American Hostage Beheaded

[Frank Hagan]

Having lived through the Vietnam war, and anxiously watching the "birthday lottery" the year I turned 19, I can tell you there is a big difference between that "conflict" and this war.

For one, the war has been won in terms of the enemy army being defeated. We never defeated the Viet Cong, not because we didn't have the might, but because we didn't have the goal of defeating them in Vietnam.

We now have guerilla warfare happening, which is very difficult to put down. But we will win this as well, and the Nato-trained IDF will be able to take over their own internal security. They are already doing a pretty good job, considering the time-line, in areas our people secure.

We will have troops there for the next ten years, but in a decreasing role as the IDF grows. The big question is whether or not the Iraqi government will evolve into a democracy, or fall back into either a dictatorship or facist muslim state. We can influence that, but really, only history will tell.

I'm always skeptical about "nation building", whether its the left trying it or the right.

[Courtly]

Hear Hear.

Battle over foreign policy, squash those opposed to the plans your nation has for the world, what-have-you. It's hard to wear the white hat while you do so, but at least it's honest.

But "nation-building"? Smacks of grand delusions, doesn't it.

If we can't even make a PEACEFUL nation get behind a single leader, what the heck do we think an unstable one will do?

[Frank Hagan]

Well, there is good news today.

Sheik Abu Anas al-Shami (may his name be blotted out) was killed today in Baghdad by an American missile. He is ... oh, excuse me, WAS ... the spiritual leader of the group that beheaded the two Americans this week, and in fact, is believed to have been the one to actually behead Eugene Armstrong on Monday.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,133114,00.html

Blown to bits by an American missile. Too bad it didn't happen last week. His death was probably faster and less painful than Mr. Armstrong's, but take heart Jonathan: there are some of us who feel he finds his biggest surprise now, realizing that rather than a stable of virgins, he stands before his eternal judge ... who is a Jew.

[Jonathan]

Didn't know God was a Jew...
The thing is, CNN nor Yahoo! news has this on their sites...

Too bad a missile struke him... I'd've perfered him
to be beaten to the edge of death, healed & get healthy, then do it
over again.. For bout five years maybe; then, maybe just then, slowly
kill him in the same fasion he killed Mr. Armstrong

[Courtly]

It's certainly news yes. And for many people, it will be seen as good news.

The question is, are there really people who see "side A executes a person from side B" as so radically different from "side B executes a person from side A"?

The major difference I see, is that the one the Americans executed was much more important to the insurgents, than the one the insurgents exeucted was to the Americans.

So I guess that means the US is better at the game.

[Frank Hagan]

Courtly, the inability to make moral distinctions is a sad thing.

Mr. Armstrong was a civilian contractor helping to re-build the infrastructure of a country, working for a non-US company, and had gained the respect and thanks of the people he was working with. In Geneva Convention terms, he was a "civilian" or, as we would say, "innocent bystander."

al-Shami was, in contrast, a fascist calling for the death of all who disagree with him, a murderer, and an enemy combatant engaged in acts of terror, not warfare. By the Geneva Convention, he is not a warrior, he is not a "side A", he is a criminal.

These men's deaths are not the same. One is tragic, while the other is a preventative measure that will help prevent the murder and destruction of countless more people. We should not be afraid to be glad at the death of people like al-Shami.

[Frank Hagan]

Didn't know God was a Jew...
The thing is, CNN nor Yahoo! news has this on their sites...

Too bad a missile struke him... I'd've perfered him
to be beaten to the edge of death, healed & get healthy, then do it
over again.. For bout five years maybe; then, maybe just then, slowly
kill him in the same fasion he killed Mr. Armstrong

Following my orthodox Christian theology, Jesus, who is God, is the Judge of all men. As always, YMMV depending on your theology, and I respect them all. I just find a kind of fitting irony in my view of it.

It is enough that we kill them, quick and sure, and not stoop to their levels. While we don't have to follow the Geneva Convention with these folks, torture is not in our best interest (even though it might be most satisfying to think about). It is for history and God to judge them in the final analysis. For now, we can be glad that he, at least, will not be able to saw off the heads of any more innocent people.

[Courtly]

It does appear to me saddening that the 'moral' lines as you call them are forged so unilaterally, and disregard so many civilian deaths on BOTH sides of the conflict. "Regrettable" you might call them?

Execution by missile - is this the sort of thing unlikely to cause collateral casualties?

Come now. We both know that the US occupation (whether "war" was ever actually declared is a matter of rhetoric) has caused the untimely deaths of thousands of non-combattants. Pre-meditation changes the character of this one only slightly.

However, I guarantee you that to the inhabitants of Iraq, it is not only black-hatted men who have difficulty separating foreigners making money from the (in their eyes) unjust occupation, and foreigners who would make "legal targets" for their aggression.

