Negotiations on terror legislation snag
By ANNE PLUMMER FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer
Wed Sep 13, 9:37 PM ET
Okay....so, is this so hard to understand, or just to prioritize properly? (I know, I know, you can't expect people to have human consciences anymore, not when national security's at stake...)
If you say that you have a right to treat your enemy captives without Geneva Convention regulations as guideline, then what reason do your enemies have to use any restraint whatsoever when they capture any of your guys? These things were established for a reason of mutual self-protection, not just some imagined namby-pambyism of "being nice to the prisoners"....and honestly, unless you've either been through a POW/torture situation yourself or read/seen and felt a damn visceral lot of the subject, you're not entitled to make decisions that may wind up putting your troops in that kind of unbridled jeopardy. Especially when you're dealing with people who behead journalists and and stone homosexuals....oh wait, that's one ideal ya got in common there, isn't it...?
Commander-in-chief, my ass...the man and the minions/handlers about him have no sense of valuing the lives of their fellow Americans, if they think that selectively ignoring treatment standards is going to make anyone inside or fighting for this country any safer....