Posted on 08/06/2004 7:41:24 AM PDT by nypokerface
Kill them all and let their allah sort them out. I am sure the demo-commies are extremely upset losing so many terrorist(P>C> insurgents)ie, supporters. God Bless Our Troops and President. Bush/Cheney 2004
just think of "ohhhh, dude...!!!"
Yes, I read it.
Where on the webpage does it say anything to the effect of "Leave the leadership of the terrorists intact?"
What did lesson 1 say? Something about being "your own worst enemy" out of "cultural ignorance?" Something about not making uninterested civilians into "active fighters?"
The solution is easy, do a Kerry
And that's what killing Sadr would do?
Using that logic (which, by the way, is the logic leftists use) we shouldn't kill any terrorist leaders, as that would make them "martyrs."
By the way, ever hear of Jeff Davis? Wonde why we didn't hang him? There are practical reasons for not doing dumb tings like this.
Well, back to one of my original points...the policy makers are not always right.
Those 300 aren't going to be released. I'll bet it is very difficult for an armed insurgent attacking US forces to make known his desire to be taken prisoner rather than killed. I don't recall reading how many were captured during the events which resulted in the 300 dead.
The Grozny "lessons learned" were spread through the USMC and the Army to find out how to win and how to win more effectively and in a less costly manner. It is not, I repeat, NOT a "political document" out of the Pentagon or George W.'s office. You can't seem to grasp that it is the MARINES and the ARMY that have adopted these tactics.
I'm not too sure about that.
If the Marine's had their way, they'd have killed Sadr by now.
Why, then, do they use Grozny "lessons learned" as a training tool? It's the basis of a USMC Master's Thesis, too, by the way.
The AFP thread said 1200 surrendered after 300 got wasted. People didn't believe it. I think if -AFP- is saying 300 dead and 1200 surrendered, and AP vouches for 300 dead...it was a slaughter.
As I posted in one of these replies, though (an article from NY Times???) surrenders aren't all that great. We check 'em in, process them, then if we don't have clear evidence they are baddies, we let 'em loose. Better they "die in battle."
Guess you have trouble reading between the lines in #1. Bye.
Oh, Dude.
For old time's sake, the Fallujah street mob strike video
http://www.jswaim.com/files/CAS.wmv
I think that maybe the catch and release is a good thing.... what if every time they caught a "frequent flier", he spilled his guts on info that is important..... Names, contacts, supply, communication, transport routes, rally points, engagement/ambush plans, IED locations and methods of detonation.... etc..
Now I know it seems like a stretch, but how many freepers have some law enforcement background that can verify that a snitch in a gang is worthy of picking up, pretend you're roughing up a bit, isolating, then getting info, finally kicking him in the ass shaking your head as he walks out the door and cursing..."I'll get you next time you dirty little b@stard...". meanwhile a "payment" or "favor" has been given and received.
Don't listen to the New York Slimes when trying to analyze motives and operational procedures of in country troops.... the pr@cks at the New York Times wouldn't know what to write about unless they had disinformation and propaganda to hurt the USA.
We can only hope that the next truck bomb or airliner takes out their whole building during an employee meeting or board of directors confab.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.