Massaoui wants a martyr’s death at the hands of the Americans.

Al Qaeda (if the MSM is to be believed) want to deny him that. They want him to remain a prisoner; disgraced and excommunicated from his beliefs.

“Truly it is most apt that an American Court should have the job of making this “decision of Suleiman the Wise”

btw, I believe a sentence within a paragraph exists within context of the paragraph. To tease out a sentence isolated from the others is selective quoting. To respond thus i believe poor form.

I don’t know whether I’m being timid or just realistic. I can sit here and type “death to all terrorists,” but that doesn’t mean our government or our society will ever let me, personally, do anything about it.

As for what the government and our society themselves will do – I think they will do the very least they can until the problem reaches an absolutely inescapable decision point. At that point, they will either declare unlimited war on the jihadis and their sponsors, or they will back down and accommodate them in the name of being “civilized.”

For a lot of people it seems, it doesn’t matter whether you die or your culture dies, as long as you die “better” than your enemies. You get that from the left a lot: “If we do X and Y, we’re just as bad as al Qaida.” To which one can only reply that for al Qaida, X and Y are a way of life; for us, X and Y are emergency measures to be abandoned once we’re safe. That may sound like a rationalization, but it works for me.

For what it’s worth, I am personally willing and equipped for a bit of crusading if the situation requires it. By that I mean a situation in which an insurgency is active in this country and the civil authorities are unable to control it. That could only happen if large segments of our Muslim population became active jihadis or supporters, and I don’t see that happening in my lifetime. (Could be wrong, but I prefer to think that our Muslims are mostly the sensible ones – otherwise they would never have left the Old Country.)

So from a personal point of view, I am content to hold my fire at least until the IEDs start going off in Alexandria, Virginia. As to the government and society, I can only pray that they have the stomach for this fight and do not surrender civilization in the name of being civilized.

(That sort of reminds me of the old saw about “Destroying the village in order to save it.” In this case, I think some people are willing to let Western culture be destroyed in order to save it. Doesn’t matter – dead is dead.)

I know propagandists and people who use psychological attacks and propaganda techniques. You can’t declaw them if they can still talk. They are not helpless. They have plenty of partisans in the ACLU and other AMerican infiltrated organizations to help them out. Look at Britain’s problem with their Muslims, and tell me you can declaw the terroists simply by arresting them and holding them incommunicado. It just pisses them off and creates more recruits for terrorism.

The belief that an enemy in a irregular war is harmless just by capturing him, is a gross ignorance of the regular and irregular means to which a combatant might use to make war upon a target of his choosing. In the past, a prisoner had no means of fighting back except witholding information. Now we have TV, the internet, emails, jihadi terroist phone cells, the ACLU, I’m going to take your property bcause I feel like it Judges, and many many other avenues of attack. Hence, being captured isn’t the END of your war as it might have been for a prisoner in WWII. Being captured is only the START of your campaign in this war, if your a terroist. If you’re an American, being captured means either instant death, death by burning and torture-cheer, or you’re going to be used as a prop to demoralize your nation till the point you’re useless then you will die.

e no longer is an imminent threat, or a likely potential threat.

Sure, tell me again that Saddam is no potential threat being alive, it is the same as Moussie. You’re grasp of human fundamentals are sorely lacking here. To use a civilian analogy, the guy who robbed you is part of the organized mob and if you testify to put him in jail, his mob buddies will burn your house and kill you and your family and your family’s family as retribution. After that happens, tell me again that the “robber who is in jail” is “harmless”.

So to kill him requires a justification of more than just because he is an enemy. We can kill him because he has committed egregious acts. But what if he hasn’t yet.

Oh, so what if the robber hasn’t told his buddies to kill you and yours, yet. DOes that mean you’re not going to execute the robber, because he hasn’t told the Mob yet, hasn’t done any harm, any egregious acts? You can take such foolish risks for yourself and your family, I’m not responsible for protecting them unlike the military, but you sure as heck ain’t going to make the decision for the rest of America.

Should we enact punishment for what could have been? Or is it for retribution and vengeance we should kill him?

Killing your enemies who are still killing your own people in the world, is neither retribution nor vengeance. It is called ruthlessness, it is called the absolute destruction of the enemy. It is peace through superior firepower, and nothing you or the Democrats or the independents or the Libertarians will do will matter a wit to preserve peace for American families and children. Because you are not what the terroists fear nor will you ever stop terrorism. That’s a fact, and it is a fact that America is plagued by, and either we will reach our genkai limit or we shall be overrun. Either way, it is interesting times for the world superpower. Kill or be killed. People have problems with killing, and they need to get out of the way of the rest of us who don’t have a problem with killing. Those who can’t kill, can’t add, can’t do math in their heads, should leave the accounting to those who can.

