[Vision2020] Beating dead horses

Wed May 30 08:31:20 PDT 2012

Mr. Hansen,

It would be ideal to have captured Al-Awiaki, but smart bombs aren't that smart. How many US Troops are worth sacrificing to capture a known leader of a well organized and armed terrorist organization when we can just kill him with no loss of life on our side? I don't think we should ask troops to risk their lives unless it is absolutely necessary. If Al-Awaki or any other active terrorist believes he is innocent and wants a fair trial, he can always surrender. Otherwise, he is going to going to have to bit the bullet, or drone, in this case. These kinds of people don't surrender. 

Donovan J. Arnold

From: Moscow Cares <moscowcares at moscow.com>
To: 'Sunil Ramalingam' <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> 
Cc: 'vision 2020' <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Beating dead horses

Concerning Al-Awlaki:  I agree with you 1,000%.  Al-Awlaki should have been captured and held for trial by a United Nations tribunal.  That would have been the moral thing to do.

Concerning who is/isn’t a militant:  That has become the “gray area” of combat operations, since the advent of gorilla-warfare (introduced in the Korea conflict and “amped up” in Vietnam).

Would the US have been considered immoral to bomb a Nazi munitions factory in WW2 if that factory contained Jewish forced labor?  That’s a tough one.

Was Lt. Calley, and his platoon, immoral for assaulting and killing women and children in the village of My Lai, South Vietnam, after receiving confirmed reports of Viet Cong inhabiting that village?  My answer is “Yes”.  However, it must be emphasized that not all Viet Cong were males between the ages of 18 and 60.  There have been several instances of Viet Cong “suicide bombers”, many were women and children, with bombs strapped to their bodies as they entered US observation posts and compounds, resulting in letters to next-of-kin.

In addition to those “non-military aged” combatants killed as a result of such operations, there are other (just as severe) remnants of “collateral damage”, such as . . .

Bill, good friend of mine that I met while attending North Idaho College (I mentioned this earlier on the Viz), suffered from PTSD.  He and I shared more than a couple beers discussing our times in the military.  I learned from him what caused his PTSD.

Bill was an artilleryman in the Marines in Vietnam.  As an artilleryman, his team would receive missions that simply included grid coordinates and the types and levels of shelling to conduct.  Many times his team was called on to use white phosphorus shells (extremely incendiary).  He never had the “opportunity” to see the results of his team’s shelling up close until . . .

Bill’s team was called on to conduct white phosphorus saturation shelling of a target approximately one square kilometer in size.  His team hit the target heavily for, what he felt, was a couple hours.  After the fires and smoke had degenerated, Bill and his team were ordered to conduct a recon patrol of the target . . . a village of hootches containing the burned bodies of elderly women and children.  It was learned that there were VC in the village, but they had cleared out long before the shelling began.

I haven’t had any contact with Bill in quite a while.  I only hope that is at peace with himself.

So, you see, Sunil (and I am paraphrasing here) . . .

War NEVER proves who is right, only who is left.

Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

From:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Sunil Ramalingam
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 6:51 AM
Cc: vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Beating dead horses

Tom,

You are right, it is confusing, primarily because it's poorly written. I was thinking of the Al-Awlaki murder when I wrote the first sentence, and am referring specifically to that killing in my first sentence.

The second quote goes to the Obama administration's position (or lie) that it's killing militants with its drone campaign; they can make it because of their expansive definition of 'militants.'

I should be more clear when I write. For clarity's sake, let me say I find both categories of killing disgusting and illegal, and I can't support someone who is doing this.

Sunil
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
From: thansen at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Beating dead horses
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 06:31:14 -0700
To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
Sunil -

I am puzzled a little, honestly, by your comments.

Are you addressing "ALL [my emphasis] military age males in a strike zone" or just those that are US citizens (as suggested by your opening sentence)?

If the former, I will have more to say.  If the latter, I kinda (in spirit) agree with you.
Seeya round town, Moscow.

Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho

"If not us, who?
If not now, when?"

