US Forces Have To Hit Religious Sites

Newsday ^

[avalon]

In early 1944, Allied forces in World War II faced a decision that is now disturbingly common in Iraq: What to do with enemy forces using holy sites as defensive positions?

German troops were entrenched behind the Gustav Line, south of Rome, and defending the key city of Cassino from the heights of Monte Cassino, and its famous and revered sixth-century monastery. The Allies made a fateful, though ultimately militarily successful, decision: Using hundreds of American bombers, they destroyed the Abbey of Monte Cassino, clearing the way for eventual Allied success in piercing the Gustav line in May 1944, taking Rome on June 4, and liberating Italy within the year.

Despite the obvious public relations setbacks, coalition forces in Iraq faced with similar decisions (more visible than in World War II given the unblinking eye of 24-hour cable news coverage) must make the same choice. Failure to do so will lead to additional casualties and, worse, signal to insurgents that they are safe when using a mosque as a fortress, weapons storage facility or sniper nest.

Military actions this week show that the military leadership in Iraq understands this important lesson of history. Coalition forces in Iraq made the right - if unpopular - choice Monday when U.S. Marines came under sniper fire from the minaret of a mosque in Fallujah, where some insurgent positions in the city came under heavy American fire last night.

After taking casualties Monday, the Marines returned fire and destroyed the minaret and the snipers. When attacked again later that day from within the same mosque, Marines called in armor and air support. U.S. forces fired on insurgents in the mosque, killing eight.

The attack on the mosque will not be unique, and the use of religious sites by insurgents or terrorists is not happening only in Fallujah. As Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said yesterday, "there have been additional attacks from mosques in Fallujah" before Monday's. And radical cleric Muqtada al-Sadr and his loyalists regularly use holy places in Najaf as refuge.

Capturing or killing al-Sadr is key to ending the insurgency in Najaf and elsewhere. If al-Sadr continues to misuse such sites, coalition and Iraqi forces will have no choice but to enter - and perhaps destroy - such facilities.

Such actions will likely be seen by many as an attack on Islam. They are not. The mosque in Fallujah was used to shoot and kill troops; it is no longer serving that unholy purpose. The same will be true elsewhere across the nation.

Following the destruction of the Abbey of Cassino in 1944, German troops used the ruins as defensive positions. They were successful in turning back American troops and then their New Zealander replacements. It wasn't until a month later, on May 18, that Polish troops raised their flag on the mountaintop with the Nazis in full retreat.

Like coalition forces in Iraq Monday, the Allies in World War II chose to destroy a religious facility used by the enemy for non-religious means. Despite the obvious drawbacks, and Allied reticence to raze a religious treasure, it was the right choice, saved lives and helped lead to the liberation of Europe.

Similarly, security in Fallujah will come only after insurgents who attempt to use the ruins as a political defensive position - as they surely will - are publicly and overwhelmingly defeated.

In 1964, a rebuilt abbey was reconsecrated at Monte Cassino. Iraqis, too, can rebuild a mosque defiled by terrorists, but only when insurgents are in full retreat and mosques are used only for saving lives, not taking them.

[2banana]

1. If I remember my history right, the Germans did not occupy the Abbey of Cassino until after it was bombed. They were around it and had an observation post in it, but did not occupy it with combat troops until after it was rubble (which, BTW, makes for even a better defensive position).

2. The Geneva Convention protects religious sites until they are used for military purposes. The they become a legitimate military target.

[FreedomPoster]

An OP alone puts it in the category of "used for military purposes." Artillery spotting is a pretty vital military function.

[JudgeMan]

They should do that ... and perhaps then they would find those elusive WMD.

[2banana]

An OP alone puts it in the category of "used for military purposes." Artillery spotting is a pretty vital military function.

True, but also in the Geneva Convention is the topic of "proportionality." For instance, you see one enemy soldier in a town. Is it right to carpet bomb the entire town? According to the Geneva Convention, the answer is no, you respond with a response that is proportional to the threat.

[mtbopfuyn]

Question - If the people were so oppressed by SH (and of course they were, just posing the question here) why does every male by the age of 6 are wandering the streets carrying such weapons? They obviously had them before so why did SH allow it? It seems more and more is coming in every day, so where is it all coming from?

[dennisw]

US Forces Have To Hit Religious Sites......

Hardly religious, mosques are bases for a cult. A death cult. An in your face, hyper aggressive death cult.