Is this the first step of the next war?
I also just love Rummy’s attitude. We don’t have to tell you excrement.
So no matter where they go. We will follow. Is that it?
We as peace loving Americans must stop it. We must stop it now.
Uhm…isn’t that a little inflammatory? It looks like US forces crossed a totally featureless stretch of desert into Syria in hot pursuit of a convoy they mistakenly (thanks to a top Iraqi) thought contained the most wanted man in the world. It’s a shame that it didn’t pan out but I really don’t want Saddam to escape to Syria where we have to try to get him out or sit back and watch him join up with the Baathists there–I know the two Baathist parties aren’t buddies but things have changed. Do you?
Our forces use GPS technology. They know exactly where they are. And I thought Osama, remember him? He killed allmost 3000 people on our soil, was the most wanted.
Osama Bin Laden is the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorist”. Saddam Hussein is the Defense Department’s “Most Wanted Ace of Spades”.
>We as peace loving Americans …
Who? Are there some of them left?
Odd, MSNBC left out part of Rumsfeld’s answer:
I don’t have a comment on this, other than this:
Can we all assume that “We” is not ALWAYS the USA? As in, “We go into Syria” must of course equal “USA goes into Syria.”
I know it’s a minor point, but it does make a difference wrt which threads I open and which I don’t open.
Sorry for the hijack.
So crossing an international border without authorisation to suit your (i.e. the USA’s) purpose is not objectionable/a cause for worry? How does it matter what kind of terrain was involved? :rolleyes:
And good point, Anahita. When I saw the thread title, the “we” automatically registered in my mind as the USA! Worrying, it is.
**
We’ve done it before in the 20th century when we were looking for Banditos in Mexico. I can’t say I have any objections to US forces pursuing forces fleeing into Syria.
Marc
To define this more clearly, the borders of Arab states- particularly in the Arabian Peninsula, but also those in the Levant- have always been rather fluid and poorly defined, since early Arab kings exercised authority over tribes, rather than lands; where the tribes went, so went the king’s influence.
So one might argue that the American troops were as much in Iraq as in Syria.
Regardless, even if Saddam gets to/is in Syria, so bloody what? The Syrians aren’t just going to hand over control of their military and paramilitary resources to him. If you’re worried about justice, you might want to worry first about the few dozen citizens of (friendly) European states (including Britain) being held at Guantanamo without trial, while John Walker Lindh not only gets a trial, he gets it on his own soil, with a jury of his peers.
US forces attack vehicles near Syrian border. Shoot first, ask questions later:
Yeah, kill 'em first and find out later. Why take the trouble to detain them when you can just kill them?
Well, duh!
Of course he has to die. Suppose you actually capture him, what would you accuse him of? How could you hold a trial without looking like an enormous hypocrite.
No, if and when he is found by US forces, he will be quite dead.
The fact that it has been done before doesn’t make it anymore legal or right to violate national borders.
Well, here’s what bugs me about it. The “hostilities” are over, right? So even if this convoy is made up of Iraqi military vehicles, there is no longer any justification to outright attack them. The “war” is over. If we regard these people as criminals in flight, on what basis do we make that assumption? Did they open fire on us first? And even if the borders are somewhat “fluid”, wouldn’t the presence of Syrian border guards be kind of a tip-off? Presumably, border guards don’t simply randomly choose some section of the Godforsaken Desert.
Do we have some sort of carte blanche to kill people on the presumption that they might be Saddam and Sons? Loathesome pustule as he may be, has he actually been indicted or charged with anything?
Or is it coming down to, once again, “We don’t care. We don’t have to care. We’re the Americans.”
Excuse me ? Are you saying that those armed forces that have been bragging about how they drop their bombs with the most exquisite precision isn’t up to the task of keeping track of what country their tanks are in ?
Neither Saddam nor the Ba’ath Party have surrendered. There’s reason to believe that the ongoing attacks against Coalition soldiers may be organanized by Saddam or by remnants of the Ba’ath Party. Wouldn’t these conditions provide legal justification for attacking fleeing Ba’ath Party members?
Try and apprehend fleeing Party members? Sure…
Not an assassination mission inside the national borders of a third country. If that indeed is what it was.
According to my Atlas, the entire Iraq-Syria border is well-defined and fixed (MacMillan World Atlas, 1996).
Normally, I would assume that a desert border would not be marked (thereby making it difficult for US troops to determine which side of the border they were on). However, the presence of Syrian border guards indicates to me a marked border at the particular location in question.
I suppose there is always the possibility that the border guards were outside their jurisdiction, though?
Nevertheless, GWB has already declared that the war is over. The only reason to believe that the “ongoing attacks against Coalition soldiers may be organanized by Saddam or by remnants of the Ba’ath Party” is because GWB says so. There isn’t much of the card pack left - most are them are already in custody.
There isn’t really any grounds for atacking “fleeing Ba’ath Party members”.
What gounds can there be for attacking a bunch of random unknown guys in cars?
Guards or now guards the GPS systems the US military boasts about prevents them from not knowing where they are.
I grow increasingly distrustful of a nation that excersises power without regard for other nations. I seem to remember that the West used to stand up to such countries in the past because it was the right thing to do.
Respectfully, I can’t see the relevance of this. Equating chasing Pancho Villa’s gang into Mexico after they had invaded the US to attacking a convoy of Iraqis in Syria is a bit of a stretch. What’s next, do we launch a punitive expedition into Syria ala 1916?