Sorry, but i need to return to this statement:
>
> Yes, I'd cut off the water if that was the case,
> realising full well that would lead to innocent
> deaths, if that was the only way to stop our
> nation inflicting civilian deaths in an unjust war.
>
Why do you feel you have a right to pursue a policy leading to innocent deaths (which you acknowledge openly), yet you don't feel that Bush and Blair have that right?
What gives you such moral superiority? Not only over Bush and Blair, but also over those you sentence to death (because you clearly feel their lives are worth less than your notion of what is "just" and what is not - a moral distinction).
I suspect you don't really believe that, but that *is* the ramification of the policy you promote. Think about what you're saying there.
|