[ChildOfThe60s]

This war must be fought in back alleys, knives in the ribs of terrorists. Our operatives in those back alleys, many times, have to be judge and executioner.

As far as war prisoners are concerned, GITMO is kiddy college. Study history. Study our opponents.

Uncivilized? Sometimes, perhaps often. But the aggressor makes the rules of warfare, and we are not the aggressor. If we respond with anything less than 100% resolve, using all the force at our disposal, we will have no civilized society to discuss.

This is not a civilized war (in as much as any war is "civilized"). If your reasoning is founded upon a belief that there is anything civilized about war or that we are somehow obliged by morality to treat terrorists as anything other than the barbarians that they are, your conclusions are guaranteed to be erroneous.

[Anthem]

--Uncivilized? Sometimes, perhaps often. But the aggressor makes the rules of warfare, and we are not the aggressor. If we respond with anything less than 100% resolve, using all the force at our disposal, we will have no civilized society to discuss.

I am certainly not going to plant a halo on anyone's head, least of all Sadddam, bin Laden, or any government thug anywhere in the world. However, if we engage in torture and terrorising populations ourselves, then we lose moral authority, a very powerful element in the psychology of warfare.

The fact that the Bush gang could not produce an adequate report explaining 9/11 further undermines the notion that we are not the aggressors. Couple that with the multiple agendas for going to war in that part of the world -- oil, the population agenda (dose Muslims just havin' too many rug rats), and Israel -- and we no longer look like a free republic defending ourselves. We look like a neo-colonial power picking strategic targets and using the transparent figleaf "democracy" as our pretext.