[Tallguy]

It would go better over there if everyone on the ground were to make sure they always told the truth about the matter (whatever they’re involved with). It tends to keep everyone on the straight and narrow that way (from the Pentagon on down) Things work out better that way.

I'm reminded of the Jack Nicholson line in "A Few Good Men", "You can't handle the Truth." (I don't mean you, personally). The fact is that things are done in the heat of combat that men can not talk about for years. WW2 vets will admit to eachother that they did this or that were outside the accepted rules of warfare.

I know a Korean War vet that said that it was SOP NOT to take prisoners until the position was secured. That means there were no fine distinctions made about whether an opposing soldier was "resisting" or not. I've seen our own generals blanche at roundtable discussions when a veteran junior officer mentions this type of thing.

[Star Traveler]

You said — “ I’m reminded of the Jack Nicholson line in “A Few Good Men”, “You can’t handle the Truth.” (I don’t mean you, personally). The fact is that things are done in the heat of combat that men can not talk about for years. WW2 vets will admit to eachother that they did this or that were outside the accepted rules of warfare.”

Yes, I’m sure this is so. And in today’s world of instant media and the digital cameras and the video cams proliferating — it’s getting harder and harder to just “keep it quiet” and put it aside. It ends up coming back to “bite you in the butt”.

The fact of the matter is that if they are going to do that anyway, “but we just won’t talk about it” — then *be done with it* and make it an *open policy* and just “go for it”.

This thing of “we’re telling you this, but it was actually that” is what is getting everyone into trouble. If they’re going to do “that” — then just make it policy and *do it*....

.

And then — “I know a Korean War vet that said that it was SOP NOT to take prisoners until the position was secured. That means there were no fine distinctions made about whether an opposing soldier was “resisting” or not. I’ve seen our own generals blanche at roundtable discussions when a veteran junior officer mentions this type of thing.”

Yep, I can understand that. And this shouldn’t be covered up. It should be *policy* if they’re going to do that. Be done with it and “make it so”....