Rule By Poser

Way back when the Bush administration launched the invasion of Iraq, the prevailing assumption among those who were in charge was that it would be a cakewalk. The people would embrace us as liberators. People who had some clue about how the world works knew it would be an ugly mess, as is the case with all wars. War is, by definition, the ugliest of human activities. It’s purpose is to kill and destroy.

Inevitably, stories turned up about abuses. One essential way to prepare soldiers for war is to dehumanize the enemy. Men, even trained killers, are not going to kill people they see as sympathetic. There’s no way to finely calibrate the mind of a soldier so in every war there are abuses, even when care is taken to avoid them. That’s why things like the Abu Ghraib prison incident happened. War is and always will be an ugly business.

That knowledge should lead Western governments to use their technological and economic advantages to avoid getting into wars with the barbarians on the edge of civilization. Instead, they start wars they never intend to win, so they can preen and pose about their virtue and morality, when something terrible inevitably happens. It means some guy in uniform gets to be strung up in order to please the vanity of our rulers.

Sergeant Alexander Blackman shot dead an insurgent on September 15 2011 after he had been injured by Apache helicopter gunfire.

The 42-year-old was originally known as Marine A to protect his identity from terrorists.

He grew up in Brighton and has two sisters and a brother, according to the Justice for Marine A website.

The keen sportsman is a skilled canoeist who competed at national events.

He joined the marines aged 23 and married his wife Alex in 2010 after the pair met in the Somerset town of Taunton.

At the time of the 2011 killing Blackman was serving in Helmand province with Plymouth-based 42 Commando.

Blackman was ”dismissed with disgrace” from the Royal Marines after serving with distinction for 15 years, including tours of Iraq, Afghanistan and Northern Ireland.

He was handed seven years for manslaughter, but having already served almost three-and-a-half years since his conviction for murder, he could be free within weeks of the sentencing on March 28.

Sgt Blackman shot an injured Taliban insurgent in the chest in 2011 before quoting Shakespeare at him.

He said: “There you are. Shuffle off this mortal coil you c***.

“It’s nothing you wouldn’t do to us”.

He then told soldiers: “Obviously this doesn’t go anywhere, fellas. I just broke the Geneva Convention.”

The shooting was captured on film but has not been released out of fears it could be used as terrorist propaganda.

Dramatic footage that has been released shows troops cheering as an Apache warship fires some 139 rounds at militants trying to sneak up on British positions.

Another clip shows Sgt Blackman and Jack Hammond, known as Marine C, find an AK47, a hand grenade and spare ammunition next to the injured fighter.

Blackman ordered colleagues to move the enemy fighter out of sight from British Army surveillance cameras mounted on balloons.

Blackman was convicted of murder in November 2013 by a court martial in Bulford, Wiltshire, and sentenced to life with a minimum 10-year term.

It was the first such conviction of a serving British soldier since the Second World War.

Judge Jeff Blackett told Blackman at his sentencing: “If the British Armed Forces are not assiduous in complying with the laws of armed conflict and international humanitarian law they would become not better than the insurgents and terrorists they are fighting.”

There you have it. He handed down a sentence as a public act of piety, signalling to the other lunatics in the ruling class that he is some sort of special snowflake for throwing the book at this soldier. It’s also why the West has not won any wars in a long time. Instead of focusing all energy on killing the enemy and breaking their stuff, all energy is put into maintaining moral superiority, even if that means losing.

The point of war is to kill the enemy and break up their stuff. The hope is they quit before you kill all of them and break all of their stuff, but you plan otherwise. If the Afghans knew all along that helping Osama bin Laden was most likely going to mean their cities and large towns would be flattened, they would have chose differently. Let’s assume they played it the same and Bush had firebombed Kabul, what would have been the result?

Yeah, there would have been a lot of hand-wringing and pearl clutching in Washington, but every other nutjob in the Middle East would have been re-calibrating his plans. A lot less death and destruction would have come as a result. Instead we have decades of killing to no logical end. We have an endless war of attrition just so Western leaders can have chances to let us know that they paragons of virtue.

What’s truly insane about all of this is the people in charge seem to care more about the opinion of the enemy than they do their own people. Maybe Sgt Blackman should have been punished, but the only reason to punish him is to maintain good order in the ranks. It’s not that he killed a wounded man. It’s that he violated the rules of engagement and encouraged others to do the same. It should be ZFG about what the terrorist think.

