My Photo
Location: Montgomery Area, Alabama, United States

Former BUFF driver; self-styled military historian; paid (a lot) to write about beating plowshares into swords; NOT Foamy the Squirrel, contrary to all appearances. Wesleyan Jihadi Name: Sibling Railgun of Reasoned Discourse

Friday, July 22, 2005

Got One? Oh Well.

Following the news only intermittantly--the Monk clan has moved for the weekend into a cave in the vicinity of Gatlinburg TN that has cable, a huge plasma TV, and wifi. My kind of "camping!" Photos will follow soon.

I do see that the Brits, who issued a "shoot on sight" order for suspected terrorists yesterday, shot and killed one on the tube this morning. Jolly well done, boys!

I'm sure this policy violates certain rights the "bombers" (as Auntie Beeb calls them), or "suicide bombers" (as MessNBC and the Christian-bashers with Negative News have it--as if the terrorists just couldn't stand the world's nonsense anymore and resolved to end it all with an angst-ridden final statement of explosive performance art (how's that for mirror-imaging?)), are entitled to as British welfare recipients, but it will spare them the Horrors of Gitmo or some similarly sinister right-wing internment facility, as well as the psychological stress involved in a long trial, where details that would doubtless harm the fatal performance artists' self esteem would surface.

Kill them all; let God sort them out.


Update, 25 Jul 05
: Okay, not really. I was doubtless the last person who reads this blog to learn, but the gent shot on Saturday wasn't a roachlamist terrorist. He was a Brazilian, one Jean Charles Menezes, 27, who was in the wrong place at the wrong time, doing the wrong thing when confronted by police.

Very, very sad. Nontheless, the actions of the London anti-terror cops was understandable and justifiable. This is war. Killing someone suspected on reasonable grounds of being an enemy combatant, who refuses to surrender when confronted is not only understandable, it should be expected and condoned. If a few innocents die as a frictional result of combat activity, that is regrettable, but justifiable.

Of course, we warriors should make every reasonable effort to avoid such collateral damage, within the constraint of still achieving valid military objectives, because, if the objectives are properly conceived, they will be logically tied to the entire hierarchy of military and national objectives above them, including the broad political objectives set by the military's civilian masters. Obviously, those political objectives include protecting innocent civilian lives (why do Western nations usually chose to use military power in the first place?). Had this man been a terrorist, the act of killing him would have served the cause of saving innocent civilian lives--the lives of his targets. The fact that he was probably not a terrorist does not mitigate the fact that he gave reasonable indication of being one at the time he was shot.

We civilians (as I have become again fairly recently) must keep in mind that the earliest possible achievement of our war objectives is the most humane solution to the whatever problem it is we've told military power to deal with. This may sometimes entail the use of means that seem inhumane or even barbaric, but in war, unlike most other endeavors, the ends almost always justify the means. And the closer war becomes to 'total war,' or Eigentliche Krieg, the less restricted the use of means becomes. Our enemies slice throats to the bone for on camera for fun, blow up crowds of children for accepting candy from American pig-dogs, kill innocent muslim tourists in the hundreds because they (rightly) see tourism as a soft-power form of infiltration. They kill us in dozens and hundreds, not in millions, because they lack the means to kill more at a time, not because they lack the will. I may not understand much in this life, but I do understand war and I do understand our enemy. I understand that most will submit only unwillingly when the Western knee is on the muslim chest and a big, bloody, serrated Western knife is at the exposed muslim throat--and that will work only after the ten million most-committed of muslim radicals--in our society and around the world--are turned into smoking meat hunks. The only real danger to the civilian population posed by this mistake is that the Brit police will now ask questions first and then shoot. Stick to your guns, boys (& girls)!

Fortunately, the Brits seem to be all taking this with a bit more stiff-upper than we would. Had this happened in the US, even many on the right would be screaming bloody murder and the leftist press would be having a field day at the Administration's expense. The Brits--even al-Beeb--seem to be saying, "oh well. Too bloody bad, but he shouldn't have run..." That is the correct answer. The Brazilians do want an eye for an eye, of course. Blair should politely tell them to get bent. The Muslim Association of Britain has bemoaned that the victim "was a human being too" and warned Blair about further violence 'if this sort of thing continues' (or words to that effect). The MAB, often a sounding board for radical islamist rhetoric despite its new-found respect for human life, should be arrested to a man and be sent packing off to Paki.

This should also be an object lesson to the hordes of immi's that the Brits, in their multicultural fervor, have invited into their country without check for the last 20 years: Learn a smattering of the language of the country you work in (Menenzes still didn't speak a word after working two years as an electrician); if you feel inclined to wear a Neocoat with wires sticking out of it in the middle of July because it "looks cool" or "makes a statement" or whatever, re-think your fashion priorities; and if confronted by grim men with badges and drawn guns, cooperate--don't run. If you do, expect to die. And we'll let God sort you out.


Update 2, 25 Jul 05
: According to Capt Ed, Menenzes had been in Britain for three years, not two, and spokee dee Eeenglish very very weeel (he leearn eet from a booook). I hereby posthusmously grant him the Darwin Award for 2005. Great work, genius!

<< Home