2). Let me get this straight. You don't know if killing a high ranking military general and presidential successor of Iran may or may not lead to more civilian deaths? Seriously? What, you think Iran might be all, "Oh, hey , that's cool. We won't retaliate."
3). Did you miss the part where Japan attacked our homeland? You know, the second prepositional phrase in that sentence. And the manner with which you just brushed off using 2 nuclear bombs is rather disturbing.
4). According to the Constitution, the power to enact war was given to Congress, not the President. He has to consult Congress for war. You don't need to be a politician to know this for most US citizens. You're Canadian so it's understandable your are familiar with how our Constitution established checks and balances on each branch of the government.
5). That's not how declaring war works. We were attacked by Japan on US soil and still officially declared war.
6). Then you obviously don't know much about the region. Our government is very much viewed as the aggressor for millions in the Middle East and southwest Asia (Central America too). Was it not us (and the UK) that overthrew their government in 1953 and installed the Shah?
I said I don't want more people to die. Is that really considered standing on moral high ground to you?
That last sentence just shows how committed you are to having a real conversation. That is, quite frankly, the most blatant straw-man I've ever seen. Do you truly want me to reply to that? Of course we are on the same team when it comes to wanting people not to suffer... The high ground is how you want to, quote on quote, set things straight, as if you were some kind of authority on anything. Take a moment to understand how flawed you are, just like everyone else, then perhaps we can start to actually talk.
As for many of the points here, again you pull ideas to their extreme. Did it ever occur to you that I do not agree with the idea of war in general? How could you even suggest that I am okay with the idea of nuclear warfair? My point was simple, that sometimes it takes a bit of strong-arming to rectify the attitudes and behaviors of certain world players and I strongly believe in the idea of hurting the least amount of people while getting the message across as strongly as possible.
How you were able to turn such a simple concept against me is absolutely mind-blowing. Are you sure you're here to debate, or just here to put people down? If you want to actually talk, I'll address your points, but if you're going to just turn my words against me and portray me in a way that has nothing to do with who I am, I don't want to talk to you.