But, that’s not the world today. Our rulers care more about foreigners than they do their own people. If it were otherwise, the rulers would be quick to paper over these sorts of incidents, defending their fellow citizens against these sorts of accusations. Given their policy preferences, and the way they conduct foreign policy, it is safe to say they truly hate the rest of us. We have to hate them back.

This post has already been linked to 7105 times!

Leave a Reply

80 Comments on "Rule By Poser"

Notify of
avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
Guest
Guest
The Iraq war *was* a cakewalk. The US invaded Iraq on March 20, 2003. Baghdad fell on April 9, 2003. That’s less than three weeks to overthrow a sovereign country halfway around the world. American forces suffered 139 deaths in combat. British suffered 33. Iraq suffered 9200. By any reasonable standard that is a overwhelming military victory. Then Bush appointed Paul Bremer, who was certainly no Macarthur, and the neocons completely fucked up the occupation for all the reasons you articulated above. Almost fifteen years later the country is still a disaster. Iraq would be in far better shape today… Read more »
Sharrukin
Guest

The object of war is not a pile of skulls.

Beating the Iraqi army is the means to an end,

What end?

A functioning Muslim democracy according to Bush.

A pointless war that could never accomplish what it set out to do. Muslims don’t do democracy.

Guest
Guest
The Japanese didn’t do democracy either, until the Allies forced it on them through military occupation and MacArthur’s sheer force of will. Japan was under military occupation from 1945-1951 and MacArthur was effectively a dictator in Japan from 1945-1949. Importantly, MacArthur kept the US State Department’s influence in Japan in check during the occupation. Iraq was under military occupation for 14 months. It took the neocons at the U.S. State Department exactly one month to get Brenner installed as the head of the Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA), and the State Department took over Iraq. Chaos ensued, resulting in massive profits… Read more »
Drake
Guest

Japan was a unified, civilized, homogeneous, disciplined society. Iraq has not been any of those things for centuries.

When the Emperor ordered them to lay down their arms and cooperate, they did.

Guest
Guest
I would suggest you read up a bit on Japan. It was absolutely *not* a unified, civilized or disciplined society. It was effectively an imperial military dictatorship in which the Emperor was a figurehead who provided moral authority to the military leaders. The Japanese Military attempted a coup the night before the Emperor surrendered, and it was entirely unclear whether the Military would accept the surrender. Some holdouts did not. MacArthur’s first directive was to disarm the population under force of Allied arms. http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/macarthurs-occupation-of-japan-lessons-of-counterinsurgency/ In any event, the main point is that the U.S. Military knows how to do post-war… Read more »
David
Guest

“When the Emperor ordered them to lay down their arms and cooperate, they did.”

You are correct sir. If the Emperor had not ordered the Japanese people to “bear the unbearable”, the US occupation of Japan would have been far bloodier and nastier.

“Guest” has no idea what he is talking about.

Anonymous White Male
Guest
“The U.S. Military knows precisely how to win wars. The U.S. State Department has no clue how to win the peace.” Sorry, the State Department’s function is not to win the peace.The are engaged in “perpetual war for perpetual peace”. Keeps the currency spigot going full blast. If enemy combatants get a hangnail in captivity, allow them to pursue claims in court. You can waste more money this way. You have to understand that the function of government anymore is not to maintain conditions for the freedom, security, and pursuit of happiness of its citizens. Its purpose is to borrow… Read more »
cogitansiuvenis
Guest

This isn’t true, the Japanese had democratic elements within the existing Meji government being governed by an Imperial Diet comprised of a house of representatives and peers.

It also bears repeating that the only reason why the Japanese occupation went so smoothly was due to the order of the emperor, and the threat of nuclear annihilation by the US government. I wonder what have happened if instead of retaking Falluhah the US merely opted to obliterate it.

greg
Guest

If MacArthur’s army could pacify a country like Iraq today’s U.S. military certainly could not. They are more concerned with being welcoming to trans genders and promoting females to places where they can screw things up.

Asher
Guest

Two things:

a) Japan has an average IQ of between 10 and 15 pts higher than Iraq.

b) the current middle east is about as inbred as our species has seen in many thousands of years. Japan is less inbred by orders of magnitude.

You simply can’t compare the two

JohnMc
Guest

No the Japanese did not do democracy but they did something else that made democracy possible. That is except at the top aka emperor, there is cultural divide between the religion and the operation of the State.

Muslims on the other hand operate under Sharia which melds the two functions together. “Give unto Ceasar” is not operative in the Muslim mind.

