It depends on what you mean by civilian targets. Do you mean non uniformed fighters? Do you mean non-combatants? Do you mean houses, hospitals, mosques, infrastructure? What if that infrastructure is currently held and being used for fighting/storing munitions?
If you mean school girls at a wedding, then obviously no. Otherwise, yes. On 11/22/05, Dana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > oh yeah, legally sure. That's like Libby probably not getting > convicted because of the definition of the crime, is what I am saying. > > Do you think incendiary weapons should be used against civilian targets? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Find out how CFTicket can increase your company's customer support efficiency by 100% http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=49 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:183704 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
