HOW TO SOLVE OUR PRISONER PROBLEM

[Tigermike 3,052]

KILL, DON'T CAPTURE

HOW TO SOLVE OUR PRISONER PROBLEM

Ralph Peters

Osama: Far better dead than on trial. 

July 10, 2006 -- THE British military defines experience as the ability to recognize a mistake the second time you make it. By that standard, we should be very experienced in dealing with captured terrorists, since we've made the same mistake again and again.

Violent Islamist extremists must be killed on the battlefield. Only in the rarest cases should they be taken prisoner. Few have serious intelligence value. And, once captured, there's no way to dispose of them.

Killing terrorists during a conflict isn't barbaric or immoral - or even illegal. We've imposed rules upon ourselves that have no historical or judicial precedent. We haven't been stymied by others, but by ourselves.

The oft-cited, seldom-read Geneva and Hague Conventions define legal combatants as those who visibly identify themselves by wearing uniforms or distinguishing insignia (the latter provision covers honorable partisans - but no badges or armbands, no protection). Those who wear civilian clothes to ambush soldiers or collect intelligence are assassins and spies - beyond the pale of law.

Traditionally, those who masquerade as civilians in order to kill legal combatants have been executed promptly, without trial. Severity, not sloppy leftist pandering, kept warfare within some decent bounds at least part of the time. But we have reached a point at which the rules apply only to us, while our enemies are permitted unrestricted freedom.

The present situation encourages our enemies to behave wantonly, while crippling our attempts to deal with terror.

Consider today's norm: A terrorist in civilian clothes can explode an IED, killing and maiming American troops or innocent civilians, then demand humane treatment if captured - and the media will step in as his champion. A disguised insurgent can shoot his rockets, throw his grenades, empty his magazines, kill and wound our troops, then, out of ammo, raise his hands and demand three hots and a cot while he invents tales of abuse.

Conferring unprecedented legal status upon these murderous transnational outlaws is unnecessary, unwise and ultimately suicidal. It exalts monsters. And it provides the anti-American pack with living vermin to anoint as victims, if not heroes.

Isn't it time we gave our critics what they're asking for? Let's solve the "unjust" imprisonment problem, once and for all. No more Guantanamos! Every terrorist mission should be a suicide mission. With our help.

We need to clarify the rules of conflict. But integrity and courage have fled Washington. Nobody will state bluntly that we're in a fight for our lives, that war is hell, and that we must do what it takes to win.

Our enemies will remind us of what's necessary, though. When we've been punished horribly enough, we'll come to our senses and do what must be done.

This isn't an argument for a murderous rampage, but its opposite. We must kill our enemies with discrimination. But we do need to kill them. A corpse is a corpse: The media's rage dissipates with the stench. But an imprisoned terrorist is a strategic liability.

Nor should we ever mistreat captured soldiers or insurgents who adhere to standing conventions. On the contrary, we should enforce policies that encourage our enemies to identify themselves according to the laws of war. Ambiguity works to their advantage, never to ours.

Our policy toward terrorists and insurgents in civilian clothing should be straightforward and public: Surrender before firing a shot or taking hostile action toward our troops, and we'll regard you as a legal prisoner. But once you've pulled a trigger, thrown a grenade or detonated a bomb, you will be killed. On the battlefield and on the spot.

Isn't that common sense? It also happens to conform to the traditional conduct of war between civilized nations. Ignorant of history, we've talked ourselves into folly.

And by the way: How have the terrorists treated the uniformed American soldiers they've captured? According to the Geneva Convention?

Sadly, even our military has been infected by political correctness. Some of my former peers will wring their hands and babble about "winning hearts and minds." But we'll never win the hearts and minds of terrorists. And if we hope to win the minds, if not the hearts, of foreign populations, we must be willing to kill the violent, lawless fraction of a fraction of a percent of the population determined to terrorize the rest.

Ravaged societies crave and need strict order. Soft policies may appear to work in the short term, but they fail overwhelmingly in the longer term. Wherever we've tried sweetness and light in Iraq, it has only worked as long as our troops were present - after which the terrorists returned and slaughtered the beneficiaries of our good intentions. If you wish to defend the many, you must be willing to kill the few.

For now, we're stuck with a situation in which the hardcore terrorists in Guantanamo are "innocent victims" even to our fair-weather allies. In Iraq, our troops capture bomb-makers only to learn they've been dumped back on the block.

It is not humane to spare fanatical murderers. It is not humane to play into our enemy's hands. And it is not humane to endanger our troops out of political correctness.

Instead of worrying over trumped-up atrocities in Iraq (the media give credence to any claim made by terrorists), we should stop apologizing and take a stand. That means firm rules for the battlefield, not Gumby-speak intended to please critics who'll never be satisfied by anything America does.

The ultimate act of humanity in the War on Terror is to win. To do so, we must kill our enemies wherever we encounter them. He who commits an act of terror forfeits every right he once possessed.

Ralph Peters' new book, "Never Quit the Fight," hits stores today.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolu...alph_peters.htm

[GoAU 1,600]

Can I get an "amen"??

