putting them through basic military brainwashing that turns them into blood thirsty soldiers totally confused about who is attacking who for what reasons.

A young high school graduate just left my neighborhood for boot camp. He is convinced he is training to wage war in order defend the constitution.


The author is right that both Republicans and Democrats defend the killing of civilians. But he mainly concentrates on Hillary. Did not see anything about the killing of civilians on purpose when they bombed out a hospital in Afghanistan under the Obama administration. Nor did he mention the eternal drone strikes that kill many civilians. Children in Pakistan pray for cloudy days where the drones do not function. On sunny days they have to hide inside or get killed.


What's the difference between this mass murder and those of WWII? Many Americans shrug off the war crimes committed by the US quite cavalierly. This is just more of the same old paradigm manifesting itself: whatever choices America makes are validated by the excuse that Americans might be in some kind of danger possibly at some remote future date--or that profits are threatened.


Hillary and the truth, water and oil anyone?



advocating the large-scale killing of civilians through aerial
bombardment as a legitimate means

It is time to re-open that court house in Nuremberg.


Face it kids, if you're voting for Hillary just because of the fact that she is a woman, you've got it all wrong. You and all of the other do gooders are just again voting for another international criminal who has more money than you will ever have, and when she's done she will have probably doubled or tripled that money! Meanwhile, for your children to even have the possibility of a college education they will have to do an eight year stint in the military and you will have to hope that #1 they don't get killed to keep the wealthiest 400 families in amerika wealthy, and #2 the house and senate don't decide that educating veterans like treating their medical needs aren't too expensive and try to do away with these benefits! But go right ahead and for for the Queen of Chaos, just because she's a woman!
Remember, You kids voted for Slick Oily so that you could say that you elected the first half black president, and what did that get you? Do you and all of your friends remember all of the people you called racist because they weren't going to vote for Oily for reasons other than he was half black? So now you're going to do the same thing this time and call everyone who refuses to vote for Killary a sexist, just because they won;t vote for her because she's a woman!
Like I have said before, if it really means that much to you to have a woman as president, than vote for Jill Stein. You'll sleep better at night! But what the hell, if you like the Status quo go ahead and vote for Killary, or go ahead and vote for Trump, Carson, Rubio, Cruz or Jeb Bush, it's just a matter of style! Just remember, We came, we saw and he died, and what's Libya like today?


Comparing carpet bombing republican approach with targeted approach from democrats is a false equivalence. Let's face it ISIS is a threat and they do kill and maim thousands including aid workers. Refugees fleeing Syria will be only increasing in numbers with ISIS in power, so ignoring and doing nothing is not a solution. There are wars that need to be taught.


You're so right. There's no comparison between mass murders who just let loose on everyone in range and those who pick off selected targets one after the other, one by one. But somehow they are both mass murderers and one has to wonder what kind thinking can find it meaningful to debate the relative merits of mass murderers instead of focusing all attention on doing everything one can to stop both kinds.