CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › So, we take hostages now?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

So, we take hostages now?

post #1 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:03pm
Thread Starter 
Apparently, we do. This happened last week, but no one seems to think twice about it. To me, the implications are, well, kinda sinister. From Newsday:

Quote:
U.S. Arrests Family of a Top Hussein Official



By Mohamad Bazzi
MIDDLE EAST CORRESPONDENT

November 27, 2003


Baghdad, Iraq - U.S. forces yesterday arrested the wife and daughter of a former Saddam Hussein deputy who has been blamed for organizing guerrilla attacks on Americans.

The relatives' detention seems intended to pressure Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri into surrendering or to gather information that might lead to his arrest.

The arrests were condemned by human rights groups that said family members should not be used as "bargaining chips" in the hunt for fugitives.
So wives and daughters are fair game? Can you imagine the hue and outcry if the Iraqis "arrested" Laura Bush or Jenna and Barbara? C'mon, CHUDservatives, explain to me how this is a legitimate and legal military procedure.

And we wonder why other countries are losing more and more respect for us by the minute...
Reply
post #2 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:06pm
Thread Starter 
I just read this little blurb from Joe Bob Briggs' weekly newsletter:

Quote:
Frustrated by their inability to catch Izzat Ibrahim al-
Douri, number 6 on the list of 55 most-wanted Iraqis and a man
with a $10 million reward on his head, the U.S. 4th Infantry
Division seized his wife and daughter instead. The rationale is
that it's not really hostage-taking if we do it, because, uh,
well, we don't take hostages and well, uh, maybe his daughter
knows something she's not telling and, uh, well, anyway, it's not
hostage-taking.
Reply
post #3 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:08pm
This is pretty damned disgusting.
Reply
post #4 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:37pm

Re: So, we take hostages now?

Quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Singer
C'mon, CHUDservatives, explain to me how this is a legitimate and legal military procedure.

And we wonder why other countries are losing more and more respect for us by the minute...
C'mon, who cares. And I mean that seriously. Rules of War is such a contradiction of terms.
I'm against this entire war, have been from the start. But how is this any less horrible than anything else Generalissimo Bush has done? This seems like a lesser offense to me. Next you'll be saying our military is reprehensible for not wiping their feet before breaking into someone's home to arrest them.
I just don't see this as anything unusual. This is war. You can't sugarcoat it with rules.
Reply
post #5 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:49pm
Actually, the war is over with.
Reply
post #6 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:49pm
We're not taking hostages, we're liberating them.
Reply
post #7 of 29
12/1/03 at 3:53pm
You guys...!

We're NOT at war...war is over, even though Iraq is "still a very dangerous place," which means that more soldiers die there now than they did during the war - which is over, BTW.

Also, these family mmbers are not hostages. They are confederates. They must be detained to see what they know, even though we flew out the entire Bin Laden family just after the 9/11 assaults so they couldn't be interviewed - you know, because they aren't confederates.

Also, the Moon is made of cheese and you all hate America.
Reply
post #8 of 29
12/1/03 at 4:11pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Annoyance: Medium pimpin' since '92
Actually, the war is over with.
Yeah, whatever.
Tell that to my relative in Baghdad who's been getting shot at every single day since June.
Reply
post #9 of 29
12/1/03 at 5:45pm

Re: Re: So, we take hostages now?

Quote:
Originally posted by BobClark
C'mon, who cares. And I mean that seriously. Rules of War is such a contradiction of terms.
(...)
I just don't see this as anything unusual. This is war. You can't sugarcoat it with rules.
Er, hello? Geneva convention anyone? Or is that now ignored too because it's not American?
Reply
post #10 of 29
12/1/03 at 5:51pm
hmm...taking hostages to achieve certain demands...that rings a bell. What do you call people who do that?...damn, it's on the tip of my tongue...
Reply
post #11 of 29
12/1/03 at 6:04pm

Re: Re: Re: So, we take hostages now?

Quote:
Originally posted by Van Jones
Er, hello? Geneva convention anyone? Or is that now ignored too because it's not American?
Doesn't matter who the participants are, when a war drags on, it gets dirty. Real dirty. We Americans DO like to think we're the good guys, but if need be, we'll rape that dudes wife if it means we can find out where he is. We're not the good guys, we're just the people with the big guns.
Reply
post #12 of 29
12/1/03 at 6:11pm

Re: Re: Re: So, we take hostages now?

