|
You know, if they are going to grant Amnesty to insurgents, then lets drop the investigation/prosecution of US soldiers accused of massacres and other wrong doings altogether. |
| |
Written By:
jpm100
URL:
http://
|
You know, if they are going to grant Amnesty to insurgents, then lets drop the investigation/prosecution of US soldiers accused of massacres and other wrong doings altogether. Nope. Sorry. That’s not how it works. If our troops have committed prosecutable offenses against the UCMJ, then prosecution of those offenses have nothing whatsoever to do with the offenses of others. Our troops have a legal and moral duty to abide by the UCMJ and the LOAC, irrespective of what others do. |
| |
Written By:
Dale Franks
URL:
http://www.qando.net
|
|
And get their families bankrupted mounting a defense based on the latent accusations of people who are ’God know who?’. |
| |
Written By:
jpm100
URL:
http://
|
And get their families bankrupted mounting a defense based on the latent accusations of people who are ’God know who?’. It’ll probably be a courts-martial. Soldiers trying soldiers. I’d be surprised if they are found guilty for no reason. |
| |
Written By:
Mark A. Flacy
URL:
http://
|
Sure JPM, we’ll just abandon our principles. I’m sure that’s very sensible, and the two things you’re comparing are, well, the same as apples are to oranges.
If our guys did something, like a massacre, it’s contrary to following orders. So, much like you investgate and prosecute them for being off post and drinking when they’re supposed to be standing guard, or selling operational Humvee’s out of the motor pool to the local farmers, you investigate and prosecute them for committing massacres.
To allow them to do things contrary to good discipline is contrary to having a good military.
Perhaps your confusing our military with the Jenghis Khan military that John Kerry claims he was part of.
As for Billmon -While an abrupt, overnight switch in the propaganda machine’s output from stay-the-course-forever to cut-and-run-to victory might grate on the ears of those of us who still haven’t quite adjusted to the Fox News era, I doubt the vast majority of the American people will care — or even notice. .
Perhaps Billmon isn’t in the mainstream, and doesn’t grasp what the majority of American people do, that amnesty offered and geuinely accepted, is usually the way wars end (at least when you don’t want them to go into endless extra innings passed lovingly down from generation to generation). |
| |
Written By:
looker
URL:
http://
|
"can I get the names of the people who, "three days ago were demanding the execution of John Kerry and John Murtha for even daring to suggest a withdrawal timetable"?
I guess you don’t scan the comments at Little Green Footballs or Free Republic.com much. Not that I blame you, but you should check it out some time. It’s very enlightnening a look at what the real conservatives are saying to each other.
"Perhaps Billmon isn’t in the mainstream"
I’m not, and I consider it a compliment for you to say so. But you’re confusing the amnesty proposal with the withdrawal, and also missing my point, which is that we’ve reached a point in this country where the official (and unofficial) propaganda can swing from "there’s no subsitute for victory" to "negotiate terms and withdraw" and people either don’t notice (the vast majority) or pretend that nothing has changed (this blog). |
| |
Written By:
billmon
URL:
http://
|
But you’re confusing the amnesty proposal with the withdrawal, and also missing my point, which is that we’ve reached a point in this country where the official (and unofficial) propaganda can swing from "there’s no subsitute for victory" to "negotiate terms and withdraw" and people either don’t notice (the vast majority) or pretend that nothing has changed (this blog). Uh, if the insurgency ends, we can withdraw our troops, and Iraq is left with a relatively democratic and, in Mideastern terms, liberal government...isn’t that...uh, you know...kind of like...victory? Wasn’t that how it was supposed to end?
If so, then, well, I guess I’m finding the reasoning behind your complaint as impenetrable as the Mystery of the Trinity. |
| |
Written By:
Dale Franks
URL:
http://www.qando.net
|
Clarify then - at what point were we allowed to actually pack up our kits and leave Iraq? When the last terrorist somewhere in a cave in Afghanistan or laying low in a house in Falluja is captured? When the gleam in the Iraqi dairyman’s eye doesn’t turn into a terrorist 20 years down the road?
Functioning stable government = ability to withdraw is not at all the same as Amnesty = cut and run. What rubbish.
What was ’victory’ to you? Obviously not what victory actually is.
Will we have a ’victory’ - that is, a stable form of republic or democracy in Iraq that is not a totalitarian dictatorship? Time will tell.
But victory has never been some Hollywood ending where all the bad guys die before the bloodied good guy hugs the girl and walks off leaving the extras to rebuild the society he’s just won for them.
Never has been, and never will be.
Clearly though, that will become the new meme - that any kind of withdrawl without a ’victory’ (as you define it, and which you have not) being achieved is identical to cutting and running and that it’s propaganda to say otherwise. |
| |
Written By:
looker
URL:
http://
|
But victory has never been some Hollywood ending where all the bad guys die before the bloodied good guy hugs the girl and walks off leaving the extras to rebuild the society he’s just won for them. And if this were the case, we could have left in April of ’03 when we rolled through Bahgdad, or Dec of ’03 when we captured Saddam. |
| |
Written By:
Keith, Indy
URL:
http://
|
Uh, if the insurgency ends, we can withdraw our troops, and Iraq is left with a relatively democratic and, in Mideastern terms, liberal government...isn’t that...uh, you know...kind of like...victory? Well, does it smell like napalm?
(It’s a joke, boys and girls...) |
| |
Written By:
Mark A. Flacy
URL:
http://
|
|
Aug 11th 2005 was the date Bush so succinctly stated "as the Iraqis stand up, we will stand down." Since then it seems that the situation in Iraq has gotten actually worse. Does anyone think that this new Iraqi Army will be able to crush an insurgency that the United States Army can not stop ? |
| |
Written By:
JOHN RYAN
URL:
http://
|
Since then it seems that the situation in Iraq has gotten actually worse. Has it? I seem to have missed that.Does anyone think that this new Iraqi Army will be able to crush an insurgency that the United States Army can not stop ? Yes for a couple of reasons. Reason one: we’re not there to "crush the insurgency", we’re there to train up the Iraqis to be able to crush the insurgency. And to buy the time necessary for that training. Secondly, defeating the insurgency isn’t just about the military sphere. It also to do with the political and economic spheres. Progress is being made in both of those areas as well (as witnessed by the peace plan and the insurgent reaction). |
| |
Written By:
McQ
URL:
http://www.qando.net/blog
|
Does anyone think that this new Iraqi Army will be able to crush an insurgency that the United States Army can not stop ? What’s your criteria for what they can and can’t handle?
Since we haven’t seen how they will deal on their own, who are you to say how they will do?
You might not like the way they crush it, but I’ll wager they’ll crush it. They probably will worry less about the proper etiquette which we’re held accountable for.
|
| |
Written By:
looker
URL:
http://
|
