brooklyn13, Summing your position thus far on the war -- "it's war." I think the law says something like you use appropriate force on that attacker, as needed to stop the immediate threat.
Law and human decency determines sets the terms of your response.
"Here's an imperfect analogy. Let's say you're walking down the street with your granddaughter, who's a high schooler. Out of nowhere, some random dude comes up to you and punches your granddaughter in the face so hard that she winds up knocked out or hospitalized.
P - Does her attacker, then, get to set the terms of your response? How hard you can hit him back or how many times? Because that seems to be pretty much what you're doing."
To take your shithouse analogy further it seems your position on the war would suggest you would kill the attacker if you were strong enough. Would you?
How far would you go if the attacker was one of a group. In Korea would you have been with Truman or MacArthur?
It was Plato who said, “He, O men, is the wisest, who like Socrates, knows that his wisdom is in truth worth nothing”