PF Sloan would have understood
What do you call a situation where you are accused of not doing what you will be condemned for doing? Answer: just another day. The Associated Press reports:
WASHINGTON — The U.S. military acknowledged Wednesday that it considered bombing a group of more than 100 Taliban insurgents in southern Afghanistan but decided not to after determining they were on the grounds of a cemetery. The decision came to light after an NBC News correspondent's blog carried a photograph of the insurgents. Defense department officials first tried to block further publication of the photo, then struggled to explain what it depicted. NBC News claimed U.S. Army officers wanted to attack the ceremony with missiles carried by an unmanned Predator drone but were prevented under rules of battlefield engagement that bar attacks on cemeteries
Commentary
There is something in this story for everyone. The photo is proof that the Taliban are 'operating in large numbers with impunity against a losing and helpless US military'. The photo is proof of the power of how weird the War on Terror is. The photo is also a thought experiment. What would be your thoughts if the the Predator drone had blown up the Taliban as these poor tribesmen were engaged in the traditional act of mourning? What would be your thoughts if the Taliban bombed a US military funeral at Arlington?
posted by wretchardthecat at 9/13/2006 04:32:00 PM
15 Comments:
What the....?
Those towel heads can't squat on that cemetary forever.
Are we fighting a war with these barbarians or not?
pf sloan's biggest hit
Methinks this is just one example of many of lawyers running the war, not the warriors.
In Vietnam we had LBJ designating targets, not we have JAG doing it.
One only has to remember the case in Iraq where some JAG pansy misguidedly blocked the use of sniper rounds.
It does not matter if its an entrenching tool or a bullet, kill the enemy wherever he is.
When they hear we are after them, you want them to crap in their pants, pee in their drawers, and know they are not safe anywhere, whether it is Mommy's burkha or a tombstone.
In fact, just gather in the cemetery so its easier on the undertaker.
Is there any precedent for creating a notion of sanctuary, so as to coalesce a decentralised enemy at a specific point, the better to locate and destroy?
At what point during the persuasion of the enemy that there exists a reasonable & compelling expectation of sanctuary do you strike?
Or are we really as retarded as implied in that article?
I must admit that I had to think about this one, when I heard the story around mid-day on FoxNews. My immediate and troubling response, was to ask the question of moral equivalence. The reason for this question is because killing the mourners at the funeral of their victims is a favorite tactic of the Islamic Fascists. I view this behavior as one of the most abhorrent acts a person can commit.
After brief consideration, I concluded that the moral equivalence argument fails, because the Islamists murder the mourners of their civilian victims. By contrast, the Taliban leaders are combatants and should have been blasted to Hell. The 'we don't bomb cemeteries' argument also falls on its face. Unless we have changed policy since the Marines kicked the Mahdi army's ass in the hugh cemetery by the mosque in Najaf in 2004. The NATO forces missed a huge opportunity to do significant damage to the Taliban.
Stage a provocation that attracts Islamic terrorist rats in droves: A ritual immolation of Mohammed athwart his nine-year old victim would do well. Produce it in a cemetary, or better yet a Golden Mosque. When the usual Gallery of Grotesques streams forth, brandishing their scimitars, bombarding the stage with severed heads, let predator UAVs vector bombers and strafing runs until not a one is left. Rinse and repeat. When the lawyers' calls come through, invite them as observers, and run the protocol again.
Amazing how persuasive arguments can be, if they kill-you-dead.
Find the pinhead JAG officer and put him in front of the cameras to explain the rules of engagement...every time. Let everybody see and hear the functionary who created the wall that protected our enemies. I know this would mean overturning the Gorelick precedent, but that's o.k. with me.
Does anyone actually have any doubt whatsoever that the Taliban would murder infidels standing on their own sacred ground?
The Chechen terrorists did not shrink from murdering hundreds of innocent children and their teachers...
The Jihadis in Indonesia did not shrink from beheading adolescent Christian schoolgirls...
The Jihadis in India did not shrink from murdering hundreds of Hindu as they celebrated in their sacred festivals.
The Taliban did not shrink from defiling and destroying the images of Bhudda which were both sacred to Bhuddists and treasured by the international community for their history...
The idea that because the Jihadis are standing in a cemetery that they should be safe from military attack...
is
IN-
SANE.
Another example of 40 years of Democrat decay that is rotting our country from the inside out, I do believe we may see the breakup of the US in another three or four presidential elections, from the get-it-done, can-do Americans, from the multicultural softies who's political and monetary elite would sign away their rights and life and of course the (if it ain't to late already) new region of Mexico that is forming in the south west and California.
summignumi wrote:
...and of course the (if it ain't to late already) new region of Mexico that is forming in the south west and California.
Gosh, that means we might have to put up a fence in the Siskyou mountains on the Oregon-California border.
"What is to stop them from holding their command and control coordination meetings during funerals or mock funerals from now on?"
My thought exactly, and it should only surprise us if jihadi leaders fail to catch on to the idea.
Perhaps we simply don't deserve to win. It is just amazing to watch this process unfold. We have lost our will to fight because we fear international condemnation and domestic legal issues more than we fear the taliban.
I mourn for the men who are lost because our RoE's make them vulnerable.
It seems to me that we've simply bought the liberal BS about moral equivalence and now must face the consequences.
Could we hope that there is a rational explanation for this.
There is a recent article "Murder in the Cathedral" at www.orthodoxytoday.org which discusses an ethical delema for a B-17 combat crewman in 1943.
"One of the 95th's officers, lead navigator Captain (later Lt. Col.) Ellis B. Scripture, had serious reservations on hearing this briefing. As he explained: "I'd been raised in a strict Protestant home. My parents were God-oriented people and were quite active church members. I was shocked to learn that we were to bomb civilians as our primary target for the first time in the war and that our aiming point was to be the front steps of the Münster Cathedral at noon on Sunday, just as Mass was completed."
Joe Wall's article is thought provoking and worth reading. However, I don't see the same type of moral delema regarding dropping a bomb on a group of thugs just because they are in a grave yard morning the loss of a fellow terrorist. It makes one wonder about the judgement of those who are determining the rules of engagement.
Here is the irony we need:
Suicide Bomber Hits Funeral of Provincial Governor:
It wasn't enough to just kill Afghan Gov. Abdul Hakim Taniwal on Sunday in a suicide bombing, so terrorists sent a suicide bomber to his funeral and killed six more people. As of now, no group has claimed responsibility and the bomber has not been identified.
More than 1,000 mourners had gathered Monday in the eastern Khost province, the ancestral home of Taniwal, when the attacker slipped undetected though a hundreds-strong security force to blow himself up in front of a vehicle carrying a senior police officer who may have been targeted because he was active in operations against Taliban and al-Qaeda.
The bombing caused carnage and chaos, and police fired into the air to control a charge of panicking mourners who feared there might be a second blast. Hospital officials said five police officers and a 12-year-old boy were killed. At least 35 people were wounded.
Post a Comment
<< Home