Military at disadvantage vs. terrorists

  • Follow Letters

The Rev. Terry Jones and his 50 followers have the constitutional right to burn any book of their choice, but the issue raised the ire worldwide of millions of religiously manipulated Muslims so that the issue of preventing the proposed Quran-burning had become "too big to fail." It came to involve the top of our government and military. Were the jihadists blackmailing us?

If this guy Jones burns our book, they said, we will kill Americans around the world. That was the threat of the terrorists, was it not?

Our best military forces are sent to these Middle Eastern countries with one hand tied behind their backs. Muslim terrorists -- while a minority of Islamic culture -- are civilians in unidentifiable rags killing our soldiers from behind their own women and children. Our rules of engagement prevent our forces from effectively wiping out terrorist nests because of collateral damage.

We should know by now that we cannot win that kind of war. We need statesmen as presidents, not politicians.

S.G. von Schweinitz

Appling

Comments (71)

Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
JohnRandolphHardisonCain
571
Points
JohnRandolphHardisonCain 10/02/10 - 06:17 am
0
0

United States has the right

United States has the right and responsibility to bring those directly responsible for the 9/11 and other terrorists attacks to account. United States never had a legal justification for invading Iraq. United States has no right to occupy and wage war in Afghanistan 9 years after Al Qaeda's abandoned training camps were destroyed.

No matter how much we detest the philosophy that drives the Taliban, they are legal combatants fighting in their own land against an illegal foreign occupying military power. How are they supposed to fight an asymmetric war against a vastly superior military force? They are not bound by the same constraints that United States is bound by in this political war.

United States cannot wage total war against the Taliban and the Afghan people because this is a political war for hegemony in Afghanistan and South Asia on the part of United States. It is not an existential war of survival for United States. Terrorists do not threaten the survival of United States.

The U.S. military is being misused as a police force. Occupying Iraq and Afghanistan has destabilized the Middle East and South Asia and has created more enemies of this country. The so-called war on terror has destabilized Pakistan. United States has used the shotgun of the U.S. military to kill suspected terrorist flies. It should have used the fly swatter approach by including Interpol and multinational cooperation in its efforts.

United States cannot kill its way to peace and security. The U.S. government overreacted to the attacks on 9/11 by using torture and by violating its own principles by turning to the dark side to fight a war on terror. Using fear and disinformation to stir up war fever in the U.S. is not a strategy. Instead of making terrorist attacks a criminal matter to be solved by police action, United States has helped foster a clash of civilians that many Muslims perceive as a war on Islam. This militaristic approach will not solve the problem of terrorism. Eliminating the root causes that feed terrorist recruitment can solve the problem.

Great empires have repeatedly broken themselves over the anvil of Afghanistan. We will never win our war against Muslim extremism when the very policies we pursue help create those extremists. Everyone who picks up a gun to defend their homeland against foreign occupation is not a terrorist.

The U.S. military and U.S. government admitted that Sunni militants had a right to fight the U.S. occupiers in Iraq. During the surge in Iraq, the U.S. government paid Sunni insurgents not to fight against U.S. forces and to fight against Al Qaeda in Iraq. If Sunni nationalists had a right to resist foreign occupation in Iraq, then Afghans including the Pashtuns which are the largest tribe in the world, also have the right to resist foreign occupation. United States is caught on the horns of its own dilemma.

johnston.cliff
2
Points
johnston.cliff 10/02/10 - 06:23 am
0
0

Yeah, S.G., and all our

Yeah, S.G., and all our political decisions should be made by congenial wise men with no political or economic ties nor experience. Let benevolence rule. Utopia. (insert hum and mantra chant here)

KSL
106415
Points
KSL 10/02/10 - 06:25 am
0
0

And of course, it's all right

And of course, it's all right for the Taliban and others to take their fight to Europe and beyond.

And we certainly don't want to violate their rights in trying to preempt future attacks on us or our allies.

KSL
106415
Points
KSL 10/02/10 - 06:37 am
0
0

Cain makes a point. If the US

Cain makes a point. If the US was harboring a group of people who had been responsible for instigating deadly attacks on the citizens of another country, that country would not be justified in making all citizens responsible. But then the US wouldn't do that. We would not protect the perpetrators. Big difference.

Cain, let me remind you. The US dropped two bombs. I think we killed our way to peace toward the end of WW2.

