Would you consider the dropping of bombs on homes, villages, cities and other non military targets to be deliberately targeting civilians?

__________________
America's Enemies Are Not Mine

All wars represent a failure of diplomacy

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen Roberts.

In 1998, several al-Qaeda leaders issued a declaration calling on Muslims to kill Americans—including civilians.

Yeah...not really has anything to do with the poll.

__________________
America's Enemies Are Not Mine

All wars represent a failure of diplomacy

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen Roberts.

I know Al Qaeda targets civilians but that is not the question I asked. Are you able to comprehend the question? If not I suggest you move along.

__________________
America's Enemies Are Not Mine

All wars represent a failure of diplomacy

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen Roberts.

You have to give concrete examples of your question.
Besides your intent is obvious, you are consistently anti-American and predictable.

I've yet to see any intelligence behind your arguments.

for example the bombing of Dresden, Germany in WWII would provide a good example to debate.

Not really.

Like all the horrific bombings in WWII, they were justified, in the minds of most people, because that was state-vs. state, total war.

We needed to break the will of civilians in that case.

On the other hand, and more to the relevent to today, does it make sense for us to bomb somalian villages, killing dozens of innocent people, in an attempt to take out a handful of terrorists?

It's a different kind of war: we want to win civilians to our side.

Was it ok for the Israelis to bomb Beirut, where many christians, let alone non-fundamentalist muslims lived peacefully?


I think the answer to these to exaples is no: for every innocent person we kill with a bomb, we lose the hearts and minds of dozens.

I'm not saying we should ignore terrorist threats, if we know where they are.

But dropping bombs causes way to much collatoral damage when we're trying to kill or capture a small group.

Well, I agree, it is a case by case situation....at least from a U.S. perspective.
Certainly there are historical examples of poor decisons to engage targets that are clearly civilian. I know there isn't a U.S. haphazard Rule of Engaging civilian targets intentionally and purposelly the way Al Qaeda has formalized.

I don't agree. Whether or not they were justified they still deliberately targeted civilians. This is not a debate on which instances of directly targeting civilians is justified but to determine if civilians are targeted when bombs are dropped on non-military targets. When any military decides to fire missiles into and drop bombs upon, heavily populated buildings and areas, I consider it to be targeting civilians.

__________________
America's Enemies Are Not Mine

All wars represent a failure of diplomacy

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” - Stephen Roberts.

if someone deliberately bombs civilian targets of no military value,
and there were actually civilians present to be targeted,
then yes,
obviously that would be targeting civilians.

__________________

I can't say that I'm totally against that. If we're at war with another state, the point is to win the war, lest you be killed.

There are no rules to a total war. That's what makes it a total war.

I will say, that bombing a village or city to kill a handful of terrorists is counterproductive, so, setting the obvious humanitarian concerns aside, it's counter-productive.