Burning Taliban

If this situation goes any further at all, I feel a war comin' on (Pantano style)...

The Australian photojournalist, Stephen Dupont, who shot the video footage that is now being splashed around the globe as 'evidence' of American atrocities, has been VERY clear that the burning of the bodies was done for hygiene purposes, and not as a deliberate atrocity. He goes on to add that psy-ops then saw an opportunity to send a message to the Taliban to try and "smoke them out" and provoke them to fight the Airborne troops. Dupont's account is very different from what ended up as the SBS Dateline segment. Anti-US activist/journalist John Martinkus' report is highly skewed. Here's an excerpt of Martinkus' Dateline report:

"At the top of the hills above the village the soldiers have taken the tactics of psychological warfare to a grotesque and disturbing extreme. US soldiers have set fire to the bodies of the two Taliban killed the night before. The burning of the corpses and the fact that they've been laid out facing Mecca is a deliberate desecration of Muslim beliefs."

What follows at Euphoric Reality: video footage as recorded by the Australian camera crew, photos, video of interview with Stephen Dupont, links to audio clips, video of the Muslim spin, transcripts, compilation of current headlines on the subject, round-up of bloggers opinions (with links), etc. All wrapped up in scathing commentary.

Once again the military "leadership" can't seem to deal with a situation on the battlefields of Afghanistan.

If a platoon comes across a bunch of dead Taliban or makes them dead and then burns the bodies, should that be a problem to the military commanders? Does it do damage to the American soldiers or put them at more risk to show them taunting the enemy to come out and fight.

Ok, I know, its not Marquis of Queensbury rules and all that. Mustn't take advantage when you've got them down, you know.

Somebody should tell these politically correct morons that we are fighting a war--and if they want to win that war, they better get down and dirty. The commander's job is to save as many American lives as possible while killing the enemy. The enemy knows what this war is about and if they had the power and control that we have, they would not hesitate brutally murder every American they could. Then they would desecrate the flag, insult our heritage, and spit on our religious beliefs. Then they would come over here and tell us how to live our lives, just like they did in Afghanistan for many years. So, we better win and, in the process, we better be sure that they know that if the ones who are left ever try this again, they are going to be scrubbed off the Earth.

Psychological warfare has been around as long as warfare. Julius Caesar never lost a battle because he scared the hell out of a bunch of guys who didn't scare easily. We are also fighting a bunch of guys who don't scare easily, and we trying to do it with civilized decor. They already don't like us. We are not going to win them over by being nice or trying to not step on their beliefs. If you want to stop their recruitment, fear is our best weapon. Make them know that they are going to die, and that we are going to be relentless until they do just that.

Go into the history books and study any successful military commander in history. The first thing that you will notice is that once he gained an advantage, he assaulted the enemy without quarter until they were reduced to Jell-O. If they believe they have a chance of winning--they do.

There is a big difference between being evil and being tough. We need a few generals who know the difference.

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.