“Rehab:” Gitmo recidivists thumb their noses in new video
al Qaeda has released a video love letter (er, hate letter) from two Gitmo recidivists to the rest of the world as President Obama prepares to import a boat load of detainees into American civilian courts.
Sealed with a kiss-off:
Two former Guantánamo Bay detainees now appear to have joined Al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch, which released a video on Friday showing them both and identifying them by their names and Guantánamo detainee numbers.
American counterterrorism officials have already confirmed that Said Ali al-Shihri, 35, who was released from the American prison camp at Guantánamo in November 2007, is now the deputy leader of Al Qaeda’s Yemeni branch. He is suspected of playing a role in a deadly attack on the American Embassy in the Yemeni capital, Sana, in September.
In the video released Friday, Mr. Shihri sits alongside a man identified as Abu Hareth Muhammad al-Awfi, who appears with a script at the bottom of the screen giving his Guantánamo identification number, 333. That number corresponds to a man known in Pentagon documents as Mohamed Atiq Awayd al-Harbi, who was also released to Saudi Arabia in November 2007…
…Mr. Shihri also speaks in the video, saying “by God, our imprisonment only increased our perseverance in the principles for which we went out, did jihad for, and were imprisoned for.”
AFP:
The other men in the video are identified as Commander Abu Baseer al-Wahayshi and Abu Hureira Qasm al-Rimi (also known as Abu Hureira al-Sana’ani).
The Defense Department has said as many as 61 former Guantanamo detainees — about 11 percent of 520 detainees transferred from the detention center and released — are believed to have returned to the fight.
The latest case highlights the risk the new US administration faces as it moves to empty Guantanamo of its remaining 245 prisoners and close the controversial detention camp within a year.
This is an issue the Right should unite around immediately and in full force. 9/11 families are leading the way. Don’t miss this must-read from Michael Burke, brother of FDNY Capt. William F. Burke Jr., who was killed on Sept. 11, 2001, and follow-up from 9/11 Families for a Safe and Strong America.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
The Gitmo circus
May 7, 2012 09:28 AM by Michelle Malkin
186 CommentsKSM and company go on military trial, face death penalty
April 4, 2012 01:30 PM by Michelle Malkin
65 Comments
Eric Holder: Seriously, We’re Going to Close Gitmo Pretty Soon
September 20, 2011 04:07 PM by Doug Powers
40 CommentsCharges to be re-filed against KSM and Company
May 30, 2011 11:10 PM by Michelle Malkin
53 CommentsWaPo: Family Visitations For Gitmo Detainees Under Consideration
May 12, 2011 04:08 PM by Doug Powers
105 CommentsWaterboarding Point/Counterpoint: National Security Advisor vs. CIA Director vs. Attorney General
May 3, 2011 08:27 PM by Doug Powers
48 CommentsThe suicide stunts at Gitmo revisited
April 25, 2011 10:12 AM by Michelle Malkin
117 CommentsObama administration retreats (again) on Khalid Sheikh Mohammed civilian trial; Holder blames Congress
April 4, 2011 11:50 AM by Michelle Malkin
129 CommentsOmar Khadr: Guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty, guilty
October 25, 2010 10:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
17 Comments
Categories: Gitmo
How many times and how many years was it said that this would and could happen?…. Nothing is learned, except by being smacked upside the head by a 2×4, and it appears even then , some never learn.
Methinks many of these innocent little jihadists will somehow not be captured the next time they are encountered on the battlefield, but rather placed at room temperature instead. This will all be an ultimate intelligence loss, but, one at a time, they will not be returning to their little breakfast club.
Yes, and those “some” who never learn are all leftists. They seem not to have a one-on-one relationship with reality.
Why are they releasing this video now? What on earth could they possibly hope to achieve? Doesn’t this just make a mockery Obama’s efforts to shut down Gitmo? Perhaps they don’t want Gitmo closed because it’s the only prison in the world where the prisoners are so well looked after that they put on weight?
The timing of all this perplexes me.
Be repared for the loonies on the left to claim we turned these men into terrorists by imprisoning them…despite their own admission that they were terrorists before we sent them to Cuba (“principles for which we went out, did jihad for, and were imprisoned for”).
Mr. Obama is now responsible for whatever happens.