Quote:
Originally posted by Van Jones
Er, hello? Geneva convention anyone? Or is that now ignored too because it's not American?
My point stands.
In any war, all bets are off. There are no rules, save for one- Win. Because the winner doesn't have to worry about what rules they broke to achieve victory.
To further illustrate my point, may I direct your attention to a couple of Japanese cities we performed some major renovations on at the end of WW2.

I don't condone any of this, mind you. These are the reasons why war should just be avoided altogether. The ends don't justify the means.
Reply
post #13 of 29
12/1/03 at 7:21pm
Quote:
Originally posted by BobClark
Yeah, whatever.
Tell that to my relative in Baghdad who's been getting shot at every single day since June.

Everyday since June?

That's 183 days since June 1. So a minimum of 183 bullets. And not ONE hit.

Either very, very poor marksmanship, or this relative is REALLY, REALLY fast.

Hell, don't call them hostages, call the prisoners of war, call them criminal non-combatants, call them anything you want to, as long as they tell us what we want to know.

"taking" them is much nicer than knee-capping them, and hooking them to wind up field radios, either of which is fine with me if it means some of these "resistance leaders" are found and execu.....er... brought to justice.
Reply
post #14 of 29
12/1/03 at 7:26pm
Thread Starter 
Hey, Grifter, long time no see. How are those goose-stepping lessons going?
Reply
post #15 of 29
12/2/03 at 10:27am
Quote:
Originally posted by Dale 'Grifter' Wicker
Everyday since June?

That's 183 days since June 1. So a minimum of 183 bullets. And not ONE hit.

Either very, very poor marksmanship, or this relative is REALLY, REALLY fast.
He's been hit twice.
Reply
post #16 of 29
12/2/03 at 10:40am
Quote:
Originally posted by Dale 'Grifter' Wicker
Hell, don't call them hostages, call the prisoners of war, call them criminal non-combatants, call them anything you want to, as long as they tell us what we want to know.

"taking" them is much nicer than knee-capping them, and hooking them to wind up field radios, either of which is fine with me if it means some of these "resistance leaders" are found and execu.....er... brought to justice.
So the solution to beating a terrorist is to become one? Interesting logic, that.
Reply
post #17 of 29
12/2/03 at 2:22pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Micah Robinson
So the solution to beating a terrorist is to become one? Interesting logic, that.
It's the only logic these whacked out zealots understand. Terror.

They are sure they know how to inflict it. Can they take it?

My proposal: in order to beat them, be better (or worse, depending on the interpretation) than they are.

When they see us resist their efforts at "terrorism" by continuing a normal, happy life, and at the same time see their entire world in which they were always safe begin to crumble in a fiery hail of pain and death, perhaps they will understand that it's not nearly as much fun as they thought it was.

Right now, they hold the total advantage. We play by the "rules".

As soon as Mr. Resistance Leader sees the bloody entrails of his 3 month old daughter wiped off of our boots in the grass like so much dog shit, perhaps the "Holy War" will lose just a little bit of luster.

In order to rule hell, sometimes you must become the devil himself.
Reply
post #18 of 29
12/2/03 at 2:25pm
Good god you're an idiot. You think killing the family of people who are already radicals is going to make them want to kill us less?

You might want to actually learn from these attacks we've had. Bombing countries and killing people only sends more of them to terrorist camps. It doesn't scare them away.
Reply
post #19 of 29
12/2/03 at 2:33pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Dale 'Grifter' Wicker
It's the only logic these whacked out zealots understand. Terror.

They are sure they know how to inflict it. Can they take it?

My proposal: in order to beat them, be better (or worse, depending on the interpretation) than they are.

When they see us resist their efforts at "terrorism" by continuing a normal, happy life, and at the same time see their entire world in which they were always safe begin to crumble in a fiery hail of pain and death, perhaps they will understand that it's not nearly as much fun as they thought it was.

Right now, they hold the total advantage. We play by the "rules".

As soon as Mr. Resistance Leader sees the bloody entrails of his 3 month old daughter wiped off of our boots in the grass like so much dog shit, perhaps the "Holy War" will lose just a little bit of luster.

In order to rule hell, sometimes you must become the devil himself.
Only one problem. They are all willing to die at the drop of a hat or kill whoever for their cause, and we're only willing to go so far as American public support takes us, so they'd win a war of "Who's the Best Terrorist?"

Even if we tried playing The Punisher for a bit, we'd turn the rest of the world against us, and despite our superpower status, the rest of the world would win (dollar weak, we're dependent on foreign fuels, foreign investments, and we're farming many of our best jobs overseas already).

But if you think brutal eye-for-an-eye retaliation against lesser, desperate foes helps defeat terrorists, why not ask Israel how that's working out for them?

