Let me rephrase what I said.

When I said "there is no right and wrong", I meant in terms of perception. Considering that I have said that before(there is no true right and wrong in terms of perception)I thought that you'd know what it meant when I said "there is no right and wrong." Now you know what I'm saying; in terms of perception, this is no true right and wrong.

Of course right and wrong exists. However, it exists in two ways: one way is based off of perception, the other fact. Factual right and wrong has a true right and wrong: the answer sheet. If the answer you put down matches the one on the answer sheet, then you got it right. If it doesn't match, than you got it wrong. What is important, though, is that answer sheet. Without it, then there wouldn't be a factual right and wrong. This is the type of right and wrong that you are trying to apply to this situation, Mr. Flames. You think you have the answer sheet, which means, that in your mind, you can defy my every argument. Yet, you cannot answer five simple questions just for you(that I asked you in How to say anything).

Neither have you even tried to argue this:

"The war will play out how it plays out. It won't play out wrong, it won't play out right. It'll play out the way it plays out. So if the result isn't right or wrong, how can the process be right or wrong?"

No, no, you didn't bother with that. You did exactly what I expected you to do. You found the one thing that you could exploit, and you exploited it. Well I rephrased that statement, and explained what it really meant and now it should be clear. So let's here your argument to the above quote.