There is a huge, huge difference between the U.S. military, which very deliberately tries not to kill civilians, and terrorists, who do target civilians.

While the U.S. military is already in contact with the Iraqi military on how they can signal their intent to surrender, the targets of terrorists get no such chance. Not only aren't they typically aware they are being threatened, they aren't given the chance to live.

How many people at the World Trade Center were told that an attack was coming, and to get out? How many civilians in Israel were told to leave the bus before it was blown up? How many of the Kurds who Saddam gassed were given the chance to say "I surrender"?

>We must remember the honor and dignity that go along with representing and potentially giving your life for your country as a member of the military establishment. Such an act is condoned by “society”, and is considered “civil” and within certain norms that have been embraced for thousands of years. Killing others while observing military protocol and the Geneva Convention are imperative to maintaining the dignity of the military establishment in our country and others. If a society does not have an organized military they have reverted to things like guerrilla warfare or terrorism.
>
>The end result of military action, guerrilla warfare or terrorism is the same – someone is going to die or be threatened. In any case each of these acts is a political statement or an extension of a political viewpoint. Why do we condone military action regardless of the acts committed in almost every case? If you are the military of the loosing side you may have serious problems with the winners.
>
>Around 1936 Mao se Tung wrote a book and included some words on guerrilla warfare. He stated, “as long as there is one guerrilla there is war”! What is the difference between guerrilla warfare and terrorism? The words perhaps but the acts are the same. How does an “official” military organization of a nation differ from guerrilla warfare and terrorism? It is accepted by the individual nation but may be despised by other nations.
>
>Speaking of guerrilla warfare, the early Americans used such tactics to defeat the British and Hessians (German soldiers) by using the fighting tactics of the American Indians. We did not fight by the book. Such a degrading way to fight! In fact we were traitors and rebels fighting against the authority of the land. Why our men hid behind a tree or bush, and actually shot officers – which was an unheard of act!
>
>At one time guerrilla warfare and terrorism were internal affairs of a nation. Today terrorism is also considered an international event and any reason may be excuse for its existence. As for the military of any nation, such organizations have always been used for internal or external control.
>
>Whatever happens in history as well as currently is controlled by rationalizations. When you apply facts and logic the rationalizations may be taken apart one by one. What counts in the end was what action was take.
>
>Tom