Video From Iraq

I've downloaded and watch the al qaeda video out of Iraq. I'm not posting it, but Rusty has it on line.

It is extremely gruesome, I can't emphasize that enough. These scumbags wish to portray this as revenge for the alleged rape which looks as though it did take place. But that's nonsense. They don't need an excuse for their depravity, we've already witnessed enough of it to know that.

If America has any sense left, we will simply let this steel our resolve to continue the fight in Iraq and hunting down terrorists. The only thing we should change is our position on taking prisoners. As I advocated when this kidnapping first took place and with the garbage over Guantanamo, we need to adopt a policy of killing them where they are found.

Ralph Peters spells it out more thoroughly today, "Kill Don't Capture" in the NY Post.

July 10, 2006 -- THE British military defines experience as the ability to recognize a mistake the second time you make it. By that standard, we should be very experienced in dealing with captured terrorists, since we've made the same mistake again and again.

Violent Islamist extremists must be killed on the battlefield. Only in the rarest cases should they be taken prisoner. Few have serious intelligence value. And, once captured, there's no way to dispose of them.

Killing terrorists during a conflict isn't barbaric or immoral - or even illegal. We've imposed rules upon ourselves that have no historical or judicial precedent. We haven't been stymied by others, but by ourselves.

Comments

[raindrops]

Before you go all ballistic, be sure you have the high moral ground here. We have our own scumbags and their apparent depravity to deal with before we go off on a killing spree. We are supposed to be the good guys and incidents like this do nothing to help the war effort or strengthen our position. Unfortunately, while the vast majority of the people in the armed forces would never turn a blind eye to such horrendous behavior, there will always be a tiny fraction who commit offenses which make success all that much harder for those who are truly committed to doing their duty properly.

The terrorists may not need an excuse, but they will exploit a "justification" if they think they have found one, and there are some around the world who might listen to that justification to our detriment. We can't naively ignore that or scoff at the possibility.

[SinCerely]

The terrorists may not need an excuse, but they will exploit a "justification" if they think they have found one, and there are some around the world who might listen to that justification to our detriment. We can't naively ignore that or scoff at the possibility.

Posted by: raindrops | Tuesday, July 11, 2006 at 12:42 AM

Pure liberal propoganda.

[raindrops]

The word is propaganda. And would you prefer some isolationist rhetoric that says we don't need to worry about the rest of the world because we can exist without them? Yeah, right. How long will stores stay filled without cheap goods from Asia? And just where do you get your gas? That macho posturing about how we don't need the rest of the world is crap. We have to do business with the world, and it works more efficiently if they don't hate our guts.

I don't want to cave to terrorists any more than anyone else, but I also don't want a few misfits in our military making it more difficult for those soldiers who serve honorably to do their jobs, putting them in danger, or sullying our reputation internationally. Military men and women and their families make too many sacrifices to have their service and characters besmirched by the actions of reckless individuals.

[rwilymz]

"...they will exploit a "justification" if they think they have found one, and there are some around the world who might listen to that justification to our detriment."

This is actually very accurate.

Pan-islamists -- indeed, any marginal insurrectionists you can find in the history books -- have a habit of using whatever excuse is available to rationalize their insurrection.

Just look at the history of pan-islamism. They're justified in jihading the US because ... we invaded Iraq in 2003. Before we invaded Iraq, they were justified because ... we stationed troops in Saudi in 1991. Before troops in Saudi, because we supported Israel. Before 1973 [when our non-nominal support for Israel started] because we supported the Shah. Before we supported the Shah, because... all the way back to 1784, the year after our formal independence when the Barbaries raided our shipping in the Mediterranean when their excuse was ...? who knows. We were buying salt from Spain, so that might possibly be it. And if all else fails, they only have to dig out the old canard of "crusader" -- neatly forgetting that it was muslim empires invading Europe from two directions at once which inspired the Europeans to fight back. It was all Europeans' fault for not rolling over, apparently.

Self-pitying drips need no excuse; the world is their excuse. Refer to how a 10 year-old caught hitting his sister blames the sister for being hit: "I was just swinging my arm, and and and ... SHE RAN INTO ME!!"

"We can't naively ignore that or scoff at the possibility."

That depends on if you want to enable the juvenile behavior or not. We spend too much time trying to "understand" and "be sensitive" to the issues that "cause" infantile mentalities to lash out in infantile ways.

