> The US 'threatens' nuclear war as well. There is no point in nuclear weapons if you don't threaten to use them.
I challenge you to cite an incident where the US has openly said, "do this or we will launch nukes at [city full of civilians]."
> That is pretty disingenuous. We both know that the US government counts any adult male in certain countries/regions as a militant rather than civilian. If you claim nobody is a civilian then of course you never kill civilians
Your post is the one that comes across (to me at least) as being disingenuous. My claim was that the US is not indiscriminately bombing civilian populations. You somehow are trying to conflate this with me saying that the US is not killing any civilians at all, which I did not claim, nor do I believe.
This section of your post comes across like you're looking for a way to vent your anger about how the US counts "any adult male in certain countries/regions as a militant." In doing so, you are also discounting women and children as civilians by implicitly claiming that only male civilians are killed (and then 'covered up' by claiming that they must have been militants).
> Also, I would like to hear your defence of the Iraq sanctions
I'm unsure what you're talking about. The economic sanctions against Iraq post-Gulf War but prior to the invasion? If you claim deaths due to economic sanctions are the fault of the countries that are imposing sanctions, then technically most of the world was responsible. Carrying this line of reasoning further, you could blame the US for deaths in North Korea due to economic sanctions, no?
I challenge you to cite an incident where the US has openly said, "do this or we will launch nukes at [city full of civilians]."
> That is pretty disingenuous. We both know that the US government counts any adult male in certain countries/regions as a militant rather than civilian. If you claim nobody is a civilian then of course you never kill civilians
Your post is the one that comes across (to me at least) as being disingenuous. My claim was that the US is not indiscriminately bombing civilian populations. You somehow are trying to conflate this with me saying that the US is not killing any civilians at all, which I did not claim, nor do I believe.
This section of your post comes across like you're looking for a way to vent your anger about how the US counts "any adult male in certain countries/regions as a militant." In doing so, you are also discounting women and children as civilians by implicitly claiming that only male civilians are killed (and then 'covered up' by claiming that they must have been militants).
> Also, I would like to hear your defence of the Iraq sanctions
I'm unsure what you're talking about. The economic sanctions against Iraq post-Gulf War but prior to the invasion? If you claim deaths due to economic sanctions are the fault of the countries that are imposing sanctions, then technically most of the world was responsible. Carrying this line of reasoning further, you could blame the US for deaths in North Korea due to economic sanctions, no?