Tuesday, May 03, 2011

I have a question:

Why do we keep hearing about how Obama showed such 'political courage' and so forth in approving the operation?

Considering the target, and the reasons we were after him, how the hell much courage is required to say "You have his location? The teams have worked up for the strike? Approved." ?


Windy Wilson said...

Uhh, because his base is a bunch of spinelss pacifists who desire to live under despots?

My verification word was "woomen", whom this war on terror will benefit tremendously as they will benefit from not having to live under a ruthless and immoral patriarchy (or they would if they saw things as they really are, and not throught the prism of leftist partisan politics).

Gerry N. said...

I ask my few remaining liberal friends "If we are actually engaged in a 'War on terror', why do the men in the vanguard constantly need permission to kill the enemy? I would like to see kill stats on the evening news with large prizes awarded to the fighters who kill the most enemy. Right now with their hands tied behind their backs our fighting forces have achieved an historically unheard of kill ratio of 100:1. If they were unhampered by the idea that this is a law enforcement procedure and were allowed to kill the enemy as if they were actually "The Enemy", perhaps we could see kill ratios rise to 200:1. We won WWII with a kill ration of 2:1.

If only we could elect real live leaders who would allow our fighting forces to kill the enemy, and destroy their stuff with extreme prejudice until Islam was merely an interesting side note in history, this terror thing would become a thing of the past.

Meryl said...

Micromanagement at its finest

Windy Wilson said...

Gerry, that is true. One scene in "Three Kings", that captures that idiocy of the rules of engagement is at the beginning of the movie where (Mark Wahlberg, I think) calls out to his compatriot, "Are we shooting today?" and that decision wasn't up to them.