Also, what is this "world in which they were always safe" you speak of?

These guys live in hiding under constant scrutiny and under constant threat of betrayal and death, and it has no effect on their resolve whatsoever. I don't think they're going to get MORE paranoid or uncomfortable if that is what you are getting at.
Reply
post #20 of 29
12/2/03 at 2:42pm
Quote:
You think killing the family of people who are already radicals is going to make them want to kill us less?
If you kill ALL of them. Yes. Simply by virtue of elimination. There will be no one left to fight.

What's the option? Understanding compromise? Total isolationism? Cave and give them what they want?

None are viable options.


Quote:
we're only willing to go so far as American public support takes us
With all of the flower power, hug everybody, save the whale/rain forest/ owl/ choose your flavor of the week useless bags of skin in America right now, why do we need public support? Hell, do a "Dirty Dozen" on them. Take convicts and send them, and never say a word about it.

I know, way to much of a fantasy world there, but I would support the hell out of that.

Ma and Pa American will never be upset or "hurt" by things they are totally unaware of.
Reply
post #21 of 29
12/2/03 at 2:44pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Dale 'Grifter' Wicker
If you kill ALL of them. Yes. Simply by virtue of elimination. There will be no one left to fight.
Except for maybe, THE FUCKING TERRORISTS.
Reply
post #22 of 29
12/2/03 at 2:53pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Dale 'Grifter' Wicker
If you kill ALL of them. Yes. Simply by virtue of elimination. There will be no one left to fight.

What's the option? Understanding compromise? Total isolationism? Cave and give them what they want?

None are viable options.


You do realize killing terrorists CREATES MORE terrorists, right? We've effectively "killed" Al-Qaida, which caused the remnants to spawn a number of related groups causing havoc in Iraq right now that never would've existed under other circumstances.

Terror is an ideology. Bullets, bombs, and what have you kill PEOPLE. The latter does not affect the former. Did you not read Iraqi accounts of this latest bloody raid where CIVILIANS picked up arms and fought against us because we were firing on them, too?


Quote:
With all of the flower power, hug everybody, save the whale/rain forest/ owl/ choose your flavor of the week useless bags of skin in America right now, why do we need public support? Hell, do a "Dirty Dozen" on them. Take convicts and send them, and never say a word about it.

I know, way to much of a fantasy world there, but I would support the hell out of that.

Ma and Pa American will never be upset or "hurt" by things they are totally unaware of.
Unfortunately, there's this thing called the media that make it kind of impossible to wage a truly secret war any longer.
Reply
post #23 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:00pm
Thread Starter 
Apparently Grifter thinks terrorists are a singular race of people that can be exterminated...
Reply
post #24 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:07pm
The American public will never win a war like that Grift. We're too civilizied to want to kill women and children.

You're a radical so that should help you understand that our enemies are just as rabid. This is a war we can't win cause you'll find American Terrorists rising up to fight the kind of tyranny you want. If they started doing stuff like that, you can better a good number of us'll march into dixie and start killing people too. Then what? Waste the half of America that's liberal? Not possible, you forget that we understand America and could destroy this place far more effectively than any foreigner could.

For someone who seems to understand war, you seem to ignore history and lack the understanding of how it works. To think that total elimanation of the enemy being possible demonstrates this.
Reply
post #25 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:11pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Singer
Apparently Grifter thinks terrorists are a singular race of people that can be exterminated...

Don't underestimate Grifter. I'm sure he would impartially hold the same opinion if someone high up in government would have decided that all white American male twentysomethings needed to be rounded up and eliminated after the Oklahoma Bombing incident.

You know they're a danger to all of us.... look at all the folks murdered in the US over the last couple of hundred years by raging groups of armed white twentysomethings. Jeezus save us all, we should just go and nip things in the bud.
Reply
post #26 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:11pm
Quote:
Originally posted by Jacob Singer
Apparently Grifter thinks terrorists are a singular race of people that can be exterminated...
And they all wear T-shirts that read, "Shoot Me! I'm a terrorist!".
Reply
post #27 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:13pm
Quote:
Originally posted by BobClark
And they all wear T-shirts that read, "Shoot Me! I'm a terrorist!".
I saw those around town! I wanted to get the one with Cobra Commander's face on it. You could wear the Destro one!

Yay!
Reply
post #28 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:25pm
Clearly, I'm just as frustrated as most of you. I'm just a little more psycho about it.
Reply
post #29 of 29
12/2/03 at 3:46pm
Thread Starter 
A little?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › So, we take hostages now?