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.
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?
What is ROE?
And there is deafening silence on it.
A sad bump to an excellent post.
Geneva seems to be a set of rules written to tie American soldiers hands for other nations. We should withdrawal. I know there are moral arguments for it but no Biblical scripture supports it.
Somewhere immediately after WW2 this nation lost sight of what war means. It's moral requirements to those asked in the name of a nation to serve it's people and the requirements for clear and precise military objectives.
No war can be civilized. Our own war of brother against brother was the bloodiest this nation has known. I'm not a saber rattler nor am I anti-war. War has to be understood as having no innocents in the enemies nation. It can not be fought any other way. Historically and Biblically it is a judgment upon a nation and many have forgotten that. You can't fight a nation and reward it at the same time.
Two men come to mind Joshua and King David. The battles Joshua led were to the death in many cases wars. No one of the enemy lived not even beast in some cases. King David on the other hand had his own son turn against him and his men loyal to him re-took his kingdom back from his son and in doing so killed him or their actions resulted in his death. King David {many of our elected} refused to honor his own troops and said woe is me and mourned his sons death instead.
I saw something when I was in the Navy that was hard to stomach. I was in Salvador Brazil in the late 1970's on port of call. Salvador is home to street orphans. These are children abandoned by family and in many cases by age 8 are hardened criminals. Your heart says help them. Common sense says one wrong move and they will either mame you for life or kill you. As much as you want to do something there is nothing you can do. Their own people did this to them. I have to look at Iraq in the same manner.
Our military goal in Iraq must be clearly stated & resolved and completed and the humanitarian effort abandoned. The two objectives can not co-exist in a war. At least not having troops trying to do both jobs. A solders job is not humanitarian in nature. Their job is to kill the enemy. Asking them to then feed them or provide aid and confort to in any degree those who that night may well be the ones shooting at them IMO is immoral to ask of them. We should be there to win a war and not to win hearts and minds. The two goals can not be reconciled in the same act.
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.
You absolutely correct. Bump and ping.
Re your post #28, well stated.
A military news release said the charges in the case include murder, attempted murder, conspiracy, communicating a threat, and obstructing justice.
The release said the unit commander ordered an investigation on May 9, the day the alleged murders occurred in the south of Salaheddin province, and the Army's Criminal Investigative Division is continuing the probe.
The soldiers charged in the case are in pretrial confinement, the release said, while it is determined if enough evidence exists to proceed with courts-martial.
At this point I wouldn't put it past the traitorous wing of the DIMwit party to arrange for their own manipulation of public opinion in that way. I hope they are caught if that happens.
I am as Pissed as you are.
I hope SpecOps can spring them!
The ONLY response I have
is that I bought my son a knife that never needs sharpening.
Well I have another, but..
oh never mind.