I seem to have unintentionally pushed some hot buttons.

My first comment attempted to point out what I believe is mis-identification of the enemy. I take from the lack of disagreement on that point that some or all of you agree with that.

It certainly is the soldiers' call as to the value of their own lives. My intent was not to start a political argument, rather to question the philosophy of a particular school of thought which in my opinion goes against placing American self-preservation first.

As to the excessive quote marks: well ok, but I hardly think a guy who's got a vest or belt full of explosives and ball-bearings under his jacket is a civilian. Nor do I believe that anyone who votes into power a repressive theocracy is an innocent or blameless when that theocracy starts a war by proxy.