He isn't a sack of shit for having an opposing view point. He is a sack of shit for this middle ground all sides have a valid point and the truth is somewhere in the middle bullshit.
He actually doesn't take the middle ground. He's avoiding the drone vs anti-drone argument to make a perfectly valid and legitimate point about the Guardian article.
And that's one reason why people go to war; they can't understand the arguments of both sides of a conflict, so it escalates to something that even unintelligent people can do: fight. If more people would take the time to discover the root of their conflicts, they wouldn't just take the easy way out and start name calling or throwing punches.
Very few people want to be evil or wrong for the sake of being evil or wrong - they believe they are right and they just have a different perspective on how to be right.
Truth is just the perception of fact. Depending on one's values, the truth can be viewed differently by different people. That's why it's very difficult to find "one right answer".
I personally think the middle path is always the place to begin seeking the truth.
I can tell you are angry (i have a 6th sense with these things). I am angry too. I am so angry at what my country does, and how ignorant the majority of us are about it. I have no salve. I have no solution. War's hellish qualities serve as entertainment fodder instead of a lesson.
I am angry too, but i respect the place we are and, respectfully, you should too.
