Christiaan Briggs stated for the record:
On 27 Aug 2004, at 10:17 pm, Sean Barrett wrote:
you are ignoring nearly a century of international law declaring the exact opposite of what you think.
I'm hardly ignoring it, I started my sentence with it. I'm certainly disputing its morality however. If you'd like to respond to my argument you're welcome.
I -- or rather, the signatories of the Hague Convention of 1907 -- have already responded to your argument. To repeat: mosques, like all other religious edifices, are to be spared by any attacker "provided they are not being used at the time for military purposes." The moment the Iraqis -- however noble their cause -- took weapons into their mosque the Americans -- however despicable their cause -- became justified in attacking it. The decision of the Nuremberg Tribunal has no bearing on this principle.