New Wikileaks

**SmokenScion** · 04-26-11, 03:04 PM

Unlawful combatant - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

**Gumby** · 04-26-11, 03:16 PM

Since I brought up the uniform thing, let me make my position on it very clear.
I am not saying that avoiding uniforms to blend in is cowardly, it is simply the tactic they (and our forefathers) are using.
Their action has succeeded in making them harder to spot amongst the non-combatants.
Any action has a consequence. In this case the consequence is that in order to sort out who is who, an extremely small percentage of innocent folks were guests of the USMC. (tongue in cheek before you guys flip out on that comment). I am not saying it is right, I am saying it is simply the result of their tactics.
So, my positions remain
1. 150 is a ridiculously large number of people if this was intentional wrongful imprisonment. To believe that you would have to truly believe that pretty much everyone in the military is just a thug. I am not in the military, but I have worked for the DoD for a long time and you would never convince me that anything more than a very small percentage of the military fits that description.
2. 150 is a ridiculously small number if you consider that pretty much the entire population is suspect because of the actions of the Taliban army. I am amazed our guys kept it that low. Out of literally millions of folks, they were wrong only in the hundreds speaks volumes to me about the dedication of our guys in the field and our intel analysts. Great job. I bet more people were falsely convicted and incarcerated in the US justice system during that same time period.
3. I truly do feel for those that were wrongfully imprisoned. It is my belief that the blame for that falls at the feet of the Taliban because they chose that tactic. You either blame those that did the blending in or you blame those that did the sorting out. I am blaming the blenders. Again, I am not calling that tactic cowardly, but they chose to do that knowing that some sorting would have to happen. They are not stupid. I just see it as more of their pattern of not really caring what happens to their own people as long as they can blame the West for the Afghan people's suffering.
Blaming the sorters to me is short-sighted and out of touch with the reality of the situation on the ground.

**DJ Ms. White** · 04-26-11, 03:21 PM

Are their crib notes for those two links? My eyes are bleeding for the walls of text.

**DJ Ms. White** · 04-26-11, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by Gumby

Since I brought up the uniform thing, let me make my position on it very clear.
I am not saying that avoiding uniforms to blend in is cowardly, it is simply the tactic they (and our forefathers) are using.
Their action has succeeded in making them harder to spot amongst the non-combatants.
Any action has a consequence. In this case the consequence is that in order to sort out who is who, an extremely small percentage of innocent folks were guests of the USMC. (tongue in cheek before you guys flip out on that comment). I am not saying it is right, I am saying it is simply the result of their tactics.
So, my positions remain
1. 150 is a ridiculously large number of people if this was intentional wrongful imprisonment. To believe that you would have to truly believe that pretty much everyone in the military is just a thug. I am not in the military, but I have worked for the DoD for a long time and you would never convince me that anything more than a very small percentage of the military fits that description.
2. 150 is a ridiculously small number if you consider that pretty much the entire population is suspect because of the actions of the Taliban army. I am amazed our guys kept it that low. Out of literally millions of folks, they were wrong only in the hundreds speaks volumes to me about the dedication of our guys in the field and our intel analysts. Great job. I bet more people were falsely convicted and incarcerated in the US justice system during that same time period.
3. I truly do feel for those that were wrongfully imprisoned. It is my belief that the blame for that falls at the feet of the Taliban because they chose that tactic. You either blame those that did the blending in or you blame those that did the sorting out. I am blaming the blenders. Again, I am not calling that tactic cowardly, but they chose to do that knowing that some sorting would have to happen. They are not stupid. I just see it as more of their pattern of not really caring what happens to their own people as long as they can blame the West for the Afghan people's suffering.
Blaming the sorters to me is short-sighted and out of touch with the reality of the situation on the ground.

+1

**CivilWars** · 04-26-11, 03:25 PM

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

Are their crib notes for those two links? My eyes are bleeding for the walls of text.

I just skimmed over them but the basic feeling I got is if you fight under a flag then you have rights, but if you are a guerilla or mercenary then you are fucked.

Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

**deathgodusmc** · 04-26-11, 03:32 PM

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

Are their crib notes for those two links? My eyes are bleeding for the walls of text.

I feel your pain. My left eye is twitching from this shit.

Originally Posted by CivilWars

I just skimmed over them but the basic feeling I got is if you fight under a flag then you have rights, but if you are a guerilla or mercenary then you are fucked.

Sent from my UrMoms using Tapatalk

Thats pretty much it.

Scion you are correct. I forgot that i had read all the bs to go with it before. The difiniton of the words is where unlawfull combatant comes into play. So you are correct the words unlawfull or illegal combatants are not there. So is this where you say nah nah?

**WickedTribe** · 04-26-11, 03:41 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

No actually they were farmer that were poorly trained and active a few weeks at a time as militia. Lets not try to make it sound like they were full time soldiers.

I haven't made it sound like they were full time solders, in fact, I specifically stated that they were parts of citizen militias. I also specifically stated that they weren't as well trained as their opponents, long before you even stuck your head into this particular topic. You appear to be trying to make them out to be less than they are. How, again, is this evidence that they didn't ever use their lack of uniforms to blend in?

**WickedTribe** · 04-26-11, 03:42 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Check their history.

Lazy attempt to avoid providing evidence of your own statements, noted.

**WickedTribe** · 04-26-11, 03:45 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

If you need things broken down to the very last letter and definition then you may be in the wrong forum.

I'm not asking for anything to be broken down. If you're going to butt in to defend Commander's statement, don't defend a different statement and pretend that it's the same. Commander's statement made no qualifications based on reason or time period. He clearly stated that all combatants out of uniform were cowards.

**WickedTribe** · 04-26-11, 03:49 PM

Originally Posted by Gumby

Since I brought up the uniform thing, let me make my position on it very clear.
I am not saying that avoiding uniforms to blend in is cowardly, it is simply the tactic they (and our forefathers) are using.
Their action has succeeded in making them harder to spot amongst the non-combatants.
Any action has a consequence. In this case the consequence is that in order to sort out who is who, an extremely small percentage of innocent folks were guests of the USMC. (tongue in cheek before you guys flip out on that comment). I am not saying it is right, I am saying it is simply the result of their tactics.

Thanks for clarifying, and I agree. I thought that you (as others after you have done) were passing some judgement. I agree then, that a higher risk to innocents is part of the cost of waging a guerrilla campaign. I also agree that that doesn't necessarily ease the guilt of the other side.