Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe
It's solid reasoning, if it were Iraqis hijacking the airlines. The perpetrators of 9/11 were Saudi nationals.
No civilian deserves to die over the action of their state. But if you've got a four block area chock-a-block full of insurgents, is there a more casualty conducive method than going methodically, door-to-door? While leaving ample time and opportunity for escape?
Secure the perimeter and burn the hotspots to to the ground. Which in turn would make the next neighborhood less willing to harbor insurgents and more likely to inform if they were present - lest they burn next. Having U.S. servicemen going door to door and getting their as_ses shot off makes little sense. Ask the families who lost soldiers - there were twice as many of them than there was on 9/11.
When civilians equate the tolerance of insurgents with certain death from us, rather than possible death from them,then the the insurgency loses traction.
|
I will have to think that over only because I really would rather not burn or kill civilians. This does have some merit if it's done correctly, but it is beyond me figuring out how it should be done. I don't like the door to door method and agree that's not the way to do it, fear is necessary terror isn't.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
Threaded Mode