| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"ArKLyte_" |
| Date: |
07 May 2004 04:25:46 AM |
| Object: |
Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/davidlimbaugh/dl20040507.shtml
Keeping The Enemy In Perspective
5/07/04
David Limbaugh
Pictures, stories and commentaries about American soldiers abusing
Iraqi prisoners are dominating the news. They're everywhere. I agree
this regrettable incident must be addressed, but let's not lose our
heads over it.
I understand the outrage. We must never condone this kind of behavior
by our soldiers, even against human beings who have no respect for
human life, know no bounds of decency and would gladly brutalize our
soldiers in ways that would make our soldiers' mistreatment of them
look like child's play. We must hold ourselves to a higher standard.
Perhaps we should apologize to the civilized world and to the Iraqi
people, but I'm not so anxious to apologize to the "victims"
themselves, who would probably have enjoyed eating our intestines for
lunch well before the incident.
But let's not fool ourselves into believing that our genuine efforts
to make amends will mollify the Arab street or foreign nations
predisposed to think the worst of us. Surely we don’t think for a
second that the perversely biased Arab media outlet Aljazeera, for
example, will be impressed by our contrition.
Accountability means that we accept responsibility, mete out swift and
sure justice to the perpetrators and take corrective measures to
prevent this kind of thing from occurring again. It does not mean that
we beat ourselves up to the point of questioning the righteousness or
justice of our cause.
This incident is the exception involving a very small fraction of
soldiers. They do not represent the average soldier, who is honorable
and puts his life on the line every day to protect American security
and freedom and establish Iraqi self-rule. Let's not paint our entire
armed forces, the Defense Department, the Bush Administration and the
United States itself with a wide brush of condemnation.
Our brass never condones this type of behavior. We have conducted this
war with serious restraint and utmost humanity. This episode is the
last thing the Bush Administration wanted to happen because it
undermines troop and civilian morale.
Let's have some perspective here. While our handful of abusive troops
represent the exception, the same is not true of our enemy, whose true
nature we dare not forget. The ordinary enemy combatant is an
unrepentant murderer.
The enemy and his sympathizers rejoiced as they mutilated our people
and dragged them through the streets. Sex-related humiliation is one
thing, but how about the deliberate killing of innocent women and
children as a theological obsession?
Where's the outrage for the actions against us? Where are the
condemnations? Where are the apologies?
And speaking of the enemy, some choose to believe that the hostilities
in Iraq are wholly unrelated to the War on Terror. But the identity
and character of the enemy we are fighting there conclusively proves
otherwise. To see that the action in Iraq is part of the war on terror
we need only observe the cause uniting the enemy.
The enemy -- terrorists, thugs and anarchists, local and international
-- is doing everything it can to obstruct self-rule for the Iraqis. We
are not at war with the Iraqi people or the Iraqi soldiers helping us
to defend the Iraqi people. The ongoing fighting in Iraq isn't between
the United States and Iraq, but the United States and Iraq against the
terrorists.
Sadly some of the president's critics and political opponents are
beginning to exploit this, energetically wringing their hands and
resurrecting talk of the ugly American -- though they are Americans
themselves. Liberal columnists are using this isolated case to
validate their preformed opinion that our entire war effort has been
mismanaged and a failure.
Well, I'm not willing to concede that everything has gone bad for us
in Iraq or that we are guilty of poor planning because we didn't
accurately predict every terrorist strike against our troops. Do the
critics really believe it's possible to fight a casualty-free war,
especially against an enemy that has less respect for the rules of war
than it does for life itself?
I just don't understand the logic behind allegations that we are
bungling the war because we sustain casualties or because a few of our
soldiers get out of line. How easy it is for the armchair quarterbacks
to condemn our whole military operation every time we experience
setbacks while fighting an unpredictable urban war against an
uncivilized, brutal, inhumane and evil enemy.
This is war. Let's quit pretending it's some kind of pristine chess
match.
