Re: Next time we see 180 Taliban fighters standing in ranks -

dav1936531@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On 14 Sep 2006 13:52:05 -0700, "Gordon" <krztalizer@xxxxxxx> wrote:

I /hope/ we can hit the area with a few thousand gallons of Napalm,
instead of just TAKING THEIR DAMN PICTURE.

I partially understand the rationale for not hitting them at a
funeral on what might be seen as holy ground (since we already know
they honor what everyone ELSE considers holy, riiiiight), but when
the funeral was over, those fighters got into trucks or marched
away, didn't they? Why the hell weren't they slaughtered as they
left??

Stupid. Stupid. Stupid.

WTF? Have these fucktards learned nothing from VietNam? Don't bomb
this.....only fly here.....don't shoot at the AAA batteries!!!!

I hope the decision maker can explain to the families of any coalition
dead that these Taliban end up killing about the rightness of his
decision.

There should be one rule of engagement: Spot them and kill them.
Period.

This would have made an excellent cluster bomb strike.
Dave

I can't help wondering who wrote that particular rule of engagement. Has anyone
ever recalled ever seeing a funeral service anywhere in the Muslim world where
there weren't wailing women in burkas all over the place? What I saw in the
photo was an extremely orderly collection of what looked like men that one might
have suspected were military men in ranks. Shouldn't people standing in what is
obviously a military formation in an area under enemy control be categorized as
a legitimate target of opportunity? If not, why not?

George Z.

"There is little value in trying to pour sense into a block of concrete." -
George Z. Bush


.

Quantcast