KSL
106415
Points
KSL 10/02/10 - 06:39 am
0
0

The big stick theory really

The big stick theory really works. Japan didn't care to be bombed off the map.

afadel
371
Points
afadel 10/02/10 - 06:42 am
0
0

I'm assuming that S.G. von

I'm assuming that S.G. von Schweinitz is advocating for withdrawal of forces here and not indiscriminate use of violence. In that case, while I don't agree with exactly how he expressed it, his/her point is valid.

KSL
106415
Points
KSL 10/02/10 - 07:12 am
0
0

Yeah, US, bend over and take

Yeah, US, bend over and take it.

justus4
93
Points
justus4 10/02/10 - 07:53 am
0
0

The article attempts to

Unpublished

The article attempts to address the core problem with fighting "terrorists" but fails to properly indicate WHO steered the U.S. into this century-long, trillion dollar rat hole, billion dollars for future wounded veterans care, and the administration who said, "We will be greeted as liberators" or "The oil from that country will pay for our efforts" or "It will take only one month to do it" or "Only 130,000 troops are needed" which has clearly proven to be complete statements of dishonesty at best or lies at worst. Every issue in the article could have easily been predicted by any exceptional college grad, so here is the question: Why did Bush/Cheney do it? Where they blinded by hatred and revenge? Where they so ignorant that they actually believed those reckless & arrogant statements? Did they consider the lives to be lost including the Iraqis which total in the hundreds of thousands? Are those government officials possible criminals? Have war crimes been committed? The article avoid these issues, but many citizens believe that this government was operating outside of international laws and decision made did in fact break laws. And yep, we've got possible charges coming so expect this entire century to be responding to the complete lunacy of the first U.S. administration of the 21st century.

Rhetor
862
Points
Rhetor 10/02/10 - 08:02 am
0
0

Does this letter imply that

Does this letter imply that we should wipe out Taliban and Al Qaida strongholds without respect for civilian casualties? I hope that this is not the writer's intention but, if it is, that is completely sick.

hhwilli
0
Points
hhwilli 10/02/10 - 08:21 am
0
0

If we are not 'in it to win

If we are not 'in it to win it', we should find our way out of it. This is NOT two hand touch. We can't even clearly identify who they (the enemy) are. This is no way to fight a war!

Rhetor
862
Points
Rhetor 10/02/10 - 08:48 am
0
0

Great. I don't believe it.

Great. I don't believe it. Suppose we track down some militia that nurtured Tim McVeigh. They all look like civilians most of the time, so we send in the FBI to blow up the whole town they live in. Does that sound right? Of course not.

gaspringwater
3
Points
gaspringwater 10/02/10 - 09:28 am
0
0

It's not likely a

It's not likely a conventional military force can defeat a nationalist insurgency nourished by religion. The arrogant, ignorant and incompetent Bush regime and the American public ran into the quagmire with great bravado and spirited patriotism. The warmongers mounted the podium, crowed about the founding fathers, pledged allegiance and damned the Hollywood naysayers. Full speed ahead with shock and awe. No patience with the UN's dilly-dallying and talking. Bush was the head lemming but he can't be blamed for everything. He had eager and willing followers.

And now we'll limp out with humility and deep debt. Most problems in the world can't be solved by military forces and shooting. Our country needs peacemakers and we've not had any lately.

harley_52
19571
Points
harley_52 10/02/10 - 10:21 am
0
0

Excellent assessment by Mr.

Excellent assessment by Mr. von Schweinitz. Our political leaders have taken the Nation to war, but lack the ethics, morality, or political courage to win that war. The losers are the military personnel who are asked to sacrifice their lives and limbs for a goal they cannot achieve. A country should never go to war unless they possess the resolve to win it. I think we can place most of the blame on the politicians, but a fair share belongs to the military Generals who support those politicians with the blood of their troops. There is no such thing as a "kinder, gentler" war. War is ugly. It is cruel and unspeakable. In our recent wars we've used our military as political pawns. Our leaders show their "toughness" with the blood of our sons and daughters fighting "wars" they refuse to let them win.

