[turnpike boy]

Gunner, where do we begin?

It isn't the Muslims who have a problem with the verse on the ACOG - it's folks like Mr. Weinstein and, apparently, you too. It isn't the grunts who see this as catastrophic to the cause - it's doubtful most ever knew what it was until this was pointed out to them. And the military didn't "officially sanction" that inclusion; if the scope met the RFP parameters and was priced right, or had the manufacturer's congressman on their doorstep, then it was purchased, mark and all.

Jihadists don't care what's on your weapon - only that they kill you before you kill them. Finding that mark on a scope wouldn't drive them into a more-murderous rage, nor would it serve to inflame local perceptions - most non-combatants just want to stay alive and out of the fight. COULD it piss some off? - possibly. WOULD it serve as a rally point? - incredibly improbable. Bullets whizzing past and explosives are far more position-forming than some totally obscure mark on the base of a scope.

Religion is politics too - same objective in the end. And while WMDs may well have been a supportive argument for the action, Beirut/USS Cole/The World Trade Centers are justification for the action and, quite frankly, are reason enough.