here you go terrorism apologists, page-79

leased re: here you go terrorism apologists leased, I think we may be on the same wavelength. However I hope it hasn't come down to statistics that allows the authorities to allow the situation to continue. Maybe getting the kids on side is positive for them, but if it comes at a cost of dead kids when does the payoff become negative, or doesn't it?
After the first such time there were mass killings of kids in these circumstances, this is not the first such case of mass deaths in exactly the same circumstances, someone in authority must have considered all the ramifications. The payoff if they knowingly allowed it to continue can only come in two ways, either by building up public goodwill in the adults through the kids, or on the darker side, as has been suggested by one poster, by intensifying tensions between the main factions within Iraq.
War is dirty, but when kids become pawns, it becomes too dirty for my liking.
Some posters suggested that the bomber had a choice once he could see kids. Perhaps he did, but I'm not as familiar with the thought processes of a person who is about to blow himself up as apparently they who suggested it are.
However a little bit of lateral thinking makes it is easy to see that those posters believe that the kids should be a deterrent to most people. Obviously the bomber didn't see it that way. The posters do see it that way. Have they, the posters, given any thought to how the soldiers involved might see it? Perhaps they could tell me whether they think the soldiers might see the kids as deterrents or not.