Posted on 06/19/2006 5:40:20 AM PDT by areafiftyone
No. They are both infantrymen- there are no women in the infantry.
Just in time for the morning news cycle. Al Qaida, doing the work democrats won't do.
I was thinking just that today, as I heard this news. I thought no, way dims would hire or want this done to our military,,,,,,,,,, is there?
Saddam - al Qaeda connection. al Baghdadi is a man leading the insurgency in Iraq currently. He was a Republican Guard officer for Saddam, companion of Zarqawi since the start of the war AND HAS BEEN FRIENDS WITH BIN LADEN SINCE MEETING HIM IN AFGHANISTAN http://markeichenlaub.blogspot.com/2006/06/abu-abdullah-rashid-al-baghdadi-former.html
From past experience, this means they two are eiter actually plastic toy dolls bosed in front of a cinder block, or they have already been brutally murdered.
Since we know two are missing, they aren't going to send us a video of plastic dolls. Be prepared for the ugly.
Prayers for these three brave ones.
ping
Every one of our troops knows that there is no such thing as POW status if they are captured by the enemy.
They know that they will be an exhibit of beheading, mutilation, or burning on some terrorist website for the gleeful entertainment of the bloodthirsty islamo-fascists. That is what will happen to these troops who have been captured.
If you KNOW that you CANNOT (not "must not") be captured, then what does that do to your interpretation of your ROE's? I'll tell you what it does. It causes you to use the most extreme liberal interpretation of them. Any movement, glance, sideways look by any "civilian" must be interpreted as a threat, a possible conspiracy.
If our soldier misses anything, he WILL die....BECAUSE, Prisoner status does NOT exist for our troops. It is not POSSIBLE for them to surrender and live.
Think about this for just a moment. It is the greatest crime against Geneva and Hague that is taking place in Iraq....in ANY war in which an America has EVER fought.
And there is deafening silence on it.
Your are absolutely right and hit the nail right on the head.
Where are all the human rights groups and all the rest of those who want to afford Geneva Convention Rights to Enemy Combatants?
Weren't/aren't their arguments that we need this so "our" Military will be treated accordingly, if captured.
You too, McPain, your silence is deafening!!!!
God, my heart (and prayers) go out to their families and loved ones.
Pray for our Military, wherever they may be.
......for the 50th time......
Al-Qaida-linked group claims GIs' abduction
(originally in Breaking News and then bumped out. Who knows the whims of the mods!)
So then what do we do, in that case, with this "$100k civilian" then? He is to be protected by the Geneva accords as a non-combatant. But if he's (1) not helping and (2) glad that we're getting what we get, then in this kind of war, is he really a likely non-combatant?
So then we get into some kind of Romanesque demand for public pledges of allegiance.....I guess....which of course are no better than letting this guy spout off.
If the guy shrugs and sez, "I dunno." That's one thing (even if he does). If he's spouting off, he needs to be arrested for questioning. Or, is he just saying what any ex-Saddam loyalist would want to say to our fawning press?
This is true of any civilian who witnesses or receives info about enemy activity.
I would consider it proper procedure on any battlefield.
bttt
What is ROE?
Never mind, I think I figured it out:
Rights of Enemy
Right?
Bingo!! Those a-holes better tread lightly on this.
Thats only because I posted mine 1 minute before that one was. Check the times on the posting. The Mods always delete the second posting of any article even if its 1 minute.
Rules of Engagement
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.