--
"War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."
- General William Tecumseh Sherman
.
|
|
| User: "Sergio SERVADIO" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 03:06:43 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 May 2004, ArKLyte_ wrote:
Keeping The Enemy In Perspective
David Limbaugh
I understand the outrage. We must never condone this kind of behavior
by our soldiers,
This is war. Let's quit pretending it's some kind of pristine chess
match.
"War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."
- General William Tecumseh Sherman
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
Meanwhile, let the Irakis take to task, judge and punish all those
responsible of such sub-human behaviour. Which other law should rule that
country?
This would be the only way to play fair, if a warrior can ever do so,
and not be plainly cruel.
Sergio
Pisa
.
|
|
|
| User: "EB" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 08:18:44 AM |
|
|
"Sergio SERVADIO" <servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.3.96.1040507095746.1390F-100000@servadio.df.unipi.it...
On Fri, 7 May 2004, ArKLyte_ wrote:
Keeping The Enemy In Perspective
David Limbaugh
I understand the outrage. We must never condone this kind of behavior
by our soldiers,
This is war. Let's quit pretending it's some kind of pristine chess
match.
"War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."
- General William Tecumseh Sherman
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
"You" being the poster, or David Limbaugh?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "ArKLyte_" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 05:05:03 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 May 2004 10:06:43 +0200, Sergio SERVADIO <servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote:
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
So, Saddam's agreement to a ceasefire in 1991 and then
violating it every day for over 10 years is my fault?
LOL!
Meanwhile, let the Irakis take to task, judge and punish all those
responsible of such sub-human behaviour.
Like Saddam did?
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Huh?
--
"War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it."
- General William Tecumseh Sherman
.
|
|
|
| User: "Harry" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 12:14:17 PM |
|
|
ArKLyte_ <ArkLyte_@Now.Net> wrote in message news:<usnm901e2lms71ie2l2oporil9lrv3t6i0@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 7 May 2004 10:06:43 +0200, Sergio SERVADIO <servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote:
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
So, Saddam's agreement to a ceasefire in 1991 and then
violating it every day for over 10 years is my fault?
Well, it WAS your country which imposed the ceasefire on Iraq after
you were kind enough to return Kuwaiti oil to the Kuwaiti royal family
and the oil companies they deal with. And if you felt something legal
was being violated, you should have obtained UN Security Council
approval to fix it. This also your folks failed to do, probably
because they couldn't.
Unless you felt your nation was under imminent threat, which your
friends have already announced wasn't the case. Which is too bad.
It's the only legal defense against the charge of committing a war
crime, which is what your folks are going to stand trial for.
LOL!
Meanwhile, let the Irakis take to task, judge and punish all those
responsible of such sub-human behaviour.
Like Saddam did?
Well, the prisoners were treated pretty much the way the Saddam regime
treated them, so......
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Huh?
I believe the exact same thing would happen as if they had stuck
around for a year, five years or ten years. A civil war, much
messiness, and an Islamic Republic hostile to the oil interests of the
US.
Which is to say, your folks killed 100,000 Iraqies and a thousand or
more Americans for the purpose of committing a war crime, in an
unwinnable conflict, for no reason at all.
Another brilliant policy decision from the Cheney-Lay administration.
.
|
|
|
| User: "EB" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 01:15:52 PM |
|
|
"Harry" <realpoetik@scn.org> wrote in message
news:ee68a82.0405070914.50d0c892@posting.google.com...
ArKLyte_ <ArkLyte_@Now.Net> wrote in message
news:<usnm901e2lms71ie2l2oporil9lrv3t6i0@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 7 May 2004 10:06:43 +0200, Sergio SERVADIO
<servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote:
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
So, Saddam's agreement to a ceasefire in 1991 and then
violating it every day for over 10 years is my fault?
