>While I agree to an extent, this begs an obvious question: How far do we take this line of thinking?
It be cool if military and geopolitical leaders got together to define some of these things. They could get together and have a convention of sorts, maybe in a central, neutral place, like Geneva.
>Is an attack like 9/11 justified since even the twin towers were used by the US government indirectly, owing to nearly everyone within paying taxes that supported US wars and expeditionary-ism?
Were there uniformed military personnel operating out of the Twin Towers? Of course there weren't, so it's not even close to being comparable.
It be cool if military and geopolitical leaders got together to define some of these things. They could get together and have a convention of sorts, maybe in a central, neutral place, like Geneva.
>Is an attack like 9/11 justified since even the twin towers were used by the US government indirectly, owing to nearly everyone within paying taxes that supported US wars and expeditionary-ism?
Were there uniformed military personnel operating out of the Twin Towers? Of course there weren't, so it's not even close to being comparable.