November 19, 2004

"The unreality of this question is breath-taking"

Thomas Sowell writes:

During the recent election campaign, it has been a liberal mantra that they "support the troops" while opposing the war in Iraq. Just what does supporting the troops mean -- other than just a throwaway line to escape the political consequences of a long history of being anti-military?

It certainly does not mean making the slightest effort to understand the pressures and dangers of combat, so as to avoid the obscenity of sitting in peace and comfort while second-guessing at leisure some life-and-death decisions that had to be made in a split second by men 10,000 miles away.

The latest example is the now widely-publicized incident in which an American Marine in Iraq shot and killed a wounded terrorist in Fallujah. Chris Matthews on Hardball spoke of "what may be the illegal killing of a wounded, unarmed insurgent" -- the politically correct media term for a terrorist -- and asked: "Is there ever a justification for shooting an unarmed enemy?"

The unreality of this question is breath-taking, both logically and historically. How do you know that someone is unarmed, when finding out can cost you your life? A hand grenade is easily concealed and can kill you just as dead as if you were shot by a machine gun or hit by a nuclear missile.,,

Read the whole ting...

Chris Matthews, and the Old Media and the Democrat party are on the other side. They leap hungrily on any chance to criticize Americans. And they never mention the non-stop war crimes of their allies. Never call them terrorists, or show the torture-rooms and mutilated bodies from Falluja. If any of our guys surrendered, they would be tortured and killed—the terrorists have bragged that they would do exactly that. But of course "war crimes" are only committed by Americans.

I don't wish for anyone to be kidnapped by terrorists, but if it has to happen, I kind of hope some America-hating lefty jerks like Matthews could be the victims. As their heads are being sawed off (on camera, for distribution to media allies) the thought might drift through their heads, that perhaps "insurgents" wasn't quite le mot juste.

Posted by John Weidner at November 19, 2004 9:29 AM
Weblog by John Weidner