>Hi Cetin. I cannot tell if you are being serious or sarcastic. Regardless, what you wrote is definitely the truth of the matter and a terrible tragedy in itself. The only difference is a moral one. In one case innocents are not intentionally targeted but are truly accidents in the process, in another, they are an acceptable losses and most often are directly targeted. One thing is for sure. There are no winnners in any war and that has been the case throughout history. The only hope is a stable, secure, democratic country afterwards. If only diplomacy worked in all situations.
>
>
>
>>>>...who is supplying insurgents in Iraq explosives murdering thousand of innocent civilians and American soldiers.
>>>
>>>These resistance fighters are killing civillians and soldiers like you did and doing and will. What's the difference?
>>
>>Metin,
>>There is a big difference. People who died in explosions probably didn't want to die. On the other hand, like in Guantanomo, they only kill the ones who beg to be killed.
>>For explosion like cases, they don't kill anybody, simply send some guys with RayBan sunglasses to negogiate with the terrorist leaders and supply them with weaponary and tactics. Terrorists carry out the rest. So you see they don't kill any innocent, sometimes rarely there might happen friendly fire but they don't mean to kill to anybody, it's all accident.
>>Cetin

As long as any government allows religious law and rules within itself it will be somewhat unstable. In the case of Iraq, as soon as the US troops leave, the Islamic side of the government will push harder for influence and the government will begin to collapse or stray to a dictatorial type of leadership.