In the eyes of clueless libtards of course we are brutish swine…

Perusing the New York Times and a few other sources in the MSM sphere (can’t take to much of it personally before I feel the urge to hurl) I didn’t see much regarding the following: The Sunni Insurgency Has Become a “Disaster”: An Estranged Former Ally Lashes Out, Accusing Al-Qaida of Torture and Murder in Diyala

The first paragraph: In a rather stunning development, the Iraqi Islamic militant faction known as Asaeb al-Iraq al-Jihadiya (a.k.a. “the Iraqi Jihad Union”) has issued a new statement dated October 5 suddenly accusing Al-Qaida’s “Islamic State of Iraq” of deliberately killing its fighters in Diyala province and mutilating their bodies: “To make things worse, they dug up their bodies from the graves, further mutilated them, beheaded them, and showed them off from their vehicles while driving through the towns. [The ISI] even killed our men’s wives and children.”

(hat tip to CouterTerrorism Blog)

:))))) Sleep deprivation :)))))) Stress positions

I mean i never read Solzhenitsyn, but it’s like to say “so you punched a guy in a stomach and that makes you Charlie Manson because he had also done that”

I happen to be a russian and believe me NKVD is infamous not because of sleep deprivations. But because they were an executive arm of communist dictatorship. They were whacking people like insects. I personally saw a document concerning blood levels in their basements (don’t remember the exact content). It was a slaughterhouse. They were as barbaric as Al Quaeda.

Read here

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NKVD#Repressions_and_executions

stress positions…what a joke…

Maybe you’re right. Maybe when a person without a uniform is caught with a machine gun or a bomb and actively trying to kill American soldiers, maybe those non-uniformed people should be sat down, talked to, asked questions without any physical contact or temperature, light, etc modification, and then taken outside and shot.

No uniform in war = no rights in war

Don’t wanna be the nation that executes terrorists? Ok, I’m sure Afghanistan would be more than happy to take custody of Al Queda. To those who want Gitmo closed, I suggest you advocate this policy so that it can be closed. Since no countries want these guys, I’m sure Afghanistan can be convinced to take back the Al Queda/Taliban that were caught in Afghanistan.

No?

Why not?

Because if they go to Afghanistan, or whatever their home nation then they’re likely to be REALLY tortured and then killed? Ok, then that leaves two options: kill em ourselves or keep Gitmo open.

Fact of the matter is that no one “likes” interrogating people by putting them under increased levels of duress, but it can either be done that way, or they can be shot. No other country is going to take them and then NOT shoot them or NOT torture them far far worse than what levels of duress have been authorized by the US. Anyone think that a Djibouti prison has better temperature control than a CIA interrogation room? Yeah, nothin but three squares, a/c, clean water, warm clothes, etc over in Djibouti.

Btw, I’m one of those who think Gitmo should be shut down. Let the CIA interrogate people where they’re caught, then hand them over to the locals. Caught in Afghanistan-let the Afghans deal with them. Caught in Iraq-let the Iraqis who have lost tens or even hundreds of thousands to Al Queda bombs deal with them. Caught in Saudi…well, gosh, for some reason Saudi prisons aren’t full of Al Queda despite the fact that Saudi has captured more AQ than almost any other country. Hmmm, what happens to em? Oh, and who’s captured the most AQ? Pakistan. Lots of AQ in their prisons, right? Nope. The Pakistani ISI doesn’t have an ACLU whining about the rights of non-uniformed combatants.

Capture em, talk to em, and then either shoot em on the spot or hand them over to the locals who will likely whip out AQ’s own terrorist manual, teach the techniques to the AQ guy, then-if still alive-execute him.

Of course, the less brutal, more civilized way of dealing with captured terrorists would be to incarcerate them (effectively protecting them from the govt where they were captured and/or their home nation)…as is done in Gitmo, but terrorist rights advocates don’t like that, so they complain. Why not? It keeps that Soros and leftist PAC money coming in (to say nothing of Muslim charity support).

My friend tells me there’s a scene I missed where an officer addresses his men, asks everyone who lost a friend that day to raise their hand, then had a prisoner “given” to each man.

A conservative Democrat client of mine who served in Europe during WWII, one day as we were talking about today’s conflict and my interest in serving, told me about how one young kid in their unit who was on his last breath, after a firefight, was crying about how he was going to die, and his greatest sorrow was that he didn’t even get to kill one Nazi. The commanding officer ordered one of the German prisoners to be brought before the dying soldier, put a gun in the kid’s hand, and allowed him to execute the prisoner.

My client says he’s still haunted by that to this day. But no one said anything or questioned it, at the time. That’s just the way it was. They were in war.

The Japanese were signatories to the Geneva Convention and yet that didn’t stop them, or the Nazis from torturing prisoners and civilians, or mass executions.

This idea that if we don’t waterboard the monsters who would use their infant children to smuggle bomb making material on airliners the terrorists will be nicer to us is absurd.

There are no rules of war or society these terrorist monsters recognize.

I saw “The Kingdom” recently too. The message is: it’s either us or them and we had better win or we are dead.

He started reciting the stories of US atrocities like Haditha (where he didn’t know that even the last Marine on trial is likely to have his murder charges dropped), the Green Berets in Afghanistan who were investigated for killing an AQ leader during a snatch and grab (investigated THREE times, and each time found no wrong-doing), Abu Ghraib of course (had no knowledge of the reading programs etc going on there now), and best of all…he started referring to the stories told by GIs who’d “been there” and done the atrocities; ie The Phony Soldiers who were never there at all…the anti-war activists who claimed to be soldiers and never were, but made the claim of service to get more attention for their deliberate propaganda. I’m not saying bad things haven’t happened, but it’s a damn far cry from Bataan or Okinawa or Guadalcanal or Tarawa or Iwo or a million other islands.

“War is hell” isn’t a metaphor

It’s reality, and what people choose to ignore is that Plato was right, “Only the dead have seen the end of war”

You guys are a pitiful lot.