dichotomy
26846
Points
dichotomy 10/02/10 - 10:25 am
0
0

As Rambo said, "they drew

As Rambo said, "they drew first blood". They came here on 9/11. Both wars were sanctioned by the Unitied Nations and approved by the majority here, including the Democrats. The only thing Cain said that was militarilty correct is that our military is being misused as a police force. We should have leveled the country(s), killed as many as possible, and came home. If they tried it again we should repeat step 1. Leaving our troops there in a futile effort to "rebuild" and "stabilize" merely provides a density of targets for both the terrorists and the "freedom fighters" who rightfully perceive us as an occupying force. The politically motivated artificial "rules of engagement" placed on our soldiers by our politicians are getting our troops killed. As long as we leave our soldiers in daily peril we should quit looking over their shoulders, let them defend themselves, and expect collateral damage. You cannot stop incidents of killing innocent civilians or incidents of atrocity with artificial rules of engagement which get our troops killed. It's not a good thing but it is a fact. You have placed young men with weapons in a perilous situation. Somebody, right or wrong, is going to die. We learned most of these lessons in Vietnam. Too bad nobody remembers.

dani
12
Points
dani 10/02/10 - 10:39 am
0
0

You can't make peace with

You can't make peace with fanatics.

gaspringwater
3
Points
gaspringwater 10/02/10 - 10:46 am
0
0

We're in Afghanistan making

We're in Afghanistan making war on a religious group, the Taliban. None were involved in 9-11 but we accuse them of harboring a handful of al Qaida. Who told you that? It was the same smarties that told you Iraq had WMD's and Saddam Hussein was in cahoots with al Qaida. And Saddam had a sinister scheme to get uranium from Africa. That forgery was so crude it was laughable.

WW1949
19
Points
WW1949 10/02/10 - 11:03 am
0
0

Amen, dichotomy. For those of

Amen, dichotomy. For those of you who were old enough when Vietnam was around it was you can shoot here and at that person but not here and not at that person. The Viet-Cong would just go to the areas of non combat and attack from there. When Nixon sent the B-52's over North Vietnam they came to the table. When they left the North thae went back to what they were doing. Untie the hands of our soldiers and let them work or leave this mess behind.

rmwhitley
5107
Points
rmwhitley 10/02/10 - 11:30 am
0
0

The United States of America

Unpublished

The United States of America has not fought a war to win since August, 1945. Cowardship usurps leadership.

gaspringwater
3
Points
gaspringwater 10/02/10 - 11:38 am
0
0

Untie the hands of the

Untie the hands of the soldier! There's no substitute for victory! The warrior must have a 007 license. General MacArthur wanted freedom of action to do what was necessary. Expand the war, drop a few nuclear bombs to show them we were serious.

When the war is not going according to plan - the militarist will see the solution as more of the same. Surge!

dani
12
Points
dani 10/02/10 - 12:07 pm
0
0

Bill Clinton cut our military

Bill Clinton cut our military budget drastically and our enemies were well aware of our depleted status. Then 9-1l happened and George Bush had to make do with the sham of a defense department that was left . (Note! He did not whine and blame Clinton). When will smarten up and realize what is happening in the world.

Rhetor
862
Points
Rhetor 10/02/10 - 12:18 pm
0
0

Let's get this straight,

Let's get this straight, Dichotomy. The 9/11 attacks were planned in Afghanistan and the US government had every right and obligation to go in there and defend our country. Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, as pointed out by Bush's leading terrorism expert, Richard Clarke, in his book Against All Enemies. I don't question that Saddam Hussein was a true bad guy, but he did not strike us on 9/11. If you want to understand better how the US should fight an insurgency, the Marine Corps Small Wars Manual is on line, and it is just as wise today as it was on the day it was first written. The fact remains that targeting civilians is against the laws of all nations--not that all nations follow the law. I'm sure that it would make a small number of Americans, to their discredit, feel good to go in there and blow up a bunch of families, but it won't win the war.

Rhetor
862
Points
Rhetor 10/02/10 - 12:20 pm
0
0

PS: Gen. Petraeus is the

PS: Gen. Petraeus is the world's leading expert in counter-insurgency warfare, and people do need to place trust in his judgment

Rhetor
862
Points
Rhetor 10/02/10 - 12:20 pm
0
0

Burning any religious book is

Burning any religious book is a disgusting act of ignorance and prejudice, and shame on anyone who endorses such an act.

momster59
0
Points
momster59 10/02/10 - 12:32 pm
0
0

War, huh, good God

War, huh, good God y'all!
What is it good for?
Absolutely nothing!
It's nothing but a heart breaker,
only friends with the undertaker.
Peace, Love and Understanding

momster59
0
Points
momster59 10/02/10 - 12:40 pm
0
0

KSL - dropping two atomic

KSL - dropping two atomic bombs on civilian, noncombatant cities is one of the greatest shames in US histories. We killed over 200,000 innocent civilians, disabled hundreds of thousands more, caused birth defects all over Japan and nuclear fall out over Asia that is still there 65 years later.

