[MACVSOG68]

I am not supporting violence toward them. I'm just saying that your argument of rules of war do not apply based on our being a signator of the Geneva Convention. You need to belong to a state who has declared war for that and you need to wear their uniform.

You are correct that we do not know where these prisoners came from, yet we believe we are in a war, and as such, our military leaders are requiring that we comply with the rules of war, which is not all that difficult. We are after all, the strongest military power in the world, and should not attempt to use the non uniform issue to circumvent our responsibilities.

As I have stated before, I support strong interrogation techniques if we have reason to believe they will be productive, and I rarely question actions resulting from the heat of battle. The commander on the ground must be given wide leeway in the pursuit of victory.

As you well know, that is not what this is about. This is about alleged atrocities, not committed in the heat of battle, or even by responsible individuals. This appears to be about out of control soldiers with inadequate supervision.

[blackdog]

I wouldn't want Saint Peter's job huh? I've read the "Just War Doctrine" and this issue was addressed in the book. Difficult arguments with inconclusive rationalizations of what's right based on reason.

I remember my dad telling me about North Koreans captured in the Korean War by American units, and then turned over to South Korean units as POW's in good health and condition. The NK's lived about as long as it took to lock and load under the SK units custody.

Where do we stand historically in this action in Iraq? I think this won't even get a footnote.