Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Taliban represent the former government of Afghanistan and one side of a civil war, so branding them "terrorists" simply because we really (and properly) despise them will not do.
The Taliban represent the former government of Afghanistan and one side of a civil war, so branding them "terrorists" simply because we really (and properly) despise them will not do.
You Lefties are such a confused bunch. Were they wearing the Afghan military uniform when caught? No, they weren't. They aren't Nation State soldiers, they are terrorists (enemy combatants).
Is this the first time that terrorists captured by America since Sept. 11, 2001 have been called "Prisoners of War"?
Too my knowledge .. YES, it's the first time they are called POW's. Does everyone understand that the USA is not at War with Afghanistan? When Obama claims he is "ending the war", what exactly does he mean? He can call it anything he pleases and he can certainly say "it's over" - IF the other side does not agree (and they don't) ..... then what?
The O-Team calls them Prisoners of War because they actually have no concept of what this "war" on Terrorism is about - they declared that "War" over a good while back. That's exactly the reason I was so against the Obama surge into Afghanistan is 2009 - what is the point of sending men & women into a War that he didn't support OR understand? It certainly didn't shock me to see the horrific rise in deaths or to see most of our Commanders forced out.
This discussion serves to highlight the pitfalls of engaging in any military incursion without a clearly defined purpose and goal.
Using a military for anything other than fighting a war or a duely authorized peacekeeping presence is asking for all kinds of these little legal conundrums to come back and bite your hiney.
It might seem at first glance to be advantageous to not make a formal declaration of war because you are then not constrained by the normal rule of warfare, but look back as far as Korea and you'll easily see how that has actually served to hamper any highly trained fighting force from prosecuting a conflict in an effective fashion so as to avoid unnecessary casualties and other losses.
This is all very fine if your leadership has other imperatives than simply eradicating a cancer but it serves no military fairly to have them engage in any battle without the umbrella of a legal conflict.
This discussion serves to highlight the pitfalls of engaging in any military incursion without a clearly defined purpose and goal.
Using a military for anything other than fighting a war or a duely authorized peacekeeping presence is asking for all kinds of these little legal conundrums to come back and bite your hiney.
It might seem at first glance to be advantageous to not make a formal declaration of war because you are then not constrained by the normal rule of warfare, but look back as far as Korea and you'll easily see how that has actually served to hamper any highly trained fighting force from prosecuting a conflict in an effective fashion so as to avoid unnecessary casualties and other losses.
This is all very fine if your leadership has other imperatives than simply eradicating a cancer but it serves no military fairly to have them engage in any battle without the umbrella of a legal conflict.
Read the GC. You will understand. It has NOTHING to do with not declaring war, which we actually did, a war on terror. We COULDN'T declare war on any nation because, wait for it....The Enemy Combatants don't fight for a Nation State, they don't wear a Nation State's military uniform. It is ALL spelled out nicely in the GC.
What about all the Iraqi soldiers captured during the first couple of days of the invasion of iraq? they must be Prisoners of war, since they were soldiers defending their country.
I'm not talking about the people who waited for defeat and then started blowing IEDs on roads and ****, I'm talking about the troops who frontlined in the desert.
You Lefties are such a confused bunch. Were they wearing the Afghan military uniform when caught? No, they weren't. They aren't Nation State soldiers, they are terrorists (enemy combatants).
Just for reference clarity, what did we do with all of the "enemy combatants" in WWII?
And, what the hell was Dresden all about?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
