Feel free to castigate me but I don't care. First, according to the article, he was classified as a prisoner type that doesn't need to be disclosed to the Red Cross, so the headline of the thread is a lie. Second, he is a high ranking combatant who would like nothing better than to kill my friend(s) who are over there and likely any other Americans he comes across. Third, he apparently had significant intelligence that likely helped keep our soldiers or citizens safe and alive or helped to disrupt enemy attacks and disclosing his capture would have invalidated that information.
Hearing about how horrible some notorious and brutal prisoners are being treated by the US is getting old (especially when the supposed article "exposing" it even says that it wasn't inapproprieate). I don't hear about how horrible our troops are being treated when they're blown up by roadside bombs, burned alive, in their Humvees, etc, etc, etc. Or how horrible the innocent Iraqi civilians are being treated when they're slaughtered by the same actions. I guess that's all ok because we are the evil "invaders" and the Iraqi civilian deaths are our fault and not the fault of the respected terrorist freedom fighters.
It's accusations like these that make me doubt the alleged dedication to the troops spouted by so many on the "left" (yes I am generalizing here and I know there are many on the "left" who do really support the troops but it's pretty obvious that there are plenty on your side of the fence who do not.) It's more of the "yeah we support the troops" but they're wrong for doing this, and they shouldn't shoot back at the terrorists shooting at them from mosques, and they should have pulled back rather than dropping a mineret, etc, etc, etc.
__________________
Strive to be more curious than ignorant.
|