" I don't buy your excuse. You shoot your mouth off trying label people, then try to back track when you realise you're wrong. Your shoot first, ask questions later mentality is exactly why proper debate can't be had on any issue."
I've explained how I came to my views. I don't think it's productive to go into whether one view is valid and the other not. It was just two different ways of reading the situation. I am sure there would have been others who read the situation the same as I did - that is, assumed when bruceyg replied to the first post he'd read the article as well and was expressing support for the soldier described in the article. When I approach a debate I read all the material presented for discussion. That's my habit. Some people post to make a point without reading everything. That's their habit. It's just two different ways of doing things. There doesn't have to be a "correct" way all the time.
" Is anyone else disgusted by this statement? How about innocent moderate non-Muslims. Can you clarify yourself. It sounds like you are saying that it's OK to have a few dead people, as long as moderate Muslims aren't lumped with extremists. "
I know what I've written does not describe a perfect world but I can't see a better way of approaching things. What would your solution be? Do you have a better way of approaching things?
