SpokenTruth said:
Irrelevant. You said the fact they can't vote is reason enough to not care about offending them. Regardless of someone's citizenship status, do you not think that whether they can vote or not is a valid criteria by which to regard offense? |
Well, fatslob isn't completely wrong here, although it differs for groups and time. George W. Bush could attack european people for not partaking in the Iraq-war and came away with it (probably even gained reputation for badmouthing french). Each president in the last years could simply continue to bomb people in Pakistan, Afganisthan, Iraq and Syria with drones and airplanes, because it may also hit a few terrorists (or who was declared one). It is pretty clear if you look into this, that most of the victims are not terrorists, they die simply because they live in the wrong country. That is not exactly offending these people, but I would argue it is worse. It didn't hurt any president. I think these bombings are highly racist too, think simply the outrage if a hellfire missile is fired onto a building in New York, because supposedly two terrorists entered the building. But because the victims are "only" arabs nobody really cares.
So, presidents and presidential candidates clearly can offend, attack or kill groups of people and it isn't hurting the election results.
