Terrorism as I see it is not disturbing a city held by an opposing force. It is the direct targeting of innocent civillians in order to try and change their governments actions. I cannot believe you have such a hard time seeing the difference between directly and intentionally targeting civillians so as to spread terror with the citizens in hopes to change the their governments action, and collateral damage that happens in all wars where innocent people get killed in the crossfire of a military targeting militants.
WWI, WWII - funny how we can both see the same history so differently. It is probably not worth trying to change either of our minds
NATO - sure they have a charter as does the UN, but when it hits the fan, it is US troops lead by US generals that fight most of the battles. I don’t see the rest of the world attempting to create a collition and not inviting the US. Lets remember the US is responsible for creating both NATO and the UN. The rest of Europe didn’t have the means after WWII to do much of anything.
Kuwait - We were talking about the Gulf War. America fought and won that war. Sure there was a coalittion but again it was mostly American Troops, American Equipment and American Generals and yes Saudi Arabia asked America to protect it from Iraq fearing their next stop after Kuwait was them.
Edit
So what was the aterik K question?
