Need an example? The black man in the South in 1950's USofA.
The black man was a CITIZEN of this country.
But the black man did NOT have the right to vote.
The black man could be LYNCHED by the local police department.
But the black man was a US citizen.
"Because you seem to think the Kurds are a special case somehow."
"special case" how?
Do you believe that the black man was NOT a US citizen in the 1950's?
Yet the black folk were NOT allowed to eat in the same restaurants and the WHITE folk.
And that was ALLOWED by our government.
I know the Civil Rights Movement is ancient history to school kids today.
But the analogy is good enough in this case.
The Kurds in Iraq are Iraqis
-just like-
the blacks in the South in the 1950's were Americans.
Yet the governments of both have/had no problem supporting oppression and violence against them.
By the way, are you suggesting that hatred is a justification for this sort thing?
No. I'm saying that your use of it as an example of actions against the general Iraqi people is incorrect.
Lynching a black man in the South was considered acceptable.
Lynching a white man in the North would result in criminal convictions.
Yet they are both "Americans".
Did the US government hate the US citizens? Nope.
You see, your problem is your binary viewpoint.