Ever since the announcement of plans to close GITMO in a year, I have been waiting for MSM to ask any key questions of “THE ONE”… Main one being, WHERE YOU GONNA PUT ‘EM??? Of course shooting from the HIP, you have no answer… This brings to mind a saying from my military days… WHEN YOU ARE UP TO YOUR ASS IN ALLIGATORS, IT’S TOUGH TO REMEMBER YOUR FIRST OBJECTIVE IS TO DRAIN THE SWAMP… Never more true than now… These ANIMALS have only one objective in life… To kill each and every one of US… Our mothers and fathers, brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles… They are not even going to ask if you are DEM or REPUBLICAN… They do not care, you will be dead… The reality is they are RABID DOGS, and you do not expose RABID DOGS to society, you DESTROY them…
Muhammad dirka dirka, jihad dirka, jihad dirka, dirka dirka Muhammad!
Translation: “Nah nah nah nah nah!”
This one’s for you, chap.
Americans have to wake up and stop defending the traitors they voted for. Bush, with the Gitmo and war-on-terror, sold out USA to his ‘friends and family’ in Al-Riyah, increasing Saudi visas, covering up the 9/11 investigations and sacrificing 4000 American live in the ‘war-on-Saddam’, cleverly packaged as ‘war-on-terror’. Why else is Osama free? Why else, the country that slaughtered Daniel Pearl, gave KSM and attacked India, getting trillions of US tax-dollars as aid? Fact is that neither Bush, nor Obma are paying in any way.
Americans are going to pay with their tax-dollars, blood and lives, while their elected traitors sell them out. Ofcourse, same Americans rejected Tom Tancredo.
Bottom line, elect traitors and pay.
pueblo1032 – this old retired soldier agrees with you but also says “kill them all, let God sort them out.”
As I said the other day – no prisoners, no problems.
NOW the WOT is important to the Media. They got the Commander in Cheif they wanted.
Really disgusting that the media fought tooth and nail to help free these guys and now they are the enemy again when it suits the MSM’s purposes.
In that case I look forward to continued disarray, circular firing squads and general pants wetting on the subject.
The fact that people desperately want to murder us is simply a distraction from our new mission of re-distributing wealth on the basis of conveniently perceived social injustice and besides, setting them free might get us liked in the editorial offices of the BBC and Le Monde. Probably not, but what is there to lose?
Sigh…
Wow, they spent years in Guantanamo, and they still hate us?
“Rehabilitation” for idiot fanatics like these? Sure. It’ll work. The only thing that would work better would be the insertion of a couple of ounces of metal into their ear. Insertion tool? A Glock 9mm preferably.
Michael Burke gets it-and put it in writing!
o
You are correct is it all Bush’s fault. These two were peacefully running a clothing store in Kabul and volunteering as soccer coaches at the youth center, when heartless CIA operatives burst into their store, took them to a prison ship, tortured them mercilessly, and sent them to Gitmo.
I am sure if we brought them to your home, you could explain to them all of the evils of this country caused by conservatives, explain to them that The Annointed New President and the Fellowship of Belivers in the Progressvie Movement will address all of their grievances, apologize to them, give them money for continuing education, and promise to build new homes for them in Yemen, they would give you a hug and return to a life of peace.
This morning Biden said we would try them and if found innocent and IF they are here illegally we would ship them to their home country.
He also said if they are found guilty we would imprision them in other nations.
also remember Murtha wants them.
This video is a good training tool for teaching our troops when they should take prisoners. Answer? NEVER.
Strength through capitulation.
That makes me feel all fuzzy inside!
Well at least I was able to get “o” in there.
If you want to make sure they never have the opportunity to kill Americans ever again, given the Adminstrations “Cops and Robbers” attitude, this is really the only logical option left.
Just think of all the recruiting the remaining 245 will able to do once Obama puts them into the U.S. prison system. In April of 2004 the U. S. Dept. of Justice reported that 6% of the 150,000 federal inmates are muslim. Most of them are Sunni or Nation of Islam, good old Louis Farrakhan’s followers. All one needs to do is talk with the French, who say their Muslim prison population is well over 50% of the total. Or ask the Belgians, the British or even the Australians (Muslims are recruiting the aborigines in prison)about the problem.
Remember Richard Reid (the “shoe bomber”), he converted to Islam in a British prison? How about Jose Padilla (the “dirty bomb” guy), he converted to Islam after serving time in a Florida jail where it is believed he was turned on to radical Islam (is there any other kind?) by inmates and the Muslim clerics that are allowed visits to inmates?
I think our new CIC needs a great deal more edification regarding the remaining thugs at GITMO.