The reality is: they are lashing out in infantile ways; and THAT is what needs to be understood. The Ward Churchill "we deserved it because we're so rich" shinola is just that: shinola. It's blaming the victim for, in this case, being better at being Arab traders than the Arabs themselves. Americans weren't the ones who inspired Greater Islamia to eschew their place in the post-Roman power vacuum by adopting dogmatic fundamentalist philosophies. You snooze, you lose, Ahab.

Your own doing, not ours.

The only problem with their type of infantile rationalizations of their infantility is not that *they* listen to it. They are soft-headed dinks; what do we expect them to do? The problem is that our own soft-headed dinks are listening to it, sympathizing, and saying: "Yeah! They're right! We *are* to blame for being the victim here, because ... " and they echo the rationalizations.

It's Lisa's fault for running into Bart's swinging arm.

[Righty-Tighty]

Nice post Rwil. I am relieved that someone is thinking 'round here.

[rwilymz]

"That macho posturing about how we don't need the rest of the world is crap. We have to do business with the world, and it works more efficiently if they don't hate our guts."

Aye, and the rest of the world has to do business with itself.

Watch South Park, raindrops? Remember when Chris and Saddam were battling each other for Satan's affections? and they killed each other? and showed right back up in hell where they were before? Remember that?

What was their response each time they showed right back up in hell?

"Well, where was I *gonna* go? Detroit?"

You're very right: we have to do business with the rest of the world, and individual US soldiers being rude or insensitive or excessively brutal during war is bad PR. But where is the rest of the world going to go for their "stuff"? China? India? Mexico?

China is an emerging market, but they don't make anywhere near enough "stuff". If the only auto mechanic in town is a surly, inconsiderate and profane buttwad but you need new belts and hoses, where are you gonna go?

...to the surly, inconsiderate and profane buttwad.

America's place in the world economy is at risk, but not from a handful of US soldiers caught being rogues. Deal with it and move on. Dwelling on it and conflating the thing into something more than it is is more of a problem.

"would you prefer some isolationist rhetoric that says we don't need to worry about the rest of the world because we can exist without them? Yeah, right."

Yeah.

Right.

We can exist without the rest of the world far more easily than the rest of the world can exist without us. That's what you need to understand. As the self-important college sophomores keep reminding us: it is not an equal relationship between us and the rest of the world. We are not peers. We are, industrially, their fa-a-a-ar superior betters.

That's not arrogance, jingoism, or "macho posturing"; it's dollars and cents comparisons of GNP. The rest of the world would take, almost literally, decades to industrialize to the point where it could replace the US products and services they'd be throwing away ... just because they were miffed at a handful of US soldiers raping an Iraqi girl.

There's a phrase: cut off your nose to spite your face.

The rest of the world, if they are truly upset about the horribly brutal US soldiers, will storm and stomp and bluster and the veins will pop out on their necks, ... and then they will open their wallets and buy American *stuff*. Because they need it or want it and can't get it anywhere else in the amounts desired.

[JD]

"...we need to adopt a policy of killing them where they are found"

BINGO. I SAID THE SAME THING WHEN WE FOUND SADDAM. NOW LOOK WHAT IT'S ALL TURNED INTO. THE SKUNK SHOULD'VE NEVER BEEN LET OUT OF THE RAT PIT. CLICK-BANG-THUMP.

[Hillary Miller]

Drop the Bomb....NOW!!!!
These people are cowards and they need to be eliminated immediately.

[Herschel Smith]

You know Dan, I will say that this has come up again and again, and it nothing new. Here in the U.S. we seem to keep shooting ourselves in the foot Barney Fife style. The reason we use the M16A2 (or M4) with its 22 caliber round is -- guess what! -- it is considered to be a more compassionate weapon. This is why we do not currently use the 7.62 mm NATO round. And in order to compensate for this? The Marines are taught in boot camp and later where to place a round in order to make a kill ("a hit here means a wound, a hit here means a kill"). Incredible but true.

[xxx]

God what idiots.

Kill them where they are found?

Who is to judge whether they are really terrorists or just innocent people caught in the crossfire who happen to live or be at the wrong place at the wrong time? A bunch of soldiers under fire?

