Micheal Schuber Interview-CIA

[RARGUNS]

I just heard an interview on FOX news with the former head of the Bin Laden unit in the CIA. He said this administration is fixed on individuals. Right now they want the guy who built the bombs that were sent on the planes the other day. He said this can't be won by singling out individuals. When asked what should be done, he said "kill more of them". He said "we are not going to win the hearts and minds of these people, we just have to kill them all". Finally someone who gets it.

[Morgan338LM]

This was also the analysis of some of my professors in college who were military and well versed in the subject. We as Americans tend to assume the radicals think like we do, which is a misconception. There is no common ground to find.

[RARGUNS]

Wars have never been won by being nice, tolerant, politically correct or by nation building. They are won by killing the enemy.

[TFOGGER]

The saying goes"cut off the head, and the body will die", but this does not work when dealing with an infection. We still have B-52s and millions of gallons of napalm....jus' sayin'.....If the "insurgents and freedom fighters" had to worry about us laying waste to hundreds of square miles surrounding their homes every time they tried to pull something, they might find it a little more thought provoking.

[RARGUNS]

I would tell them we have reached the double bonus round. Every time they pull some crap, we take out 10,000 of them. Each additional action would result in doubling that number. Until the "non-combative" among them are more afraid of us than they are of them, this will never be over. Once they fear us, there will be no place for the rest to hide. As it stands, we pay for "civilian" casualties. We'll hit a building that has 10 or 12 "insurgents" in it but also what they call "innocent civilians" and we pay their families money and say we regret the unintentional casualties. Bullshit! What were they doing hanging out with the bad guys if their so innocent. Kill um wholesale!

[StagLefty]

You guys are on the right page. Why do we play by the rules and our enemies don't ? Why does world opinion run our wars ? They behead our people on TV and it disappears. We embarrass some prisoners and it's a worldwide incident. The list goes on yet we bow to public opinion instead of ending these conflicts and taking care of our own domestic problems.

[BigBear]

eh, I've been saying for years we ought to bring home our troops and seal our borders, produce everything in house (but I'm not an isolationist, some people do need our help), etc. We should NOT be the worlds' "Big Brother" and police every situation that arises. It's their own God given free will whether they choose to emulate us or not. Let the M.E. kill themselves if they so choose. However, if they attack us, end thier whole existence on this planet and build a super Walmart on their land. Their should be no second chances or just one individual is repsonsible crap. An act of war should be met with an immediate and uncontrolled act of fury and discipline.

As in personal training, you train to take care of business. Walk away if you can. Talk out of it if you can. However, when threatened and you cannot get away, you end the fight as fast and as destructive as you can. You make them fear for THEIR lives to where the mear whisper or your name or glimpse of your face immediately and uneqivocably send s ashiver of fear through their deepest, innermost parts of their souls... if they live through the immediate response.


Even though there is a lot of problems with that scenario, it's sure sounds nice to me. Flame suit on.

[275RLTW]

Why do we play by the rules and our enemies don't ? Why does world opinion run our wars ? They behead our people on TV and it disappears. We embarrass some prisoners and it's a worldwide incident. The list goes on yet we bow to public opinion instead of ending these conflicts and taking care of our own domestic problems.

Because it's not vengance we're after. Yes, war would be easier if we did those things mentioned before (I highly encourage them against known combatants), however, the blanket bombing of a civilization, regardless of how misled and off base, is criminally and morally wrong (by any religion). I agree that we should punish every single threat to our nation (preferably with lead injections to the head), but not everyone that doesn't like us. Our soldiers are professional warriors, not barbaric, self rightous idiots laying waste to everything. Yes, it is difficult seeing the atrocities that others to to us, but we are better people than that and do so by proving it with our character, composure, skill, and dedication on the battlefield. Any idiot can shoot a gun in combat, a warrior does so appropriately and with HONOR. There is no honor in what our enemy does, I agree 100%, but there is much honor gained from the professonalism our soldiers display in combat, and in reconstruction of those in need of help. Honor is expensive, and it's usually paid for in blood, but it is what separates us from them.

[RARGUNS]

I'm not saying we should torture or behead our enemies. But I would not risk the life of even one of our warriors to save 100,000 of those who not only condone, but also give support by letting the enemy hide among them. wwpd (what would Patton do?)

[Hoosier]

WTF?
Who is the "all" in "kill them all"? Who is the enemy? What 10,000 people are we going to kill? Did any of you really think about the fact you're advocating mass murder?

What makes someone a terrorist, as in the definition of the term. How can you advocate killing 10,000 people without concern for weeding your enemy out of the innocents and not meet the definition of terrorist? Or is the point of view that no one "over there" is innocent?

I understand the appeal of a black and white world view, but seriously, this is the same rationale that fuels Al Queda. The world isn't that simple. Try and put yourself into the shoes of an average Iraqi, or Afghan, or Yemeni. They don't give a shit about us, they just want to live their lives. They've never met a terrorist, don't wish any American's dead, and are just trying to make the lives of their kids better than the ones they had. Much like us. You're going to advocate killing them?

If you can find 10,000 enemy to kill, congratulations you've just ended the global war on terror, because that's about the estimated size of all these terrorist organizations.

If you're suggesting we just carpet bomb a random city, fuck you.

H.

PS: Here's a definition of terrorist: systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion.[1] No universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition of terrorism currently exists.[2][3] Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or ideological goal, deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (civilians), and are committed by non-government agencies.