Okay, if you choose not to answer my first question, I’ll ask another. How can a “true Christian” (if that’s what you are) advocate the killing of innocents, which by some estimates is near 100,000 (in Iraq)?
To prevent greater evil. We must pave the way for a better world for our children and grandchildren.
That’s specious logic, Curtis. In this “better world” that you’re imagining, would the children and grandchildren of the innocent civilians that you’d have killed be alive? Should we just use a commando strike force to wipe them out were they to seek vengeance for their losses?
I suggest that you familiarize yourself with the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 18, verse 21.
I know that people of good conscience can disagree, but for me, personally, I’d like the Commander in Chief to set a slightly higher threshold before lobbing explosives around.
But these are ALSO someone’s children and grandchildren. How are they any less worthy than our’s?
They don’t have Nintendo.
Only goats.
Such decisions must be made by hard-headed and realistic men, men not afraid to make the really tough calls, willing to protect the public from having to confront the necessities of survival in a dangerous world. He must be willing to weigh the lives others as so many counting units, and must be willing to follow through on those choices without hesitation, which shows weakness to our enemies, who are legion.
He must avoid the weakening council of liberal do-gooders, whose hearts are no doubt well placed but their thinking is fuzzy and unrealistic, they are unwilling to confront the brutal truth of our world. Deep down in the place they don’t talk about at parties, they want such men protecting them from themselves. Men like your namesake, for instance.
If you train yourself with great care, and apply yourself without stinting, you may become one of those men. If so, give a moment’s thought to my advice: you may wish to consider the advantages and comforts that atheism offers such men.
Sometimes you have to kill people to save the world from the crimes they would have committed. I think that sentiment appears in the Book of Judges.
This word - I do not think it means what you think it means.
And who are you, or we, as a nation, to decide who may one day become a terrorist?
But in reality Al-Qaeda was behind it and Osama Bin Laden could have been killed or captured.
I guess you missed the part where we invaded Afghanistan and still couldn’t kill or capture him.
No school today?
I was going to say something about hindsight, can’t remember how the phrase goes…
OBL went into deep hiding after 9-11, we had more of a chance after the Cole.
It’s the birthday of the great American President Abraham Lincoln. 
Uh, no. Bin Laden has been in “deep hiding” since at least 1996, when the Egyptian (and possibly Saudi) governments began trying to assassinate him in Sudan.
He’s also had Interpol warrants out for his arrest since at least 1998. The UN imposed sanctions against Afghanistan in 1999, at the request of the Clinton government, so it’s not as though he didn’t know we were looking for him.
Seriously, let this go. You’re way off base.
It would also be nice to see Curtis acknowledge that it wasn’t Bill Clinton’s call anyway, but W’s.
But Presidents’ Day is on Monday. 
One of us has been whooshed. Did you click the link?