Well, it WAS your country which imposed the ceasefire on Iraq after
you were kind enough to return Kuwaiti oil to the Kuwaiti royal family
and the oil companies they deal with. And if you felt something legal
was being violated, you should have obtained UN Security Council
approval to fix it. This also your folks failed to do, probably
because they couldn't.
So we can blame citizens of a country for what the country did? Then what's
happening to Iraqi prisoners is justified, according to your logic.
Unless you felt your nation was under imminent threat,
Define "imminent".
which your
friends have already announced wasn't the case.
Like whom?
Which is too bad.
It's the only legal defense against the charge of committing a war
crime, which is what your folks are going to stand trial for.
Sure we are. Not in this reality, bozo.
LOL!
Meanwhile, let the Irakis take to task, judge and punish all those
responsible of such sub-human behaviour.
Like Saddam did?
Well, the prisoners were treated pretty much the way the Saddam regime
treated them, so......
You are sadly mistaken and dilusional.
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Huh?
I believe the exact same thing would happen as if they had stuck
around for a year, five years or ten years. A civil war, much
messiness, and an Islamic Republic hostile to the oil interests of the
US.
Which is to say, your folks killed 100,000 Iraqies and a thousand or
more Americans for the purpose of committing a war crime, in an
unwinnable conflict, for no reason at all.
Tragically stupid.
Another brilliant policy decision from the Cheney-Lay administration.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "MAC USN Retired" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 06:25:04 PM |
|
|
On 7 May 2004 10:14:17 -0700, (Harry) wrote:
ArKLyte_ <ArkLyte_@Now.Net> wrote in message news:<usnm901e2lms71ie2l2oporil9lrv3t6i0@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 7 May 2004 10:06:43 +0200, Sergio SERVADIO <servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote:
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
So, Saddam's agreement to a ceasefire in 1991 and then
violating it every day for over 10 years is my fault?
Well, it WAS your country which imposed the ceasefire on Iraq after
you were kind enough to return Kuwaiti oil to the Kuwaiti royal family
and the oil companies they deal with. And if you felt something legal
was being violated, you should have obtained UN Security Council
approval to fix it. This also your folks failed to do, probably
because they couldn't.
If you actually read all those stupid UN resolutions, they gave us the
power to invade. All that asshat Saddam had to do was admit he had
gotten rid of the WMD. Then his sons would still alive and raping
girls, Saddam would be enjoying his palaces etc. But NO, he wanted to
look like the big shot that could threaten the US with WMD cause he
thought that would keep us from invading. If I had been him I would
have gladdly let the inspectors go unfettered where ever they wanted.
I wouldn't even try to get WMD and just kick back and rule my country.
Unless you felt your nation was under imminent threat, which your
friends have already announced wasn't the case. Which is too bad.
It's the only legal defense against the charge of committing a war
crime, which is what your folks are going to stand trial for.
LOL!
Meanwhile, let the Irakis take to task, judge and punish all those
responsible of such sub-human behaviour.
Like Saddam did?
Well, the prisoners were treated pretty much the way the Saddam regime
treated them, so......
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Huh?
I believe the exact same thing would happen as if they had stuck
around for a year, five years or ten years. A civil war, much
messiness, and an Islamic Republic hostile to the oil interests of the
US.
Which is to say, your folks killed 100,000 Iraqies and a thousand or
more Americans for the purpose of committing a war crime, in an
unwinnable conflict, for no reason at all.
Another brilliant policy decision from the Cheney-Lay administration.
--
Leftists hate Bush with a consuming passion. But the truth is that they hate the United States of America more. They find the war in Iraq loathsome not because they are pacifists, but because the idea that America is a liberator nation sickens and enrages them.
The anti-war Left wants Americans out of Iraq. Not because it fears for their safety, but because it hungers to see an American defeat - no, more than a defeat, a humiliation.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bloom,Leopold" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
09 May 2004 01:44:05 PM |
|
|
MAC USN Retired <retirednonavyspam92@alltel.net> wrote in message news:<3i6o90hk0a801ithi4dp277bq26vo2p88d@4ax.com>...
On 7 May 2004 10:14:17 -0700, (Harry) wrote:
ArKLyte_ <ArkLyte_@Now.Net> wrote in message news:<usnm901e2lms71ie2l2oporil9lrv3t6i0@4ax.com>...
On Fri, 7 May 2004 10:06:43 +0200, Sergio SERVADIO <servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote:
Nice militarist talk yours is, about a war you seeked and started.
So, Saddam's agreement to a ceasefire in 1991 and then
violating it every day for over 10 years is my fault?
Well, it WAS your country which imposed the ceasefire on Iraq after
you were kind enough to return Kuwaiti oil to the Kuwaiti royal family
and the oil companies they deal with. And if you felt something legal
was being violated, you should have obtained UN Security Council
approval to fix it. This also your folks failed to do, probably
because they couldn't.
If you actually read all those stupid UN resolutions, they gave us the
power to invade. All that asshat Saddam had to do was admit he had
gotten rid of the WMD. Then his sons would still alive and raping
girls, Saddam would be enjoying his palaces etc. But NO, he wanted to
look like the big shot that could threaten the US with WMD cause he
thought that would keep us from invading. If I had been him I would
have gladdly let the inspectors go unfettered where ever they wanted.
I wouldn't even try to get WMD and just kick back and rule my country.
I notice that a lot of people seem to agree with you including
President Cheney, VP Kenny-Boy Lay, Cheerleader-in-Chief Georgie-Boy
Bush Junior, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Limpballs, O'Lielly, Hannity,
Coulter et al. But I also notice that all of the folks that agree
with you are going to be up for war crimes trials as soon as we can
ship them off to the Hague.
No one in the UN or on the Security Council would agree to your
premis. Quite the contrary, as far as the UN is concerned, they
refused the request. In fact, it was never even presented to the
Security Council as a whole, since it not only would have been vetoed,
but wouldn't have even obtained a majority.
And the US is NOT going to get UN assistance in pulling your chestnuts
out of your totally self-inflicted fire on the basis previously
offered, which was "Our way or the highway".
You are talking about the biggest foreign policy failure/blunder since
Vietnam here.
Unless you felt your nation was under imminent threat, which your
friends have already announced wasn't the case. Which is too bad.
It's the only legal defense against the charge of committing a war
crime, which is what your folks are going to stand trial for.
LOL!
Meanwhile, let the Irakis take to task, judge and punish all those
responsible of such sub-human behaviour.
Like Saddam did?
Well, the prisoners were treated pretty much the way the Saddam regime
treated them, so......
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Huh?
I believe the exact same thing would happen as if they had stuck
around for a year, five years or ten years. A civil war, much
messiness, and an Islamic Republic hostile to the oil interests of the
US.
Which is to say, your folks killed 100,000 Iraqies and a thousand or
more Americans for the purpose of committing a war crime, in an
unwinnable conflict, for no reason at all.
Another brilliant policy decision from the Cheney-Lay administration.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Sergio SERVADIO" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 03:26:45 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 May 2004, ArKLyte_ wrote:
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Turn them in.
They'll quickly decide.
Sergio
Pisa
.
|
|
|
| User: "EB" |
|
| Title: Re: Keeping The Enemy In Perspective - David Limbaugh |
07 May 2004 08:19:26 AM |
|
|
"Sergio SERVADIO" <servadio@mail.df.unipi.it> wrote in message
news:Pine.LNX.3.96.1040507102554.1390H-100000@servadio.df.unipi.it...
On Fri, 7 May 2004, ArKLyte_ wrote:
Which other law should rule that country?
That is for the Iraqis to decide, not me. What do you think
would happen if the coalition left Iraq tonight?
Turn them in.
"Turn them in" to whom?
They'll quickly decide.
Sergio
Pisa
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