- Unknown

On May 30, 2012, at 6:03, Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> wrote:
Chuck (or is it Chick?)
>
>I'm looking for the section in the Constitution that says the President, on his own say so, can kill US citizens, without due process. Where is it?
>
>Here's Greenwald on this issue, yesterday:
>
>http://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/obama_the_warrior/singleton/
>
>Here's something to be proud of: "Mr. Obama embraced a disputed method for counting civilian casualties that did little to box him in. It in effect counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants, according to several administration officials, unless there is explicit intelligence posthumously proving them innocent." (From this other Greenwald article yesterday: http://www.salon.com/2012/05/29/militants_media_propaganda/singleton/ )
>
>Yep, if we killed them, they must have been militants, unless someone proves otherwise, after they're dead. Of course, when we send drones back to kill rescuers and mourners, it may be hard to prove the innocence of the murder victims. And we should believe the state, because Obama's president, right? If he says it, it must be true? How many Obama supporters took the same position when Bush was president?
>
>How can we 'eliminate al Quaeda' when every time we blow up people, we help them recruit?
>
>Sunil
>Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:59:39 -0700
>From: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
>To: ckovis at turbonet.com
>CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Beating dead horses
>Mr. Kovis,
> 
>It concerns me that you don't know the difference between an opinion piece and an article strictly written with
>empirical facts backed by several sources for accuracy. One is subjective, and the other is objective.
> 
>You can post 100s of opinion pieces by anti-war, anti-Obama, or anti-current US policy writers, it doesn't substantiate your claims that Obama is targeting innocent civilians.
> 
>"When he applies his lawyering skills to counterterrorism, it is usually to enable, not constrain, his ferocious campaign against Al Qaeda -even when it comes to killing an American cleric in Yemen, a decision that Mr. Obama told colleagues was "an easy one."
> 
>This is not the full truth, which makes it a lie. If you read the article which the opinion writer is referring to, you would see that Obama has only targeted 15 Yemen with American ties, all plotting an attack on American soil. It doesn't matter if someone is a cleric from Mukalla, Yemen, or Moscow, Russia, or Moscow, Idaho, if they are plotting to kill Americans in the United States or elsewhere, I say more power to the President to bring a drone plane down on their head.
> 
>It appears to me, you reject any policy the US has of eliminating Al Qaeda, an organization that plotted, funded, and executed 3,000 American civilians, including children, and would do it again given a chance. 
> 
>Donovan J. Arnold
> 
> 
> 
>From:Chuck Kovis <ckovis at turbonet.com>
>To: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> 
>Cc: "vision2020 at moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com> 
>Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 4:32 PM
>Subject: Beating dead horses
> 
>From the New York Times via Reader Supported News:
>"In interviews with The New York Times, three dozen of his current and former advisers described Mr. Obama's evolution since taking on the role, without precedent in presidential history, of personally overseeing the shadow war with Al Qaeda.  They describe a paradoxical leader who shunned the legislative deal-making required to close the detention facility at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, but approves lethal action without hand-wringing. While he was adamant about narrowing the fight and improving relations with the Muslim world, he has followed the metastasizing enemy into new and dangerous lands. When he applies his lawyering skills to counterterrorism, it is usually to enable, not constrain, his ferocious campaign against Al Qaeda -even when it comes to killing an American cleric in Yemen, a decision that Mr. Obama told colleagues was "an easy one."  "  (My emphasis)
>I opposed Democrat Lyndon Johnson and the Vietnam War.  I oppose Democrat Barack Obama and the Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Iran Wars.  When you have a constitutional law professor saying that it is "an easy one" to kill a fellow U.S. citizen without what passes now days for "due process,"  don't expect me to go along with it.  I find it disgusting that more people in this country don't have the guts to put a stop to this at the ballot box.  As a country, we will never learn, when  a former SDS'er is an apologist for a President who says the decision to kill a fellow human being and fellow American citizen is easy.         Chuck Kovis
> 
> 
>
>======================================================= List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com =======================================================
=======================================================
>List services made available by First Step Internet,
>serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>              http://www.fsr.net
>         mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>=======================================================
=======================================================
List services made available by First Step Internet,
serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
              http://www.fsr.net
          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20120530/5f63f6dd/attachment-0001.html>