While I will happily grant that jihadists and crusaders don't have enough difference between them to show daylight, your post is attempting to equate soldiers with terrorists, which is hardly the same the thing. I think the comparison pretty much fails because professional soldiering doesn't have as it's chief tactic the targeting of civilians to achieve political ends (at least, not avowedly). Civilians are killed in every war, it's simply not avoidable. But the deaths of these civilians - I believe the nice, sanitized phrase is 'collateral damage' - isn't the object of the operation.
Furthermore, the Western military operations in the Middle East can't be called 'a crusade' by any sensible person, as there isn't a religious objective. The aims are more cynical and economic than anything else.
Boru
Furthermore, the Western military operations in the Middle East can't be called 'a crusade' by any sensible person, as there isn't a religious objective. The aims are more cynical and economic than anything else.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