What happned to innocent until proven guilty? Oh, wait I get it, that is just for American soldiers accused of child rape, murder and torture, OUR guys should get the benefit of the doubt, due process, lawywers and all the rest of it, but them damm A-Rabs, just shoot them down like the dogs they are...they're all terrorists anyway, so what's the difference.

Apparently, imprisoning them without lawyers or trials isn't good enough for the raving lunatic right fringe anymore....they have to be killed on the spot.

[TexasFred]

I used a 'Sig Line' for a while that I really DO believe in, and it drove the libber crybabies over the edge...

I may have to adopt it once again...

Kill em ALL and let Allah sort em out....

[raindrops]

just because they were miffed at a handful of US soldiers raping an Iraqi girl.

Posted by: rwilymz | Tuesday, July 11, 2006 at 10:40 AM

Geez, you can trivialize it so easily. When Saddam's forces did it, it was evil that had to be stopped at all costs. But our own guys do something just as evil and it is easy to trivialize?? We can't allow ourselves or any of ours to sink to their level and still claim to be far superior to them. It doesn't work both ways.

TexasFred, the United States is better than that. I believe that. Not because a bunch of demented fools get drunk and shout, "We're number 1!" at every event that suits them, but because we have a history of strength and doing the right thing. WWJD - somehow I don't see him wearing a tee shirt that says, "Kill 'em all and Dad and I will sort it out!"

[JDS]

What happned to innocent until proven guilty?

HEY XXX..... I MAY NOT BE A GENIUS BUT I'M FAR FROM THE IDIOT YOU ALLUDE TO.... SADDAM INNOCENT??? WHO'S THE IDIOT?

CLICK-BANG-THUMP

[rwilymz]

"Geez, you can trivialize it so easily. When Saddam's forces did it..."

...it was a state policy.

"...evil that had to be stopped at all costs"

Don't play politics on me, rain. I work for DoD and have put up with it for, literally, decades. War is war, and we -- meaning me and the folks in uniform -- do not go into war because of politics. Politics is what you all play until you get yourselves into trouble.

And part of that trouble is the politics of calling names and inciting and, yes, even de-inciting.

"But our own guys do something just as evil and it is ..."

...NOT state policy. Doesn't get simpler.

Wanna stop American soldiers from raping girls in Iraq? or girls in Okinawa [there've been fa-a-a-ar more of them, btw]? then stop the individual soldiers. Wanna stop Hussein's sunni thugs from raping? You need to stop Hussein.

Major difference.

"We can't allow ourselves or any of ours to sink to their level and still claim to be far superior to them."

Unless and until we develop national policies that advocate the random killing of political rivals and traditional tribal enemies we can't possibly be equated to them. Doing so is to suggest that two widely disparate entities are equivalent when they are not -- which is called equivocation.

"It doesn't work both ways."

It works the way it works. And the way it works is that your ramblings are largely misdirected.

Claiming that it is not the huge, mountain-range of MASSIVE PROBLEM that you believe it is is not "trivializing" anything.

Did I or did I not say "deal with it and move on"?

Dealing with it is not trivializing. But veritably demanding that we stop what we're doing, shoot ourselves repeatedly in the feet and don hairshits for the equivocated "raping a girl == systematic purges of ethnic minorities".

That's nothing more [nor less] than wallowing in self-loathing.

"Ooooh, what happens if they take reprisals for it???"

They would anyway. And if it wasn't that it would be something else. And if there was nothing else, we're still "zionist crusaders", and that's the cover-all.

Stop trivializing?

Stop viewing your own navel through the microscope.

[raindrops]

Yeah, rwilymz, I'll give you that war and politics are lousy bedfellows. And once it was decided that we were going into this war, it would have been a lot better for all involved if we had done it full-bore. There's way too much coverage of war activity on tv. At first it's exciting and people get charged up, but then a few heart wrenching things make it on and it weakens the resolve of some of the public. Then politicians want to play on that. It's ridiculous. You can't have a casualty-free war.

But I see my dad, a WWII decorated vet, cringe when he hears atrocity stories. He is such a man of honor who loves this country so much, and he taught us that we had to expect the best from the US and ourselves all the time. OK, maybe that isn't realistic in the world. But my dad's point was that expecting the best is what has made us the best. I don't think expecting honorable behavior is the same as donning a hair shirt.