Sam J.
Guest
“…Then Bush appointed Paul Bremer…” I think it very likely that Bremer did exactly what he was supposed to do. Break up Iraq with chaos so it would not a threat to Israel. The Israelis wrote a strategy report well before 9-11 claiming that was the way to defeat the forces against them and that’s what happened. There’s also the small matter of the British SAS forces caught dressed as Arabs caught setting up a car bomb. They were caught directly and I’ve read rumors that US troops would stop Arabs at checkpoints and search their cars. During the search… Read more »
pyrrhus
Guest

“A functioning Muslim democracy”, of which there are exactly zero…

Guest
Guest

Ever heard of Indonesia?

Member
“Muslims don’t do democracy.” Premise rejected. The object of war is a larger pile of skulls than what we achieved. 9200 should have been Lesson One, not the whole book. By setting the bar too low, we enabled those who threw off their uniforms, and the Geneva Conventions, who then transitioned into an endless guerrilla war, with an underlying civil and tribal war. QED. The Japanese were religious fanatics who didn’t do democracy either. In 1940. In 1945, they sang a different tune, and the lesson has taken hold well and truly. Iraq and A-stan simply weren’t firebombed into enough… Read more »
John Smith
Guest

The French military were allowed to do anything they wanted in Algeria. They killed and tortured many people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Algiers_(1956%E2%80%9357)

Karl Horst (Germany)
Guest
The Geneva convention was established as a “Gentleman’s” agreement about how to behave during armed conflict. There are many stories of US and German soldiers who went to great lengths, even risking their own lives, to protect and give aid to each other. The incident of 2nd Lt Charles Brown, a B-17 commander and Luftwaffe pilot Franz Stigler has been well documented; instead of shooting down the crippled bomber, Franz Stigler escorted the B-17 crew to safety despite disobeying direct orders to the contrary. Professional soldiers understand and respect each other even in these terrible conditions. The problem today is… Read more »
Guest
Guest
The Geneva Conventions have specific requirements which must be met in order to qualify for the protections of the Convention. Chief among those requirements are that the persons wear uniforms or other insignia that identify them as soldiers, are part of a command structure, carry arms openly, and that they observe the laws of conflict. The Bush Administration initially concluded, correctly, that the Taliban and other terrorists captured did not qualify for the protections afforded under the Geneva Convention. This was the famous Status of Forces Memorandum by Jay Bysbee. https://fas.org/irp/agency/doj/olc/taliban.pdf Interpreting any legal document in accordance with the plain… Read more »
Sam J.
Guest

“The Geneva Conventions have specific requirements which must be met in order to qualify for the protections of the Convention. Chief among those requirements are that the persons wear uniforms or other insignia that identify them as soldiers, are part of a command structure, carry arms openly, and that they observe the laws of conflict…”

Good point. Maybe THE point.

Member
Because you made the distinction between uniformed traditional combatants and the bastards we are fighting today, I think you get off course. Yes, they are evil murderous bastards who, by all western ideals, are butchers committing heinous crimes. However, from warrior to warrior, it’s possible to respect their physical and mental toughness as well as the commitment to their cause. Anyone who doesn’t respect the tactical ability of some of them is unfortunately going to get a rude awakening. I can respect them for having the balls to be a combatant in the arena. This doesn’t mean that I am… Read more »
Doug
Guest

History sure is circular.

THE LIMITS OF SOVIET AIRPOWER: THE BEAR VERSUS THE MUJAHIDEEN IN AFGHANISTAN, 1979-1989
by Edward B. Westermann
http://www.allworldwars.com/The-Bear-vs-Mujahideen-in-Afghanistan-by-Edward-Westermann.html

I consider the one of the finest essays on the State waged war I’ve read. The title is misleading, in a good way.

Ron
Guest

Addendum: We dropped two and a half time the tonnage of bombs we dropped in WW2 on a country half the size of Texas. We saw how little that worked in defeating the enemy.

Anonymous White Male
Guest

But, it was quite effective in helping take out Germany during WWII. The Germans would be the first to admit. Allied bombing and the Soviet Army.

Member

Logic fail there, Ron.
Merely comparing apples and pineapples does not prove equivalence.

The Germans we dropped it on built tanks and jets.

The height of Iraqi technological and industrial prowess would be a donkey cart. They manufacture, essentially, nothing, except more terrorists.

And dropping a JDAM on a hut when a 40mm grenade properly placed would have sufficed is one reason we dropped a much higher tonnage, for a much lower payout.