The Bush administration used TORTURE to extract the false information on "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq, even though out country signed the Geneva Convention. The only purpose of torture in interrogation is propaganda, not the truth. Years later, several thousand of our soldiers are dead, countless thousands of others are disabled and suffer PSTD and hundreds have even committed suicide. Hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens have lost their lives to a war we should have never entered into in the first place.

God have mercy on our souls. We break treaties , use our own weapons of mass destruction to wage wars of aggression and then profess to not understand why people from other countries, fear, distrust and even hate us.

follower
54
Points
follower 10/02/10 - 12:55 pm
0
0

I don't like that servicemen

I don't like that servicemen and women are killed and injured in this war. But what I don't understand is those that claim "Bush lied" and "This war is unjust".

We are not privy to the information the POTUS and the Armed Service Committee receives. An overwhelming majority of the Dems voted for action against Iraq. They were in violation of weapons treaties dating back to the early 90's. And most obvious, the current Pres. is receiving information that prompted him to increase the number of troops in the current effort. So many screamed about genocide in Somalia, but ignored the same in Iraq. Are innocent Iraqi's less deserving?

The administration cannot divulge the current threats. To do so would create a panic beyond belief.

I don't care for the current Pres. and his economic policies. But it seems that the information to which he is now privy is very sobbering and with that information, he obviously sees need to step up the effort.

Since we don't see the intel, we can only speculate.

Rhetor, I agree with your assessment of Petraeus. Seems Obama does also. This is one area I agree with him.

Fiat_Lux
13904
Points
Fiat_Lux 10/02/10 - 12:57 pm
0
0

Oh, Great Spirit, Protect us

Oh, Great Spirit,
Protect us from ever defending ourselves or our friends, or, heaven (those Great Plains in the Sky) forbid, the liberties so many have died to protect and extend to others. Lead us always to turn our backs and run away, or collaborate like the French, instead of making the heroic personal sacrifices of our idiotic ancestors, who clearly were fools in that they thought we had anything worth shedding blood to protect.

And, Great Spirit, keep reminding us that ALL people are rational, ALL people are good at heart and only want a chance to make us see things their way. Help us always to be tolerant of the rights of others to be destructive and violent, to kill us without fear of retribution, much less justice. After all, who do we think we are to desire to live in peace and security, to prosper and thrive, when so many others haven't stepped up and done what was necessary to achieve the same way of life?

Help us to be humble and grateful, not so that we will continue to share of our bounty and from the goodness you have poured out on us, but out of an abiding realization that we are worthless and to be despised when anyone else anywhere on this planet tells us that we deserve only subjugation, suffering and death.

Amen.

follower
54
Points
follower 10/02/10 - 01:00 pm
0
0

Momster, no question,

Momster, no question, thousands of innocents lost their lives in 1945 with those bombings. What was the alternative? More lost U.S. lives? You would be OK with that?

If nothing else, the utter devastation of those bombs was a message to the world the cost of a nuclear alternative. There hasn't been such a display since, and I pray there never is.

But it does prove what my grandfather said to be true. "Ones scared, and the others glad of it". I hope it stays that way.

momster59
0
Points
momster59 10/02/10 - 01:07 pm
0
0

follower - How would your

follower - How would your Jesus answer that question? How much did he weep over our inhumanity? Why did we drop the nuclear bombs on Japan and not on Germany? Why did we incarcerate Japanese Americans in concentration camps and not Germans? Could it be because they weren't European?

No, we never should have dropped atomic bombs on innocent, non military targets. We are at war right now and many countries are upset with our military aggression. Would they be justified to drop nuclear weapons on Augusta to terrorize us into withdrawing from the Middle East? Hate and mass destruction of innocent lives is never the answer. Look at the pictures of the charred bodies of the children on the playground, the little girl in the hospital with her skin falling off in shreds.

What would your Jesus have done?

momster59
0
Points
momster59 10/02/10 - 01:11 pm
0
0

Fiat - your attempt to make

Fiat - your attempt to make fun of my spirituality does not injure me or insult me. I've told you before, my self worth has nothing to do with your approval. You show the world how shallow you are with your actions.

Back to Top

Loading...