Partially, yes.

(Written on 2019/02/01)(Permalink)

If only the airlines were held to such high standards and compensated passengers for their bullshit!

(Written on 2019/02/01)(Permalink)

Thanks for trying to understand my point! It's just a topic I thought had one-sided comments so decided to stir the pot. It's because people like me question, Joel that the US forces are increasingly concerned about their collateral damage. Have a good day!

(Written on 2018/08/15)(Permalink)

Thanks for the respect Jim. It's a free forum so I'm entitled to my opinion. Ageism aside, I've formed this opinion from a neutral starting point. Killing civilians should be regrettable even as collateral.

(Written on 2018/08/15)(Permalink)

Thanks for the civil response unlike some others on here. However, you don't teach the other side how to be better by being just like them.

(Written on 2018/08/14)(Permalink)

You sound immature. Do your parents know you are?

(Written on 2018/08/14)(Permalink)

You missed the point.

(Written on 2018/08/14)(Permalink)

You old men should go air out your underwear. Civilian death on every side SHOULD be regrettable and that's a wise thing to do and that's where I and many like me globally stand.

(Written on 2018/08/11)(Permalink)

My argument is solely against how the enormous loss of civilians is not regrettable when it is US backed, no questions asked.

(Written on 2018/08/11)(Permalink)

I'm studied up. By your rationale, if today the US attacked a Chinese or Russian military base conventionally via let's say air, and started conventional war then the Chinese and Russians are within their right to target General Atomics and wipe out the whole of San Diego.

(Written on 2018/08/11)(Permalink)