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.
Good post.
good post and I agree with your above statement wholeheartedly....
I have caught flack for what i am going to say but here goes again.....
A nations people are responsible for their goverment. The Iraqi's ALLOWED sadam to rule. They lived in fear of his brutal tactics true.....but they are responsible for not having enough back bone to stand up to him. How long would America's "southern boys" go along under that type of regime before rising up. How many American males would stand by and watch as their daughters were drug off for the Kings pleasure.
History is full of rebellions against dictators as well as full of peoples who stuck their head in the sand as their people were brutalized. The arabs are particularly bad about following whomever is the most brutal. Go along to get along. Look at this conflict.....when we came in they were all cheers and hugs for us.....as soon as the insurgency/terrorists got going they stuck their heads in the sand.....waiting to see who comes out on top.
A citizenry that stands aside for a leader such as sadam, has no character and is part of the problem and are not innocent.
You've articulated the inherent problems in trying to win the war while attempting to win the hearts and minds.
It cannot be done.
1) Kick ass.
2) Afterwards, when you have their attention, work toward reconstruction.
This plan seemed to work out very well in Japan and Germany.
I am in agreement with both of you. It is unconscionable that we have been helping the very people who now (perhaps) conspire to hide our soldiers and/or their whereabouts. Charity begins at home.
This statement is ridiculous on the face of it. I would accuse you of trolling except I see you have been around for like 6 years.
After each and every foreign war we have had to deal with occupation and pacification of the conquered area.
In Germany, the US lost 7,000+ troops after VE day getting control. Various insurgencies had to be put down. Folks remember the movie "Patton" but they don't remember what he was doing when he died, commanding forces in Europe overseeing this process.
Blackjack Pershing got his reputation and began his career successfully smashing the Islamic insurgency/Pirates in the Philippines after the Spanish American war. It took years but in the end, constant pressure and armed force won the day. Only recently have these groups started to rise again because of the corrupt and feckless government that has been at the helm for the last 20 years or so.
Between war and peace there is always a period where soldiers and not police are called to create the peace.
So drop the crap about how the military can't do this, we do it just fine and have for a long time.