Here we go again...

Should we

  • Search for and rescue them

    Votes: 6 60.0%

  • Ignore the kidnappers

    Votes: 4 40.0%
  • Total voters
    10
  • Poll closed .
They put themselves in harm's way to make a point. Unfortunately for these idiots that's not the point they managed to make. They did it to themselves though, the consequences are theirs to enjoy. :shrug:
 
I say go and find them; not because they deserve the assistance... but because it allows for some 'justified' house to house searching for a couple-o-hundred blocks. You never know who or what you will find.
 
unclehobart said:
I say go and find them; not because they deserve the assistance... but because it allows for some 'justified' house to house searching for a couple-o-hundred blocks. You never know who or what you will find.
Click to expand...


That's not very libertarian....
 
Professur said:
That's not very libertarian....
Click to expand...

Not only that, but imagine the howls of protest from the very groups the people we are trying to save represent...
 
She's an aid-worker and has been there since before the war started...she chose to stay and continue helping...pretty ballsy!

Find her, rescue her and make a point by being particularly violent against her kidnappers during her rescue.

Thing is...will she return to her duties after her rescue?
 
MrBishop said:
She's an aid-worker and has been there since before the war started...she chose to stay and continue helping...pretty ballsy!

Find her, rescue her and make a point by being particularly violent against her kidnappers during her rescue.

Thing is...will she return to her duties after her rescue?
Click to expand...

So were the two missionaries in Afghanistan. They were warned by their respective state departments not to go there, and they went anyway. Why should anybody spend the time, energy, manpower, or money to try to get them back?
 
My choice isn't up there. I don't know what it would be.....
If zarquwi has um, find him, you find them, ditto for the other groups.
What's the difference in searching for them, or the guys that have them?

BTW, it would be irresponsible to 'ignore' the kidnappers...that's intel.
 
catocom said:
My choice isn't up there. I don't know what it would be.....
If zarquwi has um, find him, you find them, ditto for the other groups.
What's the difference in searching for them, or the guys that have them?

BTW, it would be irresponsible to 'ignore' the kidnappers...that's intel.
Click to expand...

You misunderstand what I meant. I meant that you don't spend time and effort just to rescue those who were kidnapped. If you find them during regular patrols and such, by all means, fire a few rounds up their tailpipes. Just don't go out specifically to find them.
 
catocom said:
Curious......
How do the operations differ in searching for hostages, or for terrorist?
Click to expand...

When you search for terrorists only, you don't have to be as careful. If a hostage dies, the press will crucify those who went on the sweep regardless of the circumstances.
 
That IS a tough one.
It seems if it Were up to me, I have to say it depends on the situation.
One op at a time. It depends on the total lost of life that each option 'might' create.

IMO these peoples life is no more important than the people who live there,
nor the solders who might rescue them.

Daily ops...business as usual...
Is that "ignore the kidnappers?"
 
Christian Peacemaker Teams said it has had representatives in Iraq since October 2002, working with U.S. and Iraqi detainees and training others in nonviolent intervention and human rights documentation. Kember and another person were part of a visiting delegation, while two of the group's staff based in Iraq also were taken, the statement said.

The group said it would not identify the other three people taken hostage. It stressed that it worked on behalf of Iraqi civilians.

"The team's work has focused on documenting and focusing public attention on detainee abuses, connecting citizens of Iraq to local and international human rights organizations, and accompanying Iraqi civilians as they interact with multinational military personnel and Iraq's government officials," the group said.
Click to expand...

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,177007,00.html


Yep, I see no need to make 'special' plans here.
 
Professur said:
That's not very libertarian....
Click to expand...
I'm a libertarian in matters of personal freedoms, finance, and general politics. In military matters I tend to be slightly to the left of Atilla the Hun. This is a martial law situation until the Iraqi forces take over. They can get back to their olde fashioned thumbscrews and electrodes as they see fit as soon as they bother to get out of the starting gate.
 
unclehobart said:
I'm a libertarian in matters of personal freedoms, finance, and general politics. In military matters I tend to be slightly to the left of Atilla the Hun. This is a martial law situation until the Iraqi forces take over. They can get back to their olde fashioned thumbscrews and electrodes as they see fit as soon as they bother to take over.
Click to expand...
I think we're close to being on the same page. :)
 
flavio said:
You against that human rights stuff?
Click to expand...

They have a right to go where they will, but that does not mean that we have a duty to rescue them if they go where they are warned not to go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top