I don’t expect someone who cleans toliets to be able to do taxes as well as an accountant. And I don’t expect that person who cleans toliets to complain to his accountant, that his accountant shouldn’t do math because the IRS isn’t on his tail yet.

Y, you may have me confused with huan! That’s ok – I like to keep people guessing.

Not really. The lack of will is the same. You don’t want to kill him immediately because you think it would be easier to let bureacracy take care of it. Huan doesn’t believe in killing him because he believes it isn’t right, and he doesn’t have enough will to change his morality to fit the times.

The terroists couldn’t give a fig about death by bureacracy, they got a lot more efficient manners of death if you hadn’t noticed. You can wait for bureacracy to kill him, but I’m not waiting around for the “villain” to get up off the ground and stab the “hero” in the back, like Hollywood keeps putting on.

You ever see that? Where the hero gives mercy to the villain, turns his back, and then the villain gets up and tries to kill the hero. Then the hero, TOm Cruise, does a instantaneous 180 and offs the enemy, and everything is morally peachy. Talk about a retarded morality system.

AS far as dealing with jihadis, I’ve always been in favor giving them fair trials with due regard for international legal standards, then shooting them.

A military tribunal will probably get rid of either 1/4 or 1/2 of the armed combatants. A military tribunal is quite fair. International legal standards indeed, sort of like the international legal standard that says the death penalty is unjust on its face. Tell me again that I was confused, and while you’re at it pull the other leg why dontcha. The lack of determination and guts is always the same, regardless of personality, in war.

One of the problems with the War on Terror is that it is an asymetrical warfare system. We heard about this after 9/11, but most people just didn’t understand what it meant. An asymmetrical warfare system uses oblique approaches that you cannot block. It is as if you learned martial arts for 50 years, to concentrate on disarming someone with two arms and two legs, and then suddenly you have to disarm someone with 4 arms and 6 legs. It just doesn’t work as well as it used to.

It is as if all the skills you’ve learned to survive in this society, is turned upside down. Cars don’t go at green, but at yellow. Cars don’t stop at red, they stop at green. You slow down at green, not yellow. You drive on the left rather than the right. Your wheel is in the BACK of the car, not the front. You sign your name backwards in order to sign your signature on a check. Your check is rotated 90 degrees and you have to write up and down, not left to right.

Assymetrical warfare produces problems in the gears. It doesn’t use massive retaliatory force, it just squirts some water and the gears rust, and then the whole thing comes down.

What this all means is that there are specific counters to terroist tactics. The single important thing you must consider, is that you must hit the terroists with a great offensive. Because asymmetrical warfare is designed to confuse your defenses and make them ineffective, you have to get the terroists to react to your symmetrical warfare. So it is a race to see who can adapt the faster. Terroists are slaughtered by symmetrical warfare, but we have to find them. We are slaughtered by asymmetrical warfare, but we are adapting. He who adapts faster and learns how to do battle the enemy way, wins.

If AL Qaeda learns how to defend against symmetrical military operations, and learns how to use Western infantry tactics and training, Al Qaeda wins.

If America learns propaganda and asymmetrical warfare, both on the defense and on the attack, we have defacto won. Currently we’re mired in the quagmire of debating whether to kill Moussie or not. And people wonder why Iraq is still a “mess” as they call it. Wars become a mess when you start talking about giving mercy to the enemy before the enemy is even defeated.

Go look up Victor Davis Hanson’s book about the Peloponessian War, a War Like No Other. It has lessons you can learn about this War on Terror, another War Like No Other. Certain terroist tactics have been used before, but not the complete shebang of Soviet Propaganda, global WWII warfare, and Moroccan fanaticism.

Zach Moose’s theatrical self-indictment will no doubt contribute to the neurotic atmosphere of mass hysteria that the Neocon have been fostering methodically with their jingoistic “analyses” of 9-11, Islam, Arabism…etc. Expect an avalanche of jingoistic we-told-you-Ayyrabz-were-savages editorials in the columns of the National Review and the Weekly Standard!

How an inoffensive (except maybe for himself!) unstable Moroccan prole eager to get his proverbial 5 minutes of glory through the grandiloquent use of outlandish statements and other “jihadist verbiages” can attract the attention of so many “conservative” minds shows the extent to which conservatism, once the ideological home of our nation’s virile and rational minds, has become of sub-ideology of sensationalist pussies and other Neocon carpetbaggers…

TEX-AVIV NEWSWIRE: I mean like Jeez! The goateed brownie even said “and I shall destroy the un-white house of the koffir Emir Bé´och may the Almighty curse his tribe’s camels and women for 40 consecutive decades Insh’Allah”