Theodore's World

That report said it all, "They came streaming out of the villiage and Mosque". From 'safe havens' that our troops can not shot at or call in an air strike.

You can't tell me the enemy doesn't know the ROE's as well as our troops do. It is impossible to fight a war with your hands tied behind your back. This is why I question the validity of sending more troops in.

From what I've learned McChrystal is a protege of General Patreaus. McChrystal was admonished in Iraq for being "too aggressive". The problem is not the General, as I first thought, but with this appeasement oriented administration. Where the enemy has all the cards in his favor and our troops are left to hang for themselves. The whole situation is bullshit.

Do you think anything was accomplished in the 25 minute meeting? Besides time to cook a pizza? How frustrated it must be for the military leaders.

I am so worried about our troops. ((prayers))

If you simply look at the area of the Pakistan border on Google Earth you will see that it is surely about the most rugged land on earth. I don't have the foggiest idea why we put land troops in there but if we must then we need a commander-in-chief who will do what it takes to win. The one we have wants us to lose. I watched a 20 year old movie last night, Tom Berenger and Charlie Sheen's Indians had an owner who wanted them to lose. They won anyway. It was a movie, folks. Not real life. In real life you need a leader who wants to win. When I worked for men who wanted me to succeed I could accomplish great things. When I worked for men who hated me and wanted me out, I couldn't accomplish anything. That's the way it works in real life. McChrystal can not overcome the burden of having a little Chicago street punk for CIC. It is later than we think.

We are at the "Lives, Fortunes, and Sacred Honor" decision point if not well beyond it. The first American Revolution destroyed the lives of almost all the Signers of the Declaration of Independence but they did what had to be done. Now at Patrick Henry's little home town of Red House, VA we have a Muslim Training Compound, protected by law. And I'll bet Zazi wasn't the only resident of my town here in Colorado planning to bomb his neighbors. Do you know what your Muslim neighbors are doing? Do you even know if they're Shiite or Sunni? What did the preacher at your local Mosque have to say Friday? Don't have a local mosque? Just wait a while. No religion is growing as fast as Islam.

Pogo said it best. We have met the enemy and he is us. How long are we going to kid ourselves that we are saving the world from these monsters? I'm really tired of hearing Hannity brag about how many millions of Muslims Bush freed and then opening the paper and reading that ten more American fighting men were killed yesterday in a place that needs B-52's and B-1's, not Armor and foot soldiers. Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn about freeing Muslims. One marine is worth more than 1.3 billion muslims in my book.

All I can say is "DITTO", to Horace's remarks.
We can count on the fingers of one hand the number of times that President and Laura Bush went out for a night on the town.
He realized that he had a Country to run, and it took presidence over everything else.
Our current Leader(?), is so self-involved, it is sickening.

I join Mark in changing my assessment of Gen McChrystal. I thought McChrystal was an obama follower, but he may not be.

Afghanistan is a mess. The situation there is deteriorating. obama inherited it so it is not all his fault. However, his ROEs and his pulling the troops back from the cities in Iraq certainly have given the Taliban optimism. obama's speech in Cairo and his support of muslims, incl. a call for a palestinian state have also encouraged muzies. Add in his ignoring of the street demonstrations in Iran, releasing Gitmo detainees and pulling the planned missile shield in Eastern Europe and obama is damn near a cheerleader for radical islam. obama is far more encouraging to our enemies than he is to our troops.

The recent rash of arrests of radical muslims here in America make me expect that it is just a matter of time before we are attacked again. If we are, I also expect obama to waffle and waver. He probably won't do anything more than Clinton did. There may be a lot more action from the American populace though. All those guns and the ammunition were not bought just for fun.

Obama should be tarred and feathered, then sent packing to Afghanistan to be the Community Organizer in Chief. He is not a leader by any stretch of the imagination.

Screw the rules of ingagement and bomb the fu#*ing mosque---this not war fighting, but playing at war. As the Russian general said when presented with a group of French prisoners during Napoleons retreat from Moscow, "shoot them, War is not a game and if more would do this we would go to war only when absolutely necessary, I don't play games".

I expect McChrystal to be replaced with a true yes man, he's too agressive to abide by horseshit rules of engagement.
It always pisses me off that the United States, while not a signatory to the Geneva Conventions always abides by their rules. We deploy with a GC card, that specifies our behavior if taken prisoner, and how we are to treat enemy prisoners of war, uniformed or not. The Conventionis not one but several succeding conventions beginning with The First Geneva Convention of 1864.
Then there was the Second Geneva convention of 1906, for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and
Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea" (first adopted in 1906).
Third Geneva Convention of 1929. Its official name is the Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, Geneva July 27, 1929, this served the nation up through WWII to Korea. Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 on the treatment of civilians during wartime.

In 1993 the United Nations Security Council adopted a report from the Secretary General and a Commission of Experts which concluded beyond doubt that the Geneva Conventions had passed into the body of customary international law that is binding on non-signatory parties whenever they engage in armed conflicts. It includes the Martens Clause. ... By refusing to ratify treaties or to consent to the development of corresponding customary norms, the powerful military States can control the content of the laws of armed onflict. Other States are helpless to prohibit certain technology possessed by the powerful military States. ... the Martens Clause establishes an objective means of determining natural law: the dictates of the public conscience. This makes the laws of armed conflict much richer, and permits the participation of all States in its development. The powerful military States have constantly opposed the influence of natural law on the laws of armed conflict even though these same States relied on natural law for the prosecutions at Nuremberg. The ICJ in its Advisory Opinion did not clarify the extent to which the Martens Clause permits notions of natural law to influence the development of the laws of armed conflict. Consequently, its correct interpretation remains unclear. The Opinion has, however, facilitated an important debate on this significant and frequently overlooked clause of the laws of armed conflict.

These have been followed by protocols.

Protocol I,
1977 Geneva Convention amendment about the protection of victims in international conflicts.

Protocol II, 1977 Geneva Convention amendment about the protection of victims in non-international armed conflicts

Protocol III, 2005 Geneva Convention amendment about the adoption of the Red Crystal emblem, this gives the ragheads precident.

For most of us we adhered to the Fourth Geneva Convention, accordingly this brings up things not discussed before or after William Calley by the MSM, where the focus was on My Lai and later on Abu Ghraib and the panty raids.
There is even a special protocol for formedical personnel. It was strictly adhered to during Vietnam by the enemy signatories when they observed Dustoff operations and even rear area hospitals.

We have been in Iraq since March 20 , 2003 and in Afghanistan since October 7, 2001. With our Geneva Convention observances and rules of conduct mandated by our rules of engagement, just how many American or allied lives has it saved and how many American or allied prisoners have been repatriated? None and none alive, bodies and body parts have been recovered, and I'm expected to love these MF'rs and treat them as equals.

This Chump in Charge has no clue.I can resite my oath and stand behind it-forien or domestic!

Thank you everyone.

Look everyone - America & the West are going to LOSE this war in Afghanistan (and also Iraq)because we are constrained by post war UN human rights rules. Our enemies on the other hand couldn't give a rats arse about UN human rights rules. We are in effect fighting with our hands tied behind our backs.

General Patton had ONE rule: "The object of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his."

Unfortunately civilian casualities are a part of war - any government that cannot deal with that fact should consign themselves to a crushing defeat. That is where we are headed if our politicans don't find their BALLS!!!!!

Sorry for the profanity - but I am madder than hell that our countries have become so piss weak since the end of WW2 - we have become that because we have allowed ourselves to be knobbled by the UN!!

It's time to bring your boys home - they are being wasted on a theatre of war that is balanced in the enemies favour!