BoatBanter.com - View Single Post

On 9 Mar 2005 18:25:49 -0800, wrote:

NOYB wrote:

It could be true. But why?

****************
Don't know that it's true, but here's a possible reason why.

Version A: Our enemy is a brave man who made a "last stand". Badly
outnumbered, he fired on his determined captors with a small handgun
and resisted arrest until overwhelmed by a superior force.

Version B: Our enemy is a snivelling coward who crawled into a hole in
the ground to hide. The discredited ******* had even been deserted by
all closest supporters and left to fend for himself.

Version B plays a lot better with the cowboy vs. indian mindset of most
war mongers. "The enemy is subhuman, weak, and unworthy." And why make
a heroic martyr out of Hussein?

My question about the Hussein captu In almost every instance where
troops suspect there is an enemy force hiding in a hole or a cave, some
sort of grenade or other explosive is usually dropped in prior to
sending in any troops or tunnel rats. If Hussein was captured in a hole
in the ground it is amazing that he was not killed by the grenade that
one would assume would have been dropped in as soon as the cover was
removed.

Hussein is/was an asshole. If the ends justified the means, the Iraq
disaster would have been worth it. IF.

Where the hell did this come from?

Your experiences with 'tunnel rats' aren't very accurate. The technique you
describe may have wiped out a lot of Japanese machine gun emplacements, but was
not used by 'tunnel rats'. Tunnel rats went into tunnels to glean intelligence
and/or determine if the enemy were there. It's hard to glean intelligence from a
tunnel caved in by a grenade.

Your grenade assumption applies to you, not the rhetorical 'one' you use.

--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."