Posted on 01/09/2005 7:54:06 AM PST by PopGonzalez
I want Iraq PACIFIED.
If that means we have to have death squads, or that we have to simply kill every Iraqi, I don't care.
SO9
And yet it didn't work, the underground movement in occupied areas flourished. Read the accounts of French underground activity in preparations for the Normandy invasion.
I haven't been here long, but I'm amazed that my fellow conservatives can justify the killing of innocent men, women, and children. Even more astounding is that they would see no problem with having U.S. forces conduct the killing.
We've got 150,000 of our finest in Iraq attempting to bring liberty and democracy to these people, the vast majority of whom support our efforts, and yet some folks want to see a mass extermination of the population.
Good plan, then we could call them the "Vigil Aunties".
My solution would be to continue to follow the President's policies, which despite the best efforts of the MSM, are actually succeeding.
It would certainly be peaceful without any pesky Iraqi's around cluttering things up.
Send Janet Reno...
Some comments you should simply accept as statements of feeling and take them with a grain of saltwater. From the relative safety of a keyboard, it sometimes feels good to let loose with a cyber primal scream.
But the issue is real to the extent these Phoenix-style special operations, by us and by the Iraqis, will be effective, both inside and outside Iraq. A few moments ago on Fox, retired General Barry McCaffrey was telling the interviewer such a program was, in effect, overdue. McCaffrey, as 24th Infantry Division commander during Gulf War I, showed the right stuff when he destroyed an Iraqi tank division, which made the mistake of firing on his troops after the ceasefire was in effect.
Like it or not, the Iraqi campaign is only one part of the larger war. The war covers a lot of ground.
Dude, my comment was totally not series. She's just too evil to impose on anyone (Now I serious)
"Death Squads - certainly the Christian way."
The fight for Iraq has nothing to do with Christianity. It has to do with killing the terrorists so A) America is made safer - in all its multi-religious glory - because there exists one less haven for terrorists, and B) the people of Iraq can live in relative peace.
I can't believe the USA hasn't been sporting death squads in Iraq all along. I supported the idea in El Salvador, Honduras, and elsewhere. I support them now. Kill the terrorists by any means: Defend this nation.
"My solution would be to continue to follow the President's policies, which despite the best efforts of the MSM, are actually succeeding..."
What policy or policies would allowing Iraqi or Coalition forces to stamp out terrorism contradict?
I think you are being optimistic here.
You will have to find the terrorists, and their safe houses. To do so, you will have to interrogate the Lori Berensons of Iraq, and do so successfully. You will make mistakes. To be successful, you will have to eliminate the foreign fighters, and all those who support and hide them, and maybe start making examples of those who merely see and say nothing.
With the family/tribal structure, you may have to kill whole families, to cut short any vendettas caused by killing only one of a family.
You will need to handle the problem when the other side starts killing whole families, with the only purpose to blame it on the government.
It's a sad fact that Iraq already has Death Squads, as seen in the recent assassination of the election officials. The Media only recognizes Death Squads if they are NOT leftist or islamic.
If the Iraqi government creates and uses hunter-killer squads, the MSM will scream DEATH-SQUAD in 3 inch bold type. It won't matter how effective or how efficient they are in finding and killing only bad guys. It will matter even less that fighting fire with fire is sometimes necessary.
Given the history of the middle east, I doubt that you'd find enough angelic types to staff such units to provide anything that doesn't make the Latin American units look like choir boys.
I think you are being optimistic here.
To be successful, you will have to eliminate the foreign fighters, and all those who support and hide them, and maybe start making examples of those who merely see and say nothing.
With the family/tribal structure, you may have to kill whole families, to cut short any vendettas caused by killing only one of a family.
It's a sad fact that Iraq already has Death Squads, as seen in the recent assassination of the election officials. The Media only recognizes Death Squads if they are NOT leftist or islamic.
If the Iraqi government creates and uses hunter-killer squads, the MSM will scream DEATH-SQUAD in 3 inch bold type. It won't matter how effective or how efficient they are in finding and killing only bad guys. It will matter even less that fighting fire with fire is sometimes necessary.
I am sure that there is more than an ample supply of people willing to do contract work based upon the guidelines setup by the Foreign Legion.
Well we are dealing with murderers who will kill like they breath. We have to do what it takes to stop them before they can kill innocent life.
War isn't about holding hands and feeling good while praying. It's about killing the bad guys and breaking all their stuff.