Just think of all the recruiting the remaining 245 will able to do once Obama puts them into the U.S. prison system. In April of 2004 the U. S. Dept. of Justice reported that 6% of the 150,000 federal inmates are muslim.
Any country that would accept this scum is not a friend of ours…Ozero you paying attention?
On January 25th, 2009 at 2:08 pm, walterc said:
Exactly, ROE change, shoot ‘em! do not take prisoners.
Most of them are Sunni or Nation of Islam, good old Louis Farrakhan’s followers.
Most of them are Sunni or Nation of Islam.
What do we do IF we catch any new enemy combatants?
All one needs to do is talk with the French, who say their Muslim prison population is well over 50% of the total. Or ask the Belgians, the British or even the Australians (Muslims are recruiting the Aboriginals in prison)about the problem.
Remember Richard Reid (the “shoe bomber”), he converted to Islam in a British prison? How about Jose Padilla (the “dirty bomb” guy), he converted to Islam after serving time in a Florida jail where it is believed he was turned on to radical Islam (is there any other kind?) by inmates and the Muslim clerics that are allowed visits to inmates?
I think our new CIC needs a great deal more edification regarding the remaining thugs at GITMO.
I’d like to hear, “Do you still think it’s a good idea to close Gitmo given the number who have gone back to the battlefield?”
Yeah, dreaming I know.
seveneleventy, Answer: we don’t catch ‘em anymore.
If you put my posts #’rs 24, 26, 28 and 29 together it will make more sense. I had to do this piecemeal to find where I had strayed from the rules. I guess using the name of the guy that leads Nation of Islam is a no-no.
There are people in Gitmo that are simply POW’s. They have committed no crimes as such. If we capture someone who was trying to kill U.S. sodiers with an IED or an AK, he’s an enemy POW, nothing more.
Classifying all captured combatants potential criminals will come back to bite us, if we set this precedent. During the Vietnam War the North Vietnamese at one point threatened to do this to U.S. pilots. If things proceed as Biden explained, what will be our argument against trying EVERY American POW in the future?
I posted the link to the video in the Murtha thread yesterday, Chap and LGM didn’t bother to respond.
In Chaps defense, he/she actually had some lucid comments.
LGM probably thinks they are still just innocent jihadis randomly picked up on the battlefield while delivering milk to orphans by our thug soldiers, and were turned into guys that might be slightly bad by Gitmo.
Yeah, if only we would have talked to them while they were there to understand their feelings.
So do you believe they would not have gone back to terrorism if they would not have spent “years in Guantanamo”?
I still haven’t figured this out. Why, if we captured them and put them on trial and they are found guilty, is the left so quick to pawn them off on other nations?
It’s as if they know those at Gitmo are going to need to be locked up for some time, yet closing Gitmo is the only objective.
If they have to be held by some other country, so be it. At least Gitmo is closed and they are now out of sight and out of mind?
If they have to be held, what better place than Gitmo?
It all suggests closing Gitmo is only being done to appease the left.
Thanks, nice to have some affirmation around here! Seriously, I don’t know why the Bush administration decided to release al-Shihri (5 years at Gitmo + a couple months of Saudi rehabilitation = one happy reformed jihadist?). From what we know, he was almost certainly guilty of facilitating the transport of jihadists into Afghanistan, so I don’t know why that peacenik Bush administration would want him repatriated to Yemen. In this country, you can get a life sentence for conspiracy to traffic narcotics, so I have no idea why the Bush administration would feel like 5 years at Gitmo is an adequate sentence for somone who conspired to blow up buildings.
If it were up to me, I’d throw him in a U.S. prison, just as the Bush administration has already done with so many enemy combattants caught in the war on terror, and hope for the best in whatever information we can get from him, rather than torturing false information out of him a la Omar Khadr.
Fixed it.
Certainly, not in her area…NIMBY. That’s okay. Murtha will take them. He’s hoping for new voters. Nancy is always “all talk” anyway. She makes the rules; everyone else follows them.
On January 25th, 2009 at 1:46 pm, Red State Skeptic said:
Yeah, thanks to leftwing vermin like you, they were imprisoned rather than summarily executed as they should have been.
Let me see if I have this straight:
The libs have compassion for criminals who would saw their heads off, but not unborn babies. The want compassion for death row inmates and illegal aliens, but not for those who support the definition of marriage. They want to talk to people whose stated goal is our destruction and would kill them for their lefty views, but won’t tolerate dissent from liberal talking points in America.
Logical.
