Monday, July 10, 2006
The terrorists break every rule in the book, and "international law" means no more to them than national security means to The New York Times. Our response: reward their evil behavior. I'd be willing to bet that once the word got out that the US military's rules of engagement were changed to "take no terrorist prisoners," things would calm down. A lot. I also agree with Peters that such a change would not increase the likelihood that our troops would be subject to atrocities when captured--they already are subject to atrocities when captured.
Peters observes that our PC tendencies have changed the nature of war as we fight it from a battle for survival to a sort of law enforcement action on a grand scale. In the long run, this is societal suicide when confronted with an an enemy like Islamofascist terrorism. Islamist terrorism as practiced by al-Qaeda and its ilk is an existential threat to Western civilization, and its adherents are more than willing to continue their war against us for centuries, if that's what it takes for them to win. We as a society will not be able to fight the threat effectively until we, and especially our political leaders and opinion makers, acknowledge that fact.