Squeamishness or Hypocrasy

There is one thing that can be guarranteed when fighting against terrorism, and that is that the enemy will not operate under the same rules you do. In fact, for the terrorist, anything goes.

To wit: The Governor of Paktia province in Afghanistan - Mr Hakim Taniwal, an Australian citizen - was killed by a suicide bomber on Sunday. At his funeral on Monday, an explosion killed five and wounded another thirty.

Now comes a story from Associated Press via the Fox Network on this picture of 190 Taliban fighters nicely lined up at a funeral of one of their colleagues.

According to the story, the Predator drone snapped this photo and the US Army requested they be allowed to take out the target. The request was refused under the 'rules of engagement' because of an agreement between Hamid Khazi and 'someone high in the US Government' not to bomb cemetaries.

HELL-LLOO is the West at war with the Taliban or not? Is the plan to kill enemy combatants or not?

When this war is over, are America and NATO planning on soaking in self-satisfaction and smugness by saying 'we prosecuted a more culturally-sensitive and socially-aware war than the enemy'?

That is not the way to win a war. Cemetaries are only sacred ground if you're running from a Vampire, okay? Cemetaries are full of dead people, a few more won't bother them. In combat, battles have been fought before in cemetaries, the current conflicts are no exception.

Whoever that fucknuckle was who made the agreement, can now bear full responsibility for the deaths of any allied troops should a single one of those 190 Taliban fighters attack. The argument that the fighter who pulls the trigger is responsible is no longer on the table because the Army had the opportunity to stop that killer and were denied that opportunity.

I suspect because of political concerns - gotta be friendly and accommodating, because later Afghanistan may have something this idiot needs.

190 trained killers, already pissed off at the loss of one of their own. What did they do after the photo was taken, I wonder?

And now, of course, they also know that the US won't touch them at a funeral. Gosh, maybe that 'high-ranking US Government official' could make the same agreement with Osama Bin Laden or Muhommad Omar? Just so people can be buried in peace, you understand, not because there a lots of potential victims.

It's time the allies fought fire with fire, got down in the moral gutter and gave back equal measure of horror.

"It's not the way to do things!", "We can't sink to their level, it makes us just as bad as they!" I can hear people protest, "We're better than that, we have rules!" Yep, sure do, and all it's doing is giving the enemy a bigger, more docile target.

Wars cannot be won by tying your militaries hands. It cannot be won by pretending to be better than the opposition, it cannot be won by raising your principles high and demanding a fair and level combat zone. It is not about talking reasonable people into peace just because you think you're a reasonable person.

They. Do. Not. Think. That. Way.

These people want the earth to be wholly and soully Islamic under Shariah Law. They want to kill anyone who doesn't agree with them in any way the can. It's time the West stopped pussyfooting around and let the military do their job, especially Special Forces. It's time to wipe out the Taliban and Al Qaeda.

It's time, like the terrorist organisations themselves, to make the most of targets of opportunities, be they at a funeral or not, because those are the tactics the enemy is using.