I agree. It sounds kind of odd when they say it that way. Sadly though, I don’t believe one could get elected president of the U.S. right now without saying it.
Good guys kill people all the time, don’t you watch TV? What society were you brought up in?
Anyway it’s a simple strategy: fight fire with fire or in this case fight irrational all-consuming hatred with irrational all-consuming hatred. It’s the easiest way to keep the home fires burning.
Well, we have Guatanamo, and people are squawking about that. We’ve had the male nationals of several hostile countries register here, squawk squawk squawk. We’ve contained Moqtada al Sadr and now he wants to run for office. Whatever we do, we’re going to make somebody unhappy.
To be fair, nobody said ‘kill them all’ and I don’t think any political figure has done so. Often, they will say “capture or kill” the terrorists who blah blah blah.
I have nothing good to say about the current administration, but they HAVE arrested some terrorists, jailed and interrogated them. I’d prefer they go through a real court system and the rest of it, but they have arrested some terrorists.
It’s preferable to take terrorists alive whenever possible. That’s part of the point- sometimes it’s not possible to do that. Some will insist on going out shooting, and you can’t tell your military and intelligence people ‘don’t shoot back, we want to give these people a trial.’ It works the same way with normal criminals in the US. I’m not aware of anybody who is non-violently involved with terrorism (say, giving them money) getting shot. People who don’t pose an immediate threat to civilians or military are arrested. People who start shooting usually get killed.
I gues the bottom line is if you just said “jail the terrorists,” it might sound like you’re not willing to kill them if necessary.
the popular belief these days is that terrorists (read–Middle-Eastern-based terrorists) are not human, and that human rights do not apply to them. They’re also guilty until proven innocent … hell, they’re just plain guilty.
I always feel like I am in the extreme minority for believing that they should be treated like any other prisoner when taken into custody
I think it’s because this is a campaign year and nobody wants to appear soft on terror. If Kerry said he wanted to arrest the terrorists and bring them to justice, Bush and all would say he was to soft for the war and it would likely stick.
Also, 9/11 got a lot of people pissed off and that anger has to go somewhere.
Think about all the prisoner abuse scandals. It saves so much time (and newpaper ink) if we just kill them and avoid the whole thing :rolleyes:
Lastly, Toby Keith songs would lose some of their “Pizzazz” if he sang about bringing the terrorist here and making them face…a jury of their peeeeers.
Bingo. The bloodlust of a certain demographic of Americans currently makes it such that one must use the term “kill” to get the constituency to vote for them. Kinda sad actually, and telling, too.
Kerry used the word “kill” a lot in the first debate. It seemed to me that he was trying to “butch up” and sound tough on the war. It sounded rehearsed.
I guess this tweaks you guys more than it does me.
There is a declared war on terrorism which is being waged in Afganistan.
U.S. Troops are waging that war, not policemen. While they probably would like to capture the enemy, their objective is to kill or capture the enemy in the safest manner for U.S. troops and most likely its a lot easier to kill them than to capture them.
Similar to other wars - Kill the British;Kill the Germans; Kill the Japanese;Kill the NV- The term “Kill the terrorists” pops up quite often. I’m not seeing the big disconnect here.
In fact, “Kill the terrorists” does not exclude due process. If my slogan was “Jail the Child molesters” would you think that my statement excluded a fair trial?
If you are thinking that I’m one of the “certain demographic of Americans” I have to confess that I’m not one of those people who think killing anybody is a good idea. But I’m not alarmed by politicians using strong slogans to describe a war which is in process.
Imagine that. Now there is something wrong with killing people who are trying to kill Americans. Even if you want to describe this conflict – I’m speaking specifically about Al Qaeda and their ilk here, not the “terrorists” who simply want Iraq for Iraqis – as a battle of laws vs. chaos, our law still allows for using violence in self-defense.
And, before anybody complains, if terrorists are captured and held by the United States, they still have rights under our Constitution to access to lawyers, a fair trial, and humane treatment. But police and law enforcement exists to protect law and order, not to preserve our national security It is just nutty to try to pursue Osama bin Laden with a search warrant in one hand and handcuffs in another. Just kill the fucker and any of his associates who don’t give themselves up peacefully.
My only concern is to make sure we don’t kill people who are innocent. But if there are ever a group of bomb makers that barracaded themselves in some building and screamed “you’ll never take me alive and I’m glad I helped kill infidels” I really don’t see any reason not to just lob an artillery shell into the building and go home.
Maybe it’s a continuation of the “Foreign peoples who think the USA should continue to run roughshod over foreign countries and act with impunity, even though a large percentage of Americans and a majority of the world at large disagree with the war and how it has been fought”, thread?
:wally
I highly disagree with the notion that people who don’t want war with Iraq and don’t want people running around talking about killing people are “pussified”. we have not fought a distinguished or honorable war in Iraq, though I agree with the action in Afghanistan. I alos think that if a huge plot to bomb Americans is foiled and they hole up, they ought to be taken no matter what. But a goal specifically to “kill terrorists”, puts me off a bit.
To arrest someone you have to have jursdiction. The U.S. does not have jurisdiction anywhere outside its own borders (although legally speaking, I’m not sure how to classify Iraq ) and therefore cannot arrest anyone.