This guy wasn’t an innocent civilian, that’s one of the reasons it’s different. And as for the "dead is dead" part, yeah, that’s why we still chop off heads and use electric chairs, too. Come on man, there’s a huge difference between someone sawing your head off and someone shooting you. My point, though, is that there’s no comparing the killing of innocent civilians to the shooting of insurgents.JAMiAM said:And capturing and blowing off their defenseless heads is different how...?
Dead is dead, and killing a defenseless prisoner is just plain wrong...whether we do it, or they do it.
I don’t think there should be a systemic approval of “anything goes” within out military. I do, however, think that all of the talk about moral high ground and Geneva convention is out of place. We want to win this war, and I think that capturing insurgents, only to let them free once more to be recycled into the insurgency effort is a failed concept. Yeah, yeah, I know – hearts and minds, hearts and minds. Whose heart and mind are we converting by capturing this guy and then either interning him or letting him go? I’d wager a bet that no one is going to be swayed by that action; no one is suddenly going to say ‘yeah, you know, those American’s aren’t bad after all.’. In fact, numerous folks (even from gitmo) have turned up in the fighting again once they were released.The Purist said:I am asking if you want the US military to abandon these rules because the enemy has?
Anyhow, I’m not in favor of carte blanche actions from the military. I am, however, in favor of soldiers being allowed to take actions that they feel are necessary to protect themselves.