Gadzooks, if it is good enough for President zerO... 
it should be good enough for Bebe!
Posted on 10/18/2011 12:17:25 AM PDT by LeoWindhorse
Terrorists should be given the death penalty, whether formally or quietly, says former chief IDF rabbi. Terrorists who spill blood should get the death penalty, former chief IDF rabbi Avichai Ronsky said Monday. Speaking to Arutz Sheva, Rabbi Ronsky suggested that if necessary, terrorist murderers could be killed “in the field.”
“In many cases, it doesn’t need to reach a court,” he said. Soldiers could simply shoot to kill instead of doing their utmost to bring terrorists in alive, “without giving the matter too much publicity,” he explained. “It happened in the past,” he added.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
“Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed”
Absoluetely.
Gadzooks, if it is good enough for President zerO... it should be good enough for Bebe!
The enemy IS on the battlefield whether we think so or not.
It IS the desert and the forest, The school campus and the office.
He lives next door and his family runs a 7/11.
The rabbi is correct and the world would do well to take heed of his direction.
So we should just go shoot the Moose owner of the 7/11 down the block?
The rabbi commented on what to do to the battlefield enemy.
I observe what constitutes the battlefield
The warrior chooses his shot
Cute, but you are hinting that such people are fair game, without having ever been proven to have individually engaged in terrorism.
And, isn’t the law of the land Torah?
I don’t know what that means
Just as obvious to me, if you actually do not enjoy warfare and want to end it in the current millennium, you should also attack all those who aid and abet the terrorist just as unmercifully and unapologetically as you attack the terrorist himself -- Friends, family, neighbors and state sponsors alike. Of course, that would probably mean total war, but terrorists bring it on themselves.
And wouldn't it be nice to get it over with so we could live in peace for a change? Nobody wants this hanging over our kids' and grandkids' heads for a hundred years or more. Sure, we might lose. But we might also lose a never-ending war in which the enemy's principal strategy is to wear us down by throwing a long series of proxy terrorists at us.
Just my $0.02.
You and what army? Sounds like a recipe for getting thousands of conservatives clapped in prison or executed, and boosting the fortunes of the Democrats.
Huh? It’s a strategy for winning a war on terror. It has nothing to do with getting anyone thrown into prison.
Thanks LeoWindhorse.
I was told by one who was there, that after Malmedy, his unit took no SS prisoners. Omar Bradley also said he was “sick and tired” of reports of surrendering German snipers. After that, they never took a German prisoner with an empty clip. (A common tactic was for the Wehrmacht to leave one or two troops behind to delay an American advance. They would take pot shots at the Americans for half an hour or so and then surrender, secure in the knowledge that they were protected by the Geneva Convention. If they killed one or two Americans first, so much the better. The Americans countered that tactic.)
And in the near future, they MAY become fair game.
Best to observe, be ready.
I speak perfectly of the result unless you are willing to take on the supposedly friendly government as well.
Well, you pick your fights intelligently. Iran first. But yes, the unfriendly “friendlies” have to be dealt with eventually.
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.