How many civilian deaths do you think is justified before you'd say what we're doing is wrong and worse than Al Qaeda could ever try/imagine? If we nuked the entire middle east in self defense would that be reasonable? Why is a suicide bomb as a method of impact any worse than a drone strike?
We are purposefully killing civilians and creating terror. We know there are civilians around when we launch these, and when emergency personnel come to help people on the ground we shoot again in the same spot (called a double tap). We ignore all standards of ethics and rules in favor of convenience because there is no push back from ordinary US citizens. They know they can get away with it because people like you are making excuses for them.
When you compare the likelihood of a terror attack vs. getting shot in the US and the amount of resources that go into both, it is plainly obvious that the war on terror is more about keeping a monstrous giant of a state and war machine intact rather than preserving life.
I don't mean to sound callous, as I live in NYC and experienced 9/11 as it happened, but about 3,000 people died. It was a horrible event but I don't think that justifies deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians, trillions of dollars in response and sending everyone in the military to every part of the globe. That is a hysterical reactionary, backwards response that is less about justice and more about using people's misery as an excuse/pretext for global dominance.[/QUOTE]
Because one doesn't intentionally target civilians with the intent of maximizing terror. The fact that you believe a suicide bomb and a drone strike are equal is astounding to me.
I mean, its not like there's evidence to show that more militants have been killed than civilians, oh wait...
http://www.longwarjournal.org/pakistan-strikes.php
http://www.economist.com/node/21524916
As for the comparison to terror attack vs gun violence that's a completely different argument. One in the area in which the executive has nearly complete control over. The others has the complex issue of Congress. It is also not a if we can only have one and not the other.
Finally, for your last comment, while your experience with 9/11 gives you that insight, it doesn't mean it is the majority's opinion.
No. Over 4000 on drone strikes alone, factor that only 1 in 50 are actually terrorists, the rest civilians. Then tens of thousands from Iraq and Afghanistan. 8000 civilians died in Iraq during the initial invasion alone. Obviously the death toll now is in the hundreds of thousands, for numerous reasons, some as you've outlined. Then there's US support of Israel and the thousands of Palestinian lives that's cost too.
Point being, terrorists could never even dream of killing the numbers the US does.
I don't know where you can getting your information from but its clearly wrong. Order of magnitudes wrong. There haven't even been a 500 drone strikes in the last 10 years.
And attributing deaths cause by militants in Iraq/Afghanistan and actions by Israel shows you clearly jumping off the cliff. If we go that route, you can blame any and all deaths in the world on America.
Have you traveled outside of the U.S. much? I've lived in four countries (including the U.S. for nearly 10 years), been to 50 or 60. With almost no exception, the world does share the same opinion of America.
I'm sorry, but have you? Thinking the world shares the same opinion of America is borderline stupid.