On a side note, this morning on George “Cry for the One” Snuffalupagus, they asked Speaker Pelosi, Cokie Roberts, and the CEO of HP Fiorina about the ‘glass ceiling’ and how Caroline Kennedy wasn’t given fair treatment. Irony isn’t a strong enough word.
We have become silly.
Can we please stop pretending that the detention of suspected terrorists on U.S. soil is Obama’s idea or new? Many have been detained here already under the Bush administration, and as far as I know, those facilities are not “terrorist targets” because of it.
Well, obviously these guys were innocent, scooped up and sent to Gitmo just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. They were only driven into radical behavior by the cruelty they experience in Bushitler’s Cuban gulag.
I mean, obviously.
Does it really give you no pause to know that even in the U.S. judicial system, where it is a fairly high bar to convict someone — at least higher than you would like enemy combattants to have — we have imprisoned and of course executed so many people who have subsequently cleared by DNA or other exculpatory evidence? Or is it worth it to you to exact
ultimate vengeanceat the expense of killing a few of the wrong guys?Yeah but then Code Pink usually made bail pretty quickly.
Wait. Remind me again which administration released these guys?
I mean, these guys were just released right? Its not like they “laywered up” and won their freedom by taking advantage of all the wonderful rights we enjoy, correct?
Were either of these fellas released in the past week?
No?
Wow. I just hope the Obama administration is more competent in determining the ones that are actually a threat than the Bush administration apparently has been.
That remark would almost be clever, if only someone, somewhere, ever claimed that the purpose of Gitmo was to convert jihadis into allies. It’s not. The purpose of Gitmo is to take terrorists out of circulation and put them where they can’t hurt innocent people.
Of course, it performs that function best when you don’t let them go.
“Dead men tell no tales…” Pirates Creed.
Who let them go, again?
The Bush administration did. That would be the Bush administration that virtually every commenter here has had serious problems with over the years. One of those problems being the way they take their eyes off the ball in a vain attempt to look good to people like The One.
So do I. Of course his rhetoric during the campaign and since winning the election says that rather than learning from these mistakes he plans to repeat them a couple of hundred times.
Okay…with respect to immigration, spending, and a few other issues, sure. if you could point me to the posts where all y’all are criticizing Bush for his handling of Gitmo, I’d be happy to look.
Surely you don’t believe that closing Gitmo means releasing the detainees onto the streets?
The Bush administration did. Of course, they did so without the benefit of a prior example to guide them.
Obama, genius that he is, wants to close Gitmo even after seeing this.
And just by the way… saying “yeah my side is doing the wrong thing but your side did it first!” isn’t a particularly effective rhetorical device.
You mean forced to release, Chap
Again, how do you equate closing Gitmo with releasing prisoners? And how many prisoners has Obama released from Gitmo at this point? maybe we should wait to see if his record is as apparently as poor as Bush’s before making a determination.
How were they forced? Are you familiar with any of the procedural posture of these two? I looked and found nothing that indicated they did anything but follow the procedure that Bush’s administration set up. And they were released before Boumedine, so don’t blame that.
If the criteria to keep them in prison is to convict them based on the standards of the civilian criminal justice system that’s exactly what it means.
I don’t recall Obama ever saying that. Maybe you could provide a link?
Wow…unbelieveable!
When I put out a roach motel, I don’t get all teary eyed for the poor little things and release them back into my home.
Mark my words. This will come back to bite us in the keister.
PGTips said:
This sentence unwittingly answers your question about the timing of the release of this video. In effect, they are putting Obama on notice that no matter what he does with these Jihadists, they are committed to their stated goal of the destruction of the ‘Zionists’ and their allies. I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for Obama to get the memo.
Chap, you’re being really disingenuous here. For years now the left side of the spectrum, have been howling that these people need to be given a “fair trial”, meaning full protection under the 4th, 5th and 6th amendments.
Now, if Obama is going to flip his voter base the bird and do the right thing I’ll be very happy to see it. But if he’s going to continue holding them under the current rules then why close Gitmo?
#14 red state skeptic said:
Always remember, that one way Islamic organizations like al Qaeda continue to exist is with the help of useful idiots like yourself.
I believe they have stated as such within internal documents found on the battlefield years ago.
I also believe that their documents stated something like, “the political expediency of some can be manipulated to the detriment of the security for all.
R.S. Skeptic, it appears that al Qaeda is smart enough to play you like a fiddle, huh?
