by
Ralph Peters [author, novelist] 7/11/06
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 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.....To Read More.....
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.....To Read More.....
So
we can kill Awlaki with a drone -- but if we’d caught him, we’d
have to give him a civilian trial?I agree with the Obama
administration’s decision to kill the American-born al Qaeda
recruiter Anwar al-Awlaki. What I can’t fathom is why the
administration agrees with me. Here’s Defense Secretary Leon
Panetta responding to complaints from the ACLU over the
“assassination” of a US citizen without due process: “This
individual was clearly a terrorist. And yes, he was a citizen, but if
you’re a terrorist, you’re a terrorist. And that means that we
have the ability to go after those who would threaten to attack the
United States and kill Americans.”.....
- Muslims Declare War on France: 100 DEAD, hostages gunned down one by one at concert hall
- President Obama stands firmly with jihadists as death toll climbs in Paris
- Muslims shoot Jewish father and son dead in Israeli terror attack
- Muslim Student Association REJECTS Moment of Recognition Resolution for 9/11, it’s “Islamophobic
No comments:
Post a Comment