Should the Military take on Rescues?

[Cindi Hammons]

Just curious to people's responses.

Cindi H.

[Barb Bouldrey]

Human beings are human lives and we are to be humane.

Barb

[Marg Webb]

YES!!! Remember the "Bataan Death March".??? This was during one of the most devastating captures of our men and Filipino forces.
When we were able to get into that prison, most all were dead or expiring. Hundreds died on the march.
Our neighbor made it out and home, but he passed away soon after.
I was just a High School girl and I was walking to school and there my friend was. His Dad. brought him home to see his home town for the last time.
That man look just like those out of the Holocaust. He went on with the Lord the next day.
My, often I tell my heavenly Father how sorry I am, all of His plans went wrong because of satan.
I suppose that statement could be argued, but still my heart breaks for our Father.
So I say, if at all possible rescue anyone that needs rescued.!!!
Marg.

[Bruce Carriker]

The US military should not be in the hostage rescue business, period. There's a different between fighting wars and hostage rescue. Give the CIA the resources they need to do their job and leave the deep cover ops to them.

Need a country invaded? Call the Army and the Marines. Need a hostage rescued? Call someone else.

[Jim Franklin]

I notice a new program on the tube called "The Unit." I know Pres. Carter tried to send in a Delta force to rescue the Tehran hostages of which Gary Lee had been my next door neighbor with his parents but that mission failed because of poor planning and environmental conditions beyond human control. If the military had been called into the Katrina ravaged area first some lives might have been saved. I believe that the military's raison d' etra is to defend the citizens of the nation and if that means a rescue operation then it should be undertaken. Just like any other endeavor we can not expect 100% success.

[Judy Hamilton]

Bruce....with the alotment of monies to the military pruned to bare bones

who will pay for the CIA to be "Combat Ready" to effectively rescue hostages??

Is your suggestion feasible with today's Congressional budget alocations???

Judy

[Beth Larpenter-Shurbutt]

Well, as Christians I feel that we would want our military to help those in need, no matter their political viewpoint. The Bible teaches that we should love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us. I think that maybe "rescuing" would fall into that teaching.

Beth

[Ian Gentles]

The SAS are trained and used in hostage situations, rmember the Iranian Embassy Siege in London way back? Also SAS are used in anti terrorist work here in London. They are trained to be flexible, for a multy purpost role, swo rescueing hostages is well with their area of expertise.

[Cindi Hammons]

Marg,

Please read the question on the poll again. "Should the military rescue hostages who are critical of military involvement in Iraq?"

The Bataan death march involved US military men. Rescue would be a foregone conclusion. I think you missed the point.

Cindi H.

[Marg Webb]

Does that mean that one of the men just rescued should have been left behind.
Marg.

[Bruce Carriker]

Bruce....with the alotment of monies to the military pruned to bare bones

who will pay for the CIA to be "Combat Ready" to effectively rescue hostages??

Is your suggestion feasible with today's Congressional budget alocations???

Judy

Judy,

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at your description of the military budget as being "bare bones". By the end of this year, the United States will spend more on its military budget than the rest of the world combined. That is not a typo. US defense spending will equal what EVERY OTHER COUNTRY on the face of the earth spends COMBINED for their militaries.

Part of the problem is that we in this country have turned our military into far, FAR more than the Founding Fathers EVER intended for it to be.

The Army is not for peacekeeping, its for warfighting. The Army is not for hurricane relief, its for warfighting. The Army is not for nation building, its for warfighting. "Send the Military" has become our standard response to everything, and its got to stop.

As for Delta Force...take away clandestine ops from the military and put it under the CIA where it belongs. If you need a tactical clandestine operation conducted, thats what the Rangers are for. Delta Force tends to operate more at the strategic/political level anyway.

Is if feasible? Sure. Is it possible? Probably not in the current environment, where every change is resisted, and where Congressional leaders and the White House never saw a defense spending bill they didn't like.

[Cindi Hammons]

Does that mean that one of the men just rescued should have been left behind.
Marg.

Huh? I'm sorry Marg, but I have no idea what you are talking about.

The poll question is about the U.S. military rescueing people critical of the military role in (fill in the blank). The recent situation did not involve Americans nor American military. None of the men were military and all were critical of American actions in Iraq.

I'm neither saying that they should or should not have been rescued...I'm just curious about people's opinions. Unfortunately, I'm really not sure what you are talking about. If you can clarify your point, that would be great.

Cindi H.

[Marg Webb]

I seem to be out of bounds here.
I was referring to the Englishman a Pacifist, who is of course antiwar and he was rescued I thought by the Military. He is very critical of US and the English position in Iraq
He gave no thanks to the US for rescuing him. This was referred to in the News last evening.

[Hans Deventer]

I seem to be out of bounds here.
I was referring to the Englishman a Pacifist, who is of course antiwar and he was rescued I thought by the Military. He is very critical of US and the English position in Iraq
He gave no thanks to the US for rescuing him. This was referred to in the News last evening.

I think we need to distinguish issues here.

For the military, they did well, no doubt about it. And it remains a good deed, no matter the reaction. And of course, you do something good because it is the good thing to do! Not because you expect gratitude. We are not to be salesmen, expecting something in return of our "goods".

For the Englishman, he has a right to his opinion but obviously, at least he could have thanked his rescuers, no matter his political convictions.

[Cindi Hammons]

I seem to be out of bounds here.
I was referring to the Englishman a Pacifist, who is of course antiwar and he was rescued I thought by the Military. He is very critical of US and the English position in Iraq
He gave no thanks to the US for rescuing him. This was referred to in the News last evening.

No Marg, not out of bounds, I just didn't understand what you were talking about. I was hoping for all opinions...I just didn't "get" yours!

Oh, and the US didn't rescