
OK, last post in this thread. I'm invoking Godwin.
They weren't Hitlered they were Nazied.

OK, last post in this thread. I'm invoking Godwin.
They weren't Hitlered they were Nazied.

I have this friend who acts before he thinks and is constantly doing stupid stuff that puts his life in danger (so far not fatally, thank gawd). So when anybody does something stupid that puts their life in danger, we call it "pulling a Carl". So, Instead of Hitlering or Naziing, I think it would be more acurate and less offensive to say "pulling a Nazi" or "pulling a Hitler".
My 2 cents.

You are misinterpreting me LG. I have a problem letting BS stand unchallenged. If someone posts BS, I'll challenge it. I'm sorry that it is distracting or annoying.
Both problems are resolvable, if a majority of us decide its important.
Killing civilians when they are working next to soldiers or at military sites aren't a problem for most people if we are killing them. Then its called collateral damage and its easily remedied by a statement of regret and blaming the other side for using human shields. when someone attacks our military and kills our side's civilians, then most of us have no problem identifying their other side's heartless cruelty. I call this "moral relativity". (See Orwell's observations about this phenomena above)

Now you're starting to get it. Civilians are labour units when they wear out or fall apart from bombing usually a ship load of brand new labour units may be had for the picking, literally. The pentagon is a high tech meat grinder and nothing else.
We bomb thousands of tiny children and old people every year. Gee I feel safe and cozy, let's have some burgers and fries while we watch something stupid on the telly.