Their homeland has been invaded and occupied, and you seem to want to paint with a broad black brush anyone who has an issue with that. That's what's truly unfortunate.

I thank you for your bald implication that I have no sense of morals. Ad hominem attacks really make clear the character of a debate.

[Courtly]

It is enough that we kill them, quick and sure, and not stoop to their levels.

It could be easily argued, especially amongst Christians, that what you say in the first part of that sentence contradicts what you say in the last part.

[-Oz-]

Execution by missile - is this the sort of thing unlikely to cause collateral casualties?

Actually, the US Air Force has the ability to launch everything from very precise missles/bullets to kill one person to tactical nukes (or much cooler) to wipe out entire cities/countries, so collateral casualties in this case were probably just body guards, hellfire missles don't do that much external damage.

Also, the geneva convention generally speaking does not apply to this war. The geneva convention never took into account terrorism or gurilla warfare. The geneva convention has to be practiced by both sides, if the Iraqi's don't follow it we do not have to as well.

[Buddha]

Applying morality to warfare that's very amusing. ... in a really sick way. They really have nothing to do with each other. Nor should they.

Too bad a missile struke him... I'd've perfered him
to be beaten to the edge of death, healed & get healthy, then do it
over again.. For bout five years maybe; then, maybe just then, slowly
kill him in the same fasion he killed Mr. Armstrong

[Frank Hagan]

[QUOTE=Courtly]It does appear to me saddening that the 'moral' lines as you call them are forged so unilaterally, and disregard so many civilian deaths on BOTH sides of the conflict. "Regrettable" you might call them?
[quote]

Never ignored them. But you have to put them in the perspective of the alternative.

Execution by missile - is this the sort of thing unlikely to cause collateral casualties?

Actually, yes. I believe there were no innocent civilians killed in this action. The fault of innocent life being taken is the fault of the person hiding among civilians.

Come now. We both know that the US occupation (whether "war" was ever actually declared is a matter of rhetoric) has caused the untimely deaths of thousands of non-combattants. Pre-meditation changes the character of this one only slightly.

I see a clear moral difference between the accidental deaths of people and the intentional deaths of people. I don't advocate life imprisonment for people who run over kids that run into the street, but I do for pre-meditated murder.

However, I guarantee you that to the inhabitants of Iraq, it is not only black-hatted men who have difficulty separating foreigners making money from the (in their eyes) unjust occupation, and foreigners who would make "legal targets" for their aggression.

Their homeland has been invaded and occupied, and you seem to want to paint with a broad black brush anyone who has an issue with that. That's what's truly unfortunate.

I thank you for your bald implication that I have no sense of morals. Ad hominem attacks really make clear the character of a debate.

First, you framed the argument with wording that didn't suggest YOU took the position that there was no difference between the beheading of the American and the killing of the perpetrator of that beheading ... you said "some would" consider them both sides of the same coin. I declared such as position shows a lack of the ability to make moral distinctions. I did not mean it to be an ad hominem attack in any way, and apologize if I communicated it in a manner that it did.

The Iraqi's want their country back, and we agree with them. Working with the Iraqis, as we are, to kill men like this scumbag from Jordan, who is affilliated with Al Quidea and not an Iraqi, will give them their country back.

I can appreciate pacifist sentiments. I just don't agree with them.

[Jonathan]

Applying morality to warfare that's very amusing. ... in a really sick way. They really have nothing to do with each other. Nor should they.

* my comment quoted*

Maybe I'm just desensitized by all these video games now days,
but I'm sorry thats how I feel.. he needed to feel the guy's torture 1000x+

[Frank Hagan]

The West has applied morality to warfare ever since Augustine formulated the rules for it back in the 4th century. "Just war" is the foundation of our current attempts to make war between combatants on the field of battle, limit warfare to the battlefield, avoid raping and abusing women and children, etc. It is a Western concept, though, and trying to "play by those rules" against an opponent that does not can be troublesome.

Other cultures have similar ideals that are expressed a bit differently, but I'm not as familiar with them as I am with our culture.

[Buddha]

Maybe I'm just desensitized by all these video games now days,
but I'm sorry thats how I feel.. he needed to feel the guy's torture 1000x+

I just expect better of you. Every American should be angry about how these fellow Americans died but don't let anger cloud your thinking or your judgement.

The object of any war is to destroy the enemy as quickly and cheaply as possible. It does no good to torture the enemy for pleasure. Now I hope your in college before you learn these things first hand in Iraq or Afghanistan. As my father told me, "no sane person wants to go to war." Of course after three wars and 30 years in the Marines that wasn't a problem for him. Keep your sanity while all around you are losing theirs and you'll do well.

Not picking on you Jonathan just worried about you.