The article i read about this explicitly states that these "death squads" will be trying to make it painful for civilians who may be inclined to favor the insurgency. Not people who are themselves insurgents...just people who look the other way. People who let the insurgents into their home, maybe. People whose 16 year old child was seen talking to an insurgent. You know, anyone who is at all suspected of contact.
How do they make it painful? Well, they kidnap you, they 'disappear' you, they torture you, and they kill you. This is not "US Soldiers" killing people who call themselves "soldiers" (interesting that you are willing to define them as soliders here, by the way....i thought Geneva was 'quaint' because these people aren't soldiers.).
This is Iraqi para-military groups literally terrorising a civilian population as a way to discourage not just participation in, but also support for, insurgency. As noted upthread, previous uses of this means of furthering democracy have resulted in literally 100,000's of dead, tortured, and disappeared civilians. Women and children, raped and mutilated. Men beheaded in front of their families. Political dissent is very offectively oppressed by these means.
Now the insurgency is certainly not a legitimate form of political dissent, and it is a problem for the US, and a serious one at that. The question is, though, is there *nothing* that is not justified by a war-zone? Have you people ultimately no common humanity in you? We are talking about MY FRIGGIN GOVERNMENT COMMITING THE MOST HORRIBLE IMAGINABLE ACTS, in my name and yours, on people who, let's be honest here, are horrible people, but we're in their country, and we picked this fight, and we told them to 'bring it on', and now we want to cut lose the dogs of Hell on them, and fuck 'em anyway?
We went there to bring democracy, and that, my friends, is NOT democracy. I understand that we are in a shitty situation over there, i really do. But we need to retain our humanity, our decency, our respect for the Laws of God and Man, or else we will regret it. And frankly, the Left is in the right here, when they look at us and say "i told you so."
We might have to make it clear to these people they'll be tamed once an official government takes over....
Yes, we do. The kind of humanity that knows it needs to find a way to end the Hitlers of the world; and knows that singing hymns around the campfire isn't going to do it.
U.S.-funded forces allegedly included so-called death squads that were directed to kill rebel leaders and their sympathizers.
I can think of two sympathizers who would be legally targeted by such squads. Lori Berenson might never have fired a gun, but she was caught in a safe house with guns and explosive, and was running cover for those who had fired guns. Rachel Cory was protecting those who were building tunnels to run guns and explosives. The weren't merely readers of the New York Slimes who sent in $25 in support of Hamas.
For that matter, people who send $25 to Hamas are guilty of murder too, IMHO.
I read 'sympathizers' from the original article to mean the same as collaborators. In this case, it also means traitorous SOB, or will once the new Iraq government is in place.
As noted upthread, previous uses of this means of furthering democracy have resulted in literally 100,000's of dead, tortured, and disappeared civilians. Women and children, raped and mutilated. Men beheaded in front of their families. Political dissent is very offectively oppressed by these means.
Political dissent, or treasonous insurrection? My understanding is that the methods you report were Viet Cong, Kyhmer Rouge, and Islamist policy, and certainly not in the name of furthering democracy.
Political dissent had crossed a long way into murderous insurrection before Franco got the upper hand, or haven't you read your Orwell?
When I wrote the previous post, I was trying to suggest that in Iraq, the use of Death Squads will not be a clean option. However, your hysterical response makes me reconsider. Murder, rape, torture are what we are stopping. The plan is to find and kill those who support murder, rape and torture. That's ok in my book.
People who let the insurgents into their home, are signing their own death warrant. That is the well known result of being a collaborator.
Somehow 100,000 dead a year to maintain sufficient fear to keep Saddam in power doesn't bother you. What seems to bother you is that in killing 100,000 Islamic radicals, the real problem is the fact that maybe 1000 bystanders die and it might affect your karma.
The question is, though, is there *nothing* that is not justified by a war-zone? Have you people ultimately no common humanity in you? We are talking about MY FRIGGIN GOVERNMENT COMMITING THE MOST HORRIBLE IMAGINABLE ACTS, No, we aren't. You are. Killing is permitted in a war zone. What they are talking about is getting better information and doing the killing up close and personal rather than with a 500 lb bomb.
We went there to bring democracy, and that, my friends, is NOT democracy.
It's the defence of democracy, not democracy itself. There's no place in a democracy for those who would shoot people going to the ballot box.
But we need to retain our humanity, our decency, our respect for the Laws of God and Man, or else we will regret it.
And if we do not stop the Saddams of the world, what use is your definition of 'humanity and decency'? For we will surely regret it if the Saddams get the upper hand. Your definitions of 'humanity and decency' will disappear forever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.