As usual, Miltiades is only capable of insult and blind rage yet considers himself to be engaged in a 'Debate' whenever he explodes into his filthy blasphemous tirades.
The intention of my contribution was to direct attention to the fact that the perpetrator of the action MUST have had a 'Motive' for it.
I will put you a case which MIGHT explain that motive and possibly steer the discussion away from "Who can fart the loudest".
Suppose the perpetrator, (having viewed the atrocities committed by those who purport to be acting in accordance with their faith) decided that it would be a good "Wake up call" for the Church (in general) to exert some influence upon the leaders of their nations to desist their habits of slaughtering the innocents of so many other nations, merely to enhance their own standing, would such a motive be accepted with the same validity as that which attends the various campaigns of aggression imposed upon those other nations which resist aggression?.
The West has a 'Motive' (it MUST have) although it is obscure since the Western powers deem it necessary that it should be so..., they use the excuse that they are offering 'Democracy' to the people of nations that do not want it for a very simple reason, they can SEE what 'Democracy' means..... all they have to do is observe the behaviour of the West.
Not to excuse or uphold the action, merely to highlight that there must be a reason for it.