[AUloggerhead 2,252]

   

Can I get an "amen"??

246349[/snapback]

Amen ... and Testify, Ralph Peters!

... Killing terrorists during a conflict isn't barbaric or immoral - or even illegal. We've imposed rules upon ourselves that have no historical or judicial precedent. We haven't been stymied by others, but by ourselves.

The oft-cited, seldom-read Geneva and Hague Conventions define legal combatants as those who visibly identify themselves by wearing uniforms or distinguishing insignia (the latter provision covers honorable partisans - but no badges or armbands, no protection). Those who wear civilian clothes to ambush soldiers or collect intelligence are assassins and spies - beyond the pale of law.

Traditionally, those who masquerade as civilians in order to kill legal combatants have been executed promptly, without trial.  Severity, not sloppy leftist pandering, kept warfare within some decent bounds at least part of the time. But we have reached a point at which the rules apply only to us, while our enemies are permitted unrestricted freedom.

The present situation encourages our enemies to behave wantonly, while crippling our attempts to deal with terror.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Let's not lose this thing!

This is a response to an article published by an Iranian-American journalist who wrote a five page left-slanted article about his two week experience with U.S. military as an imbed.

http://www.truthdig.com/dig/item/20060627_...ts_minds/#13294

Comment #13294 by John  on  7/08  at  1:08 pm

Well, you certainly seem well rounded in your opinions, but you have left out the part about having boots on the ground, in uniform, combatant status experience.  Oh, that’s right, you don’t have that.  News flash for you:  It’s a whole different world. 

As a Special Forces operator with two tours in Iraq and countless operations and raids under my belt, let me give you an on the ground view of the world.  Close Quarters Battle (CQB) is the technique used during raids.  CQB is not a nice business.  CQB has a historically high casualty rate for the assault force.  CQB is full of unknowns.  Is there a tripwire on the door we are about to enter?  Did this guy pick tonight to have a regional insurgent meeting with about 20 of his heavily armed friends?  How many of his insurgent friends that we don’t know about live in the neighborhood?  Is this guy a paranoid freak who sleeps in a suicide vest to prevent himself from being taken alive? 

You want to see what happens when you are nice and knock on the door and invite them back to the base for milk and cookies and a little chat?  Watch COPS.  Those poor b*****ds have to be nice, and the nasty attitudes and outright hostility they have to deal with are ridiculous.  As I said earlier, CQB is not a nice business.  From start to finish, your whole purpose in life is to project mayhem and chaos, in addition to lethal ability (not lethal intent, which would be intending to kill.  Lethal ability, which means the ability to kill should you have to.)

You want to know why there are so many civilian casualties?  It is because until the bad guys grab a gun, they are civilians.  It’s not like they put on a uniform, go to basic training, and get listed as part of a foreign army.  They dig up their AK and RPG launchers in the back yard, and they go ambush a convoy.  Or they drop an IED by the side of the road on their way to the market.  Or they drive a VBIED into a checkpoint.  Welcome to the world of paranoia and overreaction, but it keeps your ass alive. 

Someone once asked me if I would fight Mike Tyson.  I said sure, as long as he gets to play the part of the U.S. and I get to play the part of the insurgents.  See, Mike would have to play by the rules of boxing.  I’d bring a baseball bat, a chainsaw, and a whole array of instruments dedicated to the defeat of the enemy.  I wouldn’t have to play by any rules.  Anyone want to make a bet on who would win? 

The moral high road is all fine and dandy when you are sitting safe at home in your little comfort zone.  Once you get out in the real world, you learn the hardest lesson of all real fast:  Nice guys finish last.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

The moral high road is all fine and dandy when you are sitting safe at home in your little comfort zone.  Once you get out in the real world, you learn the hardest lesson of all real fast:  Nice guys finish last.

we have reached a point at which the rules apply only to us, while our enemies are permitted unrestricted freedom.

To win the fight, one has to be willing to fight a little dirtier than his opponent. The biggest obstacle we have to winning this war is convincing some of our own people that we can not go into battle with our hands tied behind our backs. We have to be unafraid to get a little blood on our hands. Playing pattycake with these savages will not work. We have to go in fearless with guns blazing and wipe them out. We also need to get this war out of the courtroom. Let the military handle the fight.

[GoAU 1,600]

The moral high road is all fine and dandy when you are sitting safe at home in your little comfort zone.  Once you get out in the real world, you learn the hardest lesson of all real fast:  Nice guys finish last.

we have reached a point at which the rules apply only to us, while our enemies are permitted unrestricted freedom.

To win the fight, one has to be willing to fight a little dirtier than his opponent. The biggest obstacle we have to winning this war is convincing some of our own people that we can not go into battle with our hands tied behind our backs. We have to be unafraid to get a little blood on our hands. Playing pattycake with these savages will not work. We have to go in fearless with guns blazing and wipe them out. We also need to get this war out of the courtroom. Let the military handle the fight.

246500[/snapback]

ANother "Amen" for you. Violence is all these militants understand, and they need to be recieving it in "Super-sized" quantities. Any of this "playing nice" BS is just perceived as weakness in their eyes.