Al from da Nort
Guest

Doug;
Excellent article. So, indiscriminate brutality + Marxism didn’t work for the USSR in Afghanistan because Islam, country and Pakistan and yet carefully directed, highly discriminating brutality + ‘Democracy/Liberalism’ isn’t working for us in Agfhanistan either, because Islam, country and Pakistan. What could be the common thread_?

If only there were some way to let Afghanistan and Pakistan eat each other and not our grandkids prosperity. But then we’d have to have some way to keep them from bringing their blood feuds to our shores. What, oh what might that be_? /sarc

Doug
Guest
All I got to say about that Al, is the fellows who started this republic made a point about avoiding “foreign entanglements”. We all can digress into every aspect of why and how that sage advice has been flushed down the crapper, it doesn’t change the rock bottom truth it was about the finest piece of advice imaginable. What I think, and I’m a simple dirt person, i don’t get up every morning and think, gee, who in my neighborhood can I invade today, and on what specious foil thin illusion of legitimacy can I predicate killing and rape and… Read more »
Georgiaboy61
Guest
Doug, We’ve never met, but you are a man after my own mind. I have spent goodness knows how many hours on various “conservative” internet websites arguing with the neo-cons, interventionists and other assorted folks of the type on how dangerous to our liberties and prosperity at home the pursuit of foreign adventurism actually is. To no avail, of course, because trying to reason with these people is an exercise in futility. The wisdom of the Founding Fathers shines especially brightly in the realm of foreign affairs. These men came of age in an era not far-removed from the Hundred… Read more »
Doug
Guest
Secession from the myriad of ways of slavery of the state is first a state of mind. Awakenings begin with each of us, and I’m grateful we see such things on a complimentary level of thinking, that I do believe you and I are not alone is such thoughts and principles. I couldn’t agree more with you, it is becoming more than conjecture, verifiable proof abounds there is indeed a class of American’s, if you can call them so, who are out of their cotton picking’ fucking minds, as you say, sociopaths and psychopaths, and the little totalitarians among us,… Read more »
Member

Nailed it. Perfectly said and just the right amount of coarseness.

hmmm
Guest

yes… There is much truth in this.
We are responsible for the growth of the “military industrial machine” that the so called left hates so much. Yet their beliefs and policies grow this million headed monster into what it is today.
The citizenry of these “occupied” areas have not grown tired of death. They have not had their grammys and grampys burned to death. Diplomacy and tactical strikes did not end either world war. These tactics will not end any current or future war regardless of how fucking smart you think you are.

Member
I’ll never forget when Bush came out to announce the first aerial actions in the war in Afghanistan. The air force was being tasked with dropping leaflets that announced how much we loved the Afghan people and respected their religion. They were also dropping food baskets with biscuits and jam in them. I remember the jam particularly because somehow someone had managed to poll the Afghanis and they were disappointed in the selection of fruit. I don’t claim to possess any remarkable prescience, but I knew at that moment that nothing that occurred from that point on would resemble anything… Read more »
Guest
Guest
Historical revisionism is strong around here. The first aerial actions in Afghanistan were airstrikes and cruise missiles. Food aid came after the missile strikes in a coordinated action. As to victory, the U.S. Military attack against Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001. The ruling Taliban abandoned Kabul on November 14, 2001. By the end of November the Taliban had basically left the country, escaping to Pakistan. A new government was sworn in on December 21, 2001. No U.S. soldiers were killed, although CIA operative Johnny Spann was killed. This was, by any reasonable measure, an historic military victory. Then we… Read more »
Georgiaboy61
Guest
In narrow terms and measured by strictly military metrics – emplacements and bunkers destroyed, terrorist training camps bombed, terrorist leaders hunted down and killed – perhaps the long war in Afghanistan can be termed a victory. However, if we broaden the definition of conflict to include fourth-generation/unconventional warfare, it is plainly apparent that the U.S.-NATO alliance has lost this struggle. At best, it could be called a draw. Leaving aside the evil of their cause, the planners of the 9-11 attacks must be given their due as masters of unconventional warfare. Osama Bin Laden and his lieutenants knew that they… Read more »
Doug
Guest
Excuse me, revisionism? When you glorify and justify the invasion of other peoples lands on vague and specious excuses? How do you justify the thousands killed, the multitudes maimed, the mountains of gold and treasure wasted? The utter waste of it all. Not glorifying that, is revisionism? Like you to explain to me your rationalizing going after the stated objective of getting Bin Laden and his associates, all long dead now, with a 14 year full fledged expeditionary invasion and occupation of the entire country of Afghanistan? Who is revising history here? And since when are peoples concerns and ideals… Read more »
Member

What is really insane is that the president has a license to kill while the soldier on the ground doesn’t.