Actually I think Obama may indeed get the memo. Over his time in the national spotlight there has been exactly one constant about Obama, and that is his self-interest. He knows that if we have a successful attack inside our borders and someone he cut loose had anything to do with it then his little hope’n'change revolution is over and he goes down in history as being worse even than Carter.
You think they loved us before they got sent there?
Hey chappy
Why does the Obama, administration want to close Gitmo? What great need does it serve?
‘ To MNUSMCDAVID’ You would wear out a 2×4 on these useful idiots and still not teach them a damned thing.
I hope you’re right.
chapoutier said:
I know, if you had your way, chances are, there will be more terrorists that end up going free.
If this is what happens under a President “meanie who incarcerates innocent jihadis” Bush, imagine what will happen under President “failure of empathy, let’s make the world like us” Obama?
chapoutier said:
Good luck with that. If Obama only had the heart to go after terrorists over seas like he wants to go after babies over seas…
Why did Pres Bush allow them to be released? Why weren’t they prosecuted? Why wasn’t a system establish and used to deal with these people? Why has it taken six plus years to prosecute these people? I suppose another question would be, why haven’t we killed or captured Osama Bin Laden? What ever happened to ‘dead or alive’?
I suppose Pres Obama will have to learn from what Pres Bush did, and did not do.
The debate over whether or not to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay is about much more then that facility itself. It is a debate over how the United States and its allies are conducting the war on terrorism. If the United States concedes that its actions in Guantanamo Bay are such that they warrant closing the facility, how can the U.S. defend keeping other facilities open? And if the United States cannot house and interrogate suspected terrorists, how can it prosecute the Global War on Terrorism?
No one who has any sense, and I have not heard Obama say this, believes one can deal with Gitmo detainees in the same way that you deal with a normal criminal prosecution. If Obama “flips the bird” at anyone who belives as such, I won’t lose any sleep, nor should they be surprised.
But the fact of the matter is there is a whole lot of room between what Bush did with Gitmo, which is set up a situation in which absolutely no set of standards applied, in which people could be detained for years without trial, and what Obama has the opportunity to do. Frankly, you could do the same thin at Gitmo, were it not for the fact that the mere existence of that place has become so divisive and toxic.
Really, it is less about “closing Gitmo” in the physical sense, as it is bringing an end to some of the most egregious Bush policies with respect to Gitmo. At least for me, in any case.
That is an absolutely illogical jump to make. How do you figure conceding A necessarily leads to B?
But GUYS…imprisoning guys who are just acting according to their CONSCIOUS tells them isn’t FAIR!!!
You’ll see. If we just leave ‘em alone and let ‘em know that we mean ‘em no harm, they’ll be nice back to us!
And then we’ll all join hands and sing KUM-BA-YAAA MAH LORD, KUM-BA-YAAAAAA!!!
Excellent contribution, yohannbiimu.
Way to raise the level of discourse.
Chap. The statement and question are very clear.
To put it another way. What military facilities will be acceptable?
Huh? I am no expert, but I am sure there are people who are. We currently house many terrorists here in the states. I am sure this an imminently doable task for our folks in the military. After all, how many escaped from Gitmo? Is there something in the water or air there that makes it impervious to breakouts?
Or are you talking about what the formal procedure for trying them should be?
chapoutier, have you ever heard of a prisoner of war? If you have, then you should be able to figure out WHY these prisoners haven’t been tried. They are being kept because they are detained combatives, and are solely under the care of our military, NOT civilian authorities.
The entire (idiotic) matter of making their imprisonment a civilian matter is why these guys are going to be so emboldened when they’re released. These Islamic jihadists are soldiers of Allah, and their goal is to bring the entire world under sharia law.
We, on the other hand, are waging a war “on terror” (which is like saying you’re waging a war on blitzkrieg tactics), and we treat the enemy like gang-bangers who’re being a bit too unruly.
One side is going to win, and it doesn’t look to me like we even care.
Chap
What would be gained by closing Gitmo?
It’s called “sarcasm,” which is the level of response that 99% of the idiotic liberal dribble that is spewed in the public arena deserves.
Also, is this NOT what you liberals believe? I mean, do you not believe that these Muslims have been wronged by White capitalists, we’re getting our comeuppance,and if we just UNDERSTAND THEM, and GET TO KNOW THEM MORE, we’ll be able to coexist with the Islamic world?
Chap
How can you prosecute suspected combatants before you finish the Global War on Terrorism? War detainees are prosecuted after you win. When has it ever been done otherwise?
