I believe the policy being advocated is "Stop questioning anything! If we're doing it, it's because we have no choice! Move along, nothing to see here." Applies to torture, kidnapping, hostage taking, reprisals against civilians....
Yeah, what LB said -- It's not having the laws of war that handicaps us, it's being required by treasonous, conscientious liberals to abide by them that's the problem.
Indeed claiming we abide be civilized laws of warfare is what separates us from savage third-world dictatorships -- well except for those which claim to abide by said laws -- but it's obvious to anyone who is not willfully blinding himself to reality, that they are lying while we are constitutionally bound to be telling the truth -- it is just the un-American element which tries to force our goverment -- a government of laws, not men -- to act within the law, that endangers all of our freedoms...
I hate them so much. If ever there was an inappropriate time to raise this issue, it's now.
I'm not going to bother to read him, but I'd guess he's arguing to nuke the bastards.
Cliff May is an idiot. The choices here really aren't that complicated. Insurgencies generally can be defeated one of two ways. With the cooperation of the general populace, or by slaughtering people until they give up.
We lost the support of the general populace in Iraq a long time ago. If we're not willing to bomb them into submission, then it's long past time to leave.
It looks like he is just setting up a "the liberal media lost Iraq" argument. There really isn't any horrific thing that we are refraining from doing that could help us win in Iraq.
This article has the real version of the Barak Quote:
"Although a democracy must often fight with one hand tied behind its back, it nonetheless has the upper hand."
Sounds like it's "pitiful, helpless giant" time in America again. Takes me back.