You can Stop War

You know what's funnier? It doesn't matter who the people in the picture are or what the circumstances are. What matters is that the American people found the picture so repugnant that they demanded an end to the Vietnam war.

No one we are at war with is trying to kill U.S. citizens, other than those who seek revenge on our troops for the genocide they commit upon Muslim families. Bin Laden may be a legitimate target. But we do not seek him or his operatives, certainly not in the bombings of civilians.

Your explanation of pacifism is grossly simplified and irrelevant. This is not about pacifism. This is about war with no ends, no reason, no exit strategy, and no use. Nothing comes out of this war for the U.S. except more terrorists for us to wage more war upon. It is a terrorism generator for Lockheed-Martin and General Dynamics. It is moronic and criminal.

If there were a case for war, pacifism might be the issue. There isn't. It's not.

As to genocide, I defer to the Holocaust Museum for a definition.
__________________________________________
Genocide is a term created during the Holocaust and declared an international crime in the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The Convention defines genocide as any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

a. Killing members of the group;
b. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
c. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
d. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
e. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

The specific "intent to destroy" particular groups is unique to genocide. A closely related category of international law, crimes against humanity, is defined as widespread or systematic attacks against civilians.
__________________________________________

It seems to me that any argument that the U.S. is not committing a "real" genocide is based on the numbers killed. We generally think of the Holocaust as a prime example of genocide. Six million Jews were killed.

In Iraq 1.5 million innocent Iraqis have been killed since we began the war. Most of them at our hand. Regardless of the number, we have no respect whatsoever for Muslim life. This has been echoed over and over by veterans' testimonies. What the U.S. is doing is indeed a real genocide.

The only reason people argue this fact is because they can't believe the U.S. would do such a thing, and so they have to invent sanitized terms like collateral damage. There is no denying that the U.S. does systematically kill Muslims as policy. Their defense is that they cannot distinguish Taliban from civilians. By that logic we should drop bombs on L.A. to rid us of gang violence. Is our cutting edge military that retarded, obtuse, and deficient?

I'm sure many Americans in the heart(less)land would have no problem with bombing L.A., which confirms the ingrained extent of racism and genocide in America, by Americans.

It is a fact that the U.S. detained and transported around 2000 Afghans across the desert in steel containers, packed like sardines, and they died during the trip. They were then buried in a mass grave and only recently has some evidence surfaced. But U.S. authorities worked to remove that evidence. That's only one incident we know of. What don't we know?

The U.S. today is second only to Nazi Germany in their treatment of Muslims as less than human. The extent is unknown and covered up. But truth will ultimately prevail.

Mr. Raymond,

I was wrong when I assumed that you were a pacifist. Your above remark shows that there can be a just war--war to end war. But the Middle East War, or the Sixth Crusade, or whatever you want to label what is going on now, is unjust because we lost sight of what we had intended on doing. But just what are the intentions of the United States in the Middle East?

We no longer have Saddam Hussein to keep Iran in check, Afghanistan is unstable, and Pakistan is on the verge of a civil war. Unfortunately for everyone and everything on this planet, there are nuclear weapons to worry about. Perhaps our presence there is actually preventing a larger and deadlier conflict? But perhaps you are right and this Middle East conflict is all about getting arms manufacturers and Halliburton rich at the cost of millions of lives.

Correction: If there were not warmonger racist money hungry self-serving radical politicians making preemptive war on countries that never attacked the U.S. we wouldn't be in this mess now.

OR:

"If [we were not spreading democracy through our imperial march, sticking our nose in other countries business, and occupying sovereign lands,] there [would] not [be any] radical muslim jihadis making war on the U.S ..."