Yeah. Maybe you caught the news that the Bush administration does not classify most of the detainees as such. They are “unlawful enemy combatants.”
If they were considered prisoners of war, we probably wouldn’t be having this discussion.
Wait…is this more “sarcasm” or are you just spouting off more idiocies? Its hard to tell the difference.
So you would disagree with this National Review editorial. Please point out the Bush policy abuse at Gitmo, as debuked by this editorial, which was obviously written with the help of lawyers that are experts in this area.
Yeah, and there’s a precedent for the treatment of THOSE too. It’s called a “firing squad.” It’s a shame we don’t use those anymore.
Words chap. Just words
Is there a legal difference?
Under what rules?
And when did Congress pass a declaration of war? I mean I know we call it a “war” but isn’t that just a term of art here?
The Leftists needed to convolute this principle to make political hay at the expense of President Bush. Now that they have managed to convlute anything, like they always do, we have created a needless mess.
Geographically Gitmo is a near perfect location for housing these enemy combatants for the DURATION OF THE WAR. Some Like KSM can be prosecuted for specific terrorist acts, but most are POW’s and need to stay right where they are; no different than a German panzergrenadier captured in Belgium.
Don’t play stupid. You know that this is the so-called “conventional wisdom” as to why these “terrorists” are trying to kill us. If you don’t believe it, then good for you. If you do believe it, then you’re a moron.
Seriously, what kind of living do you think these terrorists can make w/o going back to their previous profession? Gitmo on your resume even if they give you the stamp of “rehabilitated” isn’t going to open many doors for you.
We should bring them to the U.S. have them on a gaurded work detail building our border fence. Or, just hang the Bastardos.
Exactly
The Bush administration sure thinks so otherwise it would not have fought tooth and nail to have them classified as one and not the other.
So you admit there is no legal reason to wait to bring these people to trial, especially considering there really is no formal war?
No. it really isn’t. Its what is called a strawman and is what simple-minded people rely on to make an argument.
Mr. Y, what makes you so gullible that you actually believe that all Gitmo detainees are actually enemy combattants in the first place? In fact, we KNOW that at least 22 Gitmo past and present detainees are Uighur separatists who never in any way waged war against our country. Given that so many of the detainees — such as al-Shihri himself — are detained based on circumstantial evidence, and not because a U.S. soldier wrestled an AK-47 out of his hand, what makes you believe that even half of those detained are actually “combattants” and not pretense for keeping people suspected of being part of the Qaeda network under wraps? All you have to go on is blind faith in our government, when there are so many examples we already know of which tell us there is no reason to have such faith.
From 1942 to 1946.
1,100 were prosecuted by military tribunals, with an 89% conviction rate (the federal rate was 93%). I recall that we still kept the “innocent” 11% until the end of hostilities. The Quirin case is only famous because their capture was an exception, it was widely reported, as were their (six of the eight) executions 50 days after conviction.
Most of the others cases were never reported on or were mere post-WWII back page articles. Unlike today, our media was not suicidal back then, here in this kill zone our enemies know as America.
OH, but there IS a “formal war,” except we’re too stupid to respond to it. It was declared a LONG time ago. Ever hear of this guy named “Muhammad?” He declared war on all “kafir” (non-Muslims) about 1200 years ago, and Muslims have been waging it ever since.
We’re inundated with war declarations all the time by Islamic organizations that are openly supported by the Saudis, the Egyptians, the Pakistanis, the Iranians, the Syrians–practically ever Islamic state on Earth, and you don’t think this is “FORMAL?”
When you deploy an Army HQ, 2 Corps HQ, 3 navy carrier battle groups, 15 combat brigades with supporting combat support and CSS units, and who knows how many air wings, I think you can pretty much say it’s a war.
But then Harry Truman, a Democrat, deployed an even larger force, lost 50,000 dead before he left office and proclaimed it a Police Action.
I guess it all dpends on what the definition of “is” is….to quote another famous Democrat, who also played Cops and Robbers with Al Qaeda.
I am sure all the strict constructionsts will appreciate the fact that only Congress can declare war and no such declaration has been made.
Ergo, we are not at war. Unless you are a dirty liberal that believes in a “living Constitution.”
And my only reason for stating as such is to counter the notion that we have to wait to try these people. Wait until what? There will never be a formal end to this “war” because there was never a formal beginning. Seems odd that you would insist that none of the ordinary rules of war apply to these people, except the ones that you want.
Just give them all Odopey Kool-Aid, that should fix em.
Chap. No
Formal or not, it is still a war.