Acting (or fighting) the way "THEY' act...

dd74 · 07-31-2003, 09:35 AM

An ex-CIA employee, whose name I forget, said on "Nightline" last night that the U.S. Forces have changed military tactics in their hunt for Saddam.

It seems our troops have taken a page from Saddam's own handbook, increasing the level of intensity brought to bare on Saddam's confidants.

Examples now include kidnapping, where the troops will take a member of one's family and hold that member hostage until the rest of the family comes out of hiding, and hence give themselves up. This is an old Saddam tactic that is supposedly very effective.

IMO it's about time the U.S. do this. If it works, hopefully the war will end sooner. (Yes, the war is not yet over...)

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

This is a very slippery path. Then, when you have a family member, why not torturing them a little bit too ? And let Saddam or whoever know it, by broadcasting it on the TV ? We are not far from that, having already seen the dead Hussein brothers. Or why not take an El Quaeda member and decapitate him in front of the crowd...to make an example. then pretty soon, the US governement would look no better than the Taliban, and I would not be surprised to see the Statue of Liberty getting demolished.
Joke apart, I don`t think catching Saddam will end the war anyways. The iraqui don`t like US troops in their land, and Saddam has nothing to do with it, IMO.

Aurel

350HP930 · 07-31-2003, 02:18 PM

The only changes I see is that our troops are now doing the dirty work themselves where previously our troops used to use third partys for such things as kidnapping and torture since our military code forbids such behavior.

Do a little research on Operation Phoenix or Operation Condor to learn of many previous cases of disappearances, kidnappings, torture and intimidation that were coordinated and supported by the US, but where all the dirty work was done by local authorities.

Once the US has all of Saddams old henchmen on their payroll I'm sure the military will go back to the old method of keeping their hands clean.

Its amazing how many americans that have justified the war on iraq based on such things as saddam goons kidnapping and torturing people and their family members and attacking other nations are willing to flip and think its cool when its our own nation doing the dirty work.

How is it that we are more civilized than Saddam was again?

dd74 · 07-31-2003, 02:41 PM

I think that's the exact point. No one's using the C-word (civilized). But instead, allowing for the fact that being civilized about this in an uncivilized part of the world, is a losing effort.

Hence, when in Rome, do as the Romans.

350HP930 · 07-31-2003, 02:52 PM

So if we are creating one opressive regime to replace another, why is it that we are there again?

Is it just to piss off the arab world more than it already is?

How is it that you think this will make the situation in the middle east or global terrorism any better?

If we look at Israel as an example it clearly only makes things worse.

dd74 · 07-31-2003, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 350HP930
So if we are creating one opressive regime to replace another, why is it that we are there again?

Is it just to piss off the arab world more than it already is?

How is it that you think this will make the situation in the middle east or global terrorism any better?

If we look at Israel as an example it clearly only makes things worse.

Well, first of all, I look at it from a more expedient point of view.

The U.S. population is concerned with our occupacy of Iraq, and the fact that our troops are being killed daily - that might be the reason for the stepping up in aggression. If at least, the illusion is given that we're kicking their butts even as we're being attacked seven days a week.

Secondly, we're closing in on Saddam. It's like a sprint to the finish. The end is in sight, so the aggression automatically steps up.

OR...

Because we're near more of an "inner circle," the troops have to be more aggressive because the "inner circle" is more aggressive and desperate.

Last: it's an election year in 2004. Bush doesn't want this hanging over his chances at reelection.

What you ask entails a timeline that is too long term for the political minds in GW's cabinet. They obviously haven't thought things out that far...

350HP930 · 07-31-2003, 03:11 PM

Good answers.

tabs · 07-31-2003, 03:35 PM

Aurel and HP350 U guys obviously didn't read "Hitler was Right" I was basically saying the USA in Reality can be as barbaric as any other country. War strips the humanity from men, and what war is 'Civil" anyway? Sherman said, "War is Hell."

350HP930 · 07-31-2003, 03:45 PM

Thats what I was thinking you were up to Tabs.

I would be the first to suggest that the US as a nation has no claim on morality though many americans would disagree with me on this fact.

dd74 · 07-31-2003, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 350HP930
Thats what I was thinking you were up to Tabs.

I would be the first to suggest that the US as a nation has no claim on morality though many americans would disagree with me on this fact.

Wow, that's quite a thought-provoking statement. "No claim" I might agree with, only because I can't think of anything "moral" at the moment.

What is "moral" anyway?

I imagine "morality" is more left up to the private sector.

Aurel · Aurel's Garage

For a muslim integrist, killing american infidels is moral.
For a christian neocon, massacring uncivilized muslims is moral.
For a french, bashing american foreign policy is moral.
For an ENRON executive, making millions with his employees pension is moral.
For Bush, lying about WMDs and yellow cake is moral, because the end justifies the means.
Morality, like religion, is something that everybody claims, but nobody really applies.

Aurel