Ron
Guest
So true. A president from the comfort and safety of the White House can order a drone strike on a “suspected” terrorist like Anwar al-Awlaki who was an American citizen without due process, or other “suspected” terrorists and kill adjacent innocents nearby written off as “collateral damage” is never held accountable. But when some fatigued grunt who has been on multiple tours with nerves honed by constant stress and primitive survival instinct to reflexively shoot first and ask questions later kills a wounded insurgent, well, no one bothers to asks who put him in that position under those conditions in… Read more »
LPT
Guest

Marine A was lucky to get charged with manslaughter and not murder, on the basis of your quote. It seems to me that the fact that he got away with a lesser charge already recognizes that acts in war time should be treated differently, due to the highly stressful and messy environment. Perhaps the judges statement was a little bit snowflakey, but not massively off the mark.

Member

I don’t often disagree with Z-man, and even more rarely do I say so; but from where I was standing at the time, the Aboo Grab incidents had little to do with the nature of war, as the second paragraph seems to suggest, and everything to do with the fact that — for reasons known *only* to God — we brought girls along this time, and the place turned into a frat house.

Nori
Guest

Amen,Brother. See former Brigadier General Janis Karpinski,commander of 800th Military Police,in charge of all Iraqui prisons at the time. I read yesterday that the newly appointed commander of the USAF Academy is a lesbian with a “wife” and 2 children. Life has become farce. The idiocy we’ve inflicted on our military is shameful,and suicidal.

Member

Confirmed. The military is doing everything they can to keep this quiet. Only a few years ago they were running Christians out of the academy for proselytizing. It only made sense that this was the next step. Also note female Sec AF.

Drake
Guest
Rihyad was a big frat party in the first Gulf War. When my infantry battalion was sent over for Desert Shield / Storm, the Women Marines in support roles such supply and admin were sent to Rihyad. After the war, they came back with wilder stories than our actual combat. Women being sent home pregnant on an almost daily basis – some married and not deployed with their husbands. Drunken parties and fraternization between officers and enlisted. Angry Generals trying to get things under control but also reluctant to punish people too publicly because they wanted the whole mess kept… Read more »
Zeroh Tollrants
Guest

Please allow me to add my official, “as a woman,” stamp of agreement. It is beyond maddening. That said, there’s a substantial part of me who wants to see these blue haired college feminists drafted & placed on the front of battle lines-just once.
I feel it would make a highly illustrative point to these Starbucks Marxist types, once & for all.
And yes, I am a bit of a sadist.

Georgiaboy61
Guest
Anyone with even a grain of common sense and some understanding of how military organizations function knows that the presence of women in heretofore all-male formations is enormously destructive of unit cohesion, morale, and espirit de corps. The feminists and their politically-correct cuckservative enablers – including the senior brass and perfumed princes who signed on for this nonsense – believe that it is simply a matter of making sure that the “right women” are put into these units, and not the wrong ones. This is false; the effect occurs independently of the women themselves. It doesn’t matter how competent, patriotic,… Read more »
Member

Since WW2 (and possibly Korea, which I don’t know enough about) we have only been involved in controlled wars, not existential wars. These wars (Viet Nam, Iraq, etc.) were used by our political class to play out their foreign policy fantasies. Our national security was never at stake. No George Pattons were allowed or even needed. If an existential war comes along they’ll definitely be needed and will be the ones that save us.

Dr. Mabuse
Guest
By the time the existential conflict comes along, it will be too late to find a Patton or a Sherman to save the day. Those men will have been purged from the military decades earlier, disciplined for some caustic remark about homos or fat women. Effective generals come out of a culture, they don’t just land on the earth like meteors. G.K. Chesterton naturally had the measure of a people in decline, having seen it himself in England: “It may be said with rough accuracy that there are three stages in the life of a strong people. First, it is… Read more »
James LePore
Guest

You’re probably right. By that time the only real warriors in our military will be the grunts, maybe one or two will rise
up and lead. One can only hope
.

LetsPlay
Member
I think that just as the burned wilderness sprouts with life once again, that heroes, leaders can and will rise from the common man at the time of great need. People like Patton and Sherman were germinating for decades waiting for their time in history. There are others, maybe not in the current leadership, but others can and will rise to the challenge based on the moment at hand. This is, I believe, an undeniable fact, that is part of God’s providence on this great land. I don’t say that with the intent of preserving the status quo, but of… Read more »
Drake
Guest

The first year of the Korean War was pretty out of control. We came damn close to losing at the Pusan Perimeter. The Chinese sneak attack on the Eighth Army was the last time the U.S. lost a major land battle – and the longest retreat in US Army history.

Fuel Filter
Guest
Re:The ME Wars…I’ve been saying this for years… Very simply put, we bombed the wrong fuckers. We should have done this, in this order: a) Nuked Tehran so they were out of the picture permanently  b) Nuked Mecca and Medina simultaneously two days later. Kill lots of people and break lots of things. Fuck morality when dealing with these koranimals. No “boots on the ground” needed at all. Three planes, three bombs. Nobody would have had the time for any countermeasures. Every muzloid nation on the planet would have woken up, taken notice and would still be on their best… Read more »
Fuel Filter
Guest

Sorry, it was posted on 2/24/2017 and called:

“A Desert Called Glass”

My error.

Member

Ditto.
More words because the thingy said my post was too laconic.

Tim Newman
Guest
I’m not fully in agreement with this: I have close friends who were serving in the Royal Marines at the same time as Blackman, and they believed his actions constituted murder. For sure there were extenuating circumstances, but it was murder nonetheless and he should have been tried (albeit with reduced sentencing). His commanding officer came in for much unofficial criticism because he’d encouraged a very aggressive attitude in his men; the officer in the neighbouring unit was much more chilled out and, in the opinion of the Royal Marines I know, did a better job as a result. Finally,… Read more »
Tim Newman
Guest

Plus: Blackman would have gotten away with it had it not been captured on video by one of his mates and kept on a laptop which then ended up in the hands of the British police. Faced with this evidence, the MoD didn’t have much choice but to act: had it been otherwise, they might have swept it under the carpet. It’s not so much what Blackman did, but he got caught: in the military that is the gravest of all offences.

Al from da Nort
Guest
A major problem with our current Cloud-land is the fantasy that if a subject is icky it need not be dealt with honestly. So it is with state-conducted brutality. Serious elites used to know that they had real enemies, strive to understand those enemies, and calculate the best methods to deal with them. Like it or not, brutality always has be in the mix since some enemies don’t think you’re serious otherwise. The art is to pare and tailor the brutality appropriate to the threat. This our Cloud refuses to do. In systematic (non-tribal) warfare it has been known since… Read more »
Betterdays
Guest
I would argue that the day the red hand of Rome was washed clean is the day that the decline truly began. Having participated in several “conflicts”, mostly as an enlisted slob, I have a quibble with this post. Avoiding war is as suicidal as over participation in it. War is unpleasant because it reminds us that we are all still animals. Participating and winning conflicts is necessary for the good a culture. From my perspective nations are mostly animal interaction in very large packs. Wolves kill wapiti because they are wolves. Showing hesitation or doubt is a weakness and… Read more »
Drake
Guest

I agree – it’s also a bad practice to fight an enemy too often is to be avoided when possible. Sparta fought Thebes too often and they learned their tricks and tactics. We’ve been hanging around in the Middle East too long.

Member
Lots of good comments here. Here are some of my thoughts: I lump war crimes into three broad categories: 1) Not turning off the killing instinct quickly enough. 2) Units gone bad (LT Calley, that Marine squad in AFG that was committing serial atrocities). 3) Mass killings stemming from policy. For 1) you need to show compassion to the soldiers involved and get them out of the fight immediately. 2) Break up the unit and lock up the ringleaders for a long time. End the careers of the higher echelon commanders who were too stupid or cowardly to intervene early.… Read more »
Rand Koch
Guest

Could argue with some of your positions, but very glad to see it.

Too many people say we’re the ones at fault for not giving POW status or full trials to jihadis even though the rules don’t say that we need to.

We need to follow the rules (at least until we decide otherwise), but not one inch further. If our lawyers say that waterboarding is okay within the rules we agreed to, then we should do it.

LetsPlay
Member

Fuck the lawyers.

sandpiper
Guest
The Rothschild banking family has been around for 230 plus yeare. Nathan Rothschild said “Give me the control of a nations money and I will control the country.” They have also stated if we want war here will be war! If do not want war there will be no war!” They have funded both sided of the wars fought since the French Revolution. In 2003 there were seven countries that did not have a Rothschild controlled Central bank; Afganistan, Iraq,Sudan, Libya, Cuba, North Korea, and Iran. To day , thanks to the US wars there is three. Ther are Iran,… Read more »
wpDiscuz