Iraqi troops stage phony 'surrender,' then attack

7KPLC TV ^ | March 23, 2003 | AP

[KantianBurke]

By definition, slander is obscene comments made without any facutualities to back them up. Judging by the continued harrassment of "surrendering" Iraqi troops alongside non serious means of countering that tactic, I take issue with your call of slander. Being critical? Certainly but any objections I've raissed are not wholly unjustified.

[schu]

I agree it is bad news for innocent Iraqis. However, with the nature of the media and left in the world, our guy’s natural instincts to protect themselves could result in a major public relations problem. A problem we can do without.

Without appearing insensitive, I am infinitely more concerned about our guys than the Iraqis. Our marines for them, it is just not an equal deal at all.

Thank goodness we have the highest trained most disciplined military in the world. We can only hope they keep their heads.

[KantianBurke]

Why do you ascribe "fartherm faster" as being militarily advantegous? Our rear is being threatened notwithstanding the guerilla tactics and eventual supply problems. And no I'm not a graduate of the Army War College but even the common layperson can and should ask questions.

[inquest]

Thank goodness we have the highest trained most disciplined military in the world. We can only hope they keep their heads.

I have every confidence they will. I'm more concerned about the home front.

[schu]

Media, Democrats, peace-niks, blame America Firsters, my states own “Bagdad Jim” McDermott and Patty Murray – there is a host of enemies.

Between Bush, Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Pearle and even Powell, we can hold our own.

Who did you have in mind?

[delapaz]

your right, time-honored traditions of conflict say that you give quarter when quarter is asked. If the surrendering troops abuse this, they can be killed at once.

[catpuppy]

Actually, slander is defined by Merriam-Webster as 1 : the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation 2 : a false and defamatory oral statement about a person

I wrote that "On a day when Americans have died in battle, you feel it your duty to slander their officers and their Commander in Chief." I think that your observations fit both the definition and my statement.

[Jeff Head]

Spoke to my Dad and a couple of other WW II Pacific combat vets I know today on this. One who survived Iwo Jima. Asked them about similar Japanese tactics.

To a man they said that in the end this will hurt the Iraqis the most because Americans troops soon will just kill them all and not accept any surrender that has any chance of being suspect. It happened in the Pacific, and if it keeps up here, it will happen here. When faced with the choice of ;losing you own in such a ruse ... the trade off becomes obvious and those who will suffer will be the Iraqis ... and of course the foolish press will try and demonize us.

Too bad, it will be of no copnsequence to the outcome ... just to the death tally of the Iraqis.

[ReleaseTheHounds]

MOAB? Anyone? MOAB?????!!! That's the answer!

[KantianBurke]

I suppose its beyond you to distinguish between legitimate criticism and slander. Eh. Zealots and bots are usually unamendable to distinguishing between the two. Good day.

[manoftheworld]

i agree.... the hard way....

[FairOpinion]

In WW II they didn't have peace demonstrators, demanding "support our troops, bring them home".

[BfloGuy]

slander is obscene comments made without any facutualities to back them up

What the heck is a facutuality?

[KantianBurke]

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=factuality&r=3

[zygoat]

I agree that this is about more than WMD. It's about getting a foothold in the cesspool that is the middle east and trying to show these people that there is another way. We are sacrificing the best of a future generation in an attempt to undo the centuries of brainwashed barbarism that these people know as daily life. I don't know what G.W.'s plan is, but it had better take shape quickly or resentment will grow on the supporters of this action as well as the feigned outrage of the left. I am so outraged myself at this moment that I would not mind seeing mushroom clouds erupt over Iraq,Moscow, and Paris at this moment.They are all enemies.

[Stultis]

Bush has made a grave error in not allowing air power to take on Iraqi towns which contain opposition due to "image" concerns and hopes of easy surrenders.

I would agree with you if Iraq's were the last regime that needs to be toppled in the region. Sadly, however, it is only the first. Fighting this war by these means (massive destruction aimed at leadership, humanitarian efforts as far as possible directed toward the people) is key to having the political room to wage the next war, and/or to make the next war less bloody or even unnecessary.

I hear and understand your concerns, but Dubya, Rummy et al still have my full confidence. As far as I can see the balance between aggression and compassion is being well and wisely maintained.

[KantianBurke]

Hmm...interesting points. To play the devil's advocate, I'd argue back that having incidents of guerilla warfare and US hesitance to deploy effective offensive operations showcases weakness and might hamper future endavours.

[evangmlw]

This surrender problem can be dealt with more successfully. The immediate order for all surrendering soldiers should be to completely strip, while a 30mm cannon is trained on them. Failure to completely strip on command would be grounds for immediate termination.

These lying devils are in no way to be trusted. Letting them go after their surrender is complete stupidity and a failure to understand these demoniacs. They must be detained! It's ridiculous to trust these demons of darkness.

[Travis McGee]

My father in law is a USMC Iwo Jima vet. We were watching a documentary about it, and it showed a Jap running out of a cave on fire from napalm. I asked if they shot them to put them out of their misery. He thought that was a very amusing question.

[Dr. Frank fan]

F%^& Iraqi civilians. Our raison d'etre is to remove the Iraqi WMD threat. Period. We should act like that and renounce the temptation to appear as liberators.

Basically, I agree with you. I'm just saying, it's a shame it had to be this way.

Well destroying Iraqi soliders with major civilians casualties in order to save US soliders lives and quickly ascertain the location of WMD is yet another "unfeeling" policy we MUST enact.

Right on.