Actually, you are probably right
in that the context of your reply and the general point of your thread is about jingoism... It's hard not to at times when the topic is inflamatory and the statements that follow conjure up strong emotion.
That said, all war euphemisms (like marketing... collateral damage, friendly fire, etc..) are pretty disgusting in that they are language meant to diffuse (or confuse). Please understand that my problem with your particular statements to which I responded to, seem to point out that you are still debating from a somewhat "Cold War" America (and all it's faults) point of view. I could be wrong. I dislike the rah, rah, rah, just as much as the next guy, but I also feel that this is a "just" action (if there ever really could be). I wish I could be more concrete but I still cannot divorce myself from the pathos of this situation. In debate, it is best to always try to argue from the logos, and that's why I am tending to shy away from this forum as of late. I think it very "human" to be emotional and not want to discuss this country's faults at this particular time.
Notice that I have not stated that I disagree with much of your posts in this thread, I think that the one I replied to may have gone a bit too far... YMMV.
