Originally posted by FUNKED1
Muslims kill 3,000 of us, we kill 50,000 of them in retaliation, and they are the ones from the messed up violent culture. 
Again, Funked, I must disagree, but only partially.
Yes, we vaporized more of them. Yes, we did it far more efficiently. The problem is the way we presented this action to the world. If we'd been honest, and just called it a retaliation, the effect would have been different. But, of course, we went in to help these poor souls, and managed to harm that many more of them. We weren't fanatics bent on revenge, at least not on the surface. We were, again, politically correct. But what the hell is political correctness doing in the arena of war, anyway? War is supposed to be hell, the last resort. Is there a way of going to war without actually alienating the enemy--because that's what we were trying to do. The approach was all wrong, and we'll be paying for it for years to come. And while we've swept it under the rug with our PC broom, our enemy, for all their technological backwardness, has the psychology of war down pat.
Maybe the problem is that we really are
not a violent culture. Sure, we cause more than our share of destruction, but it's always under the guise of improving the world. Violence for the sake of retribution is leaving our collective consciousness, and all the while, we're bombing nations in order to enlighten them. Too much BS. The Muslims are surely guilty of putting too much faith in a god that, by all accounts, doesn't even like them very much. We, on the other hand, instead of choosing god, have chosen to buy into our own hype, and now justify anything for values that don't work anywhere but here.
I'm not promoting genocide, and I hate repeating myself, but we'd better stop treating war as the administration of antibiotics to a sick patient, and start treating it as what it really is--a bullet to the head.
