the outcome of the election

[Chaerophon]

First of all, this is what we are talking about, please try and avoid shifting context...

Oh and just in case you are confused, bombings as in bombs from airplanes during a war and bombings as in car bombings etc, are two different things.

It is arbitrary. As has been exemplified in Iraq, bombs need not fall from the sky to be effective military tools. Perhaps my examples made my comments unclear, but they were drawn from Ashock's own post, so I thought they might be effective.

Dresden was executed for a discete political purpose, and at that level, at the level W. Churchill operated at, strategy is a political tool that has as one element military operations.

That purpose being? Intimidation. Terror. Revenge. Dresden had no strategic significance, aside from being a temporary home for thousands of fleeing refugees.

That being said, my comments had nothing to do with the context of the bombings. It had everything to do with the fact that a bomb falling from the sky is not somehow inherently a more legitimate tool than is one set up on the roadside or in a car. By this I was referring to the situation in Iraq, in particular, which is currently a nation in full-scale war - certainly not a society at peace. I find it amusing that our news automatically reports Iraqi insurgents as 'terrorists' when they are, in fact, more like underequipped military combatants. The distinction re: a nation at peace is a good one. I think that it applies perfectly in Iraq. If the Iraqis had invaded, let's say, Saudi Arabia, I sincerely doubt whether we would be referring to Saudi resistance fighters as 'terrorists'...