1. American leaders are not actively justifying their behaviour on religious grounds. After a bombing, Obama isn't getting on TV and quoting scripture as the underlying reason for his decision to execute a military maneuver. (lol of course he wouldn't he's a secret muslim lol - Dubya didn't do so either). In contrast, the Charlie Hebdo individuals are exclaiming that they have avenged the Prophet. That guy quoted on the last page is specifically saying that people should be killed in the name of Islam.
Even in the case of clearly immoral behaviour, there is an obvious difference between Person X killing someone while happening to be a Christian, and Person Y killing someone on the basis of his Christian beliefs.
2. Killing innocent people isn't the goal. If it were possible to execute these strikes with zero collateral damage, the American military would do so. Contrast that with a suicide bombing - innocent deaths are the goal. Do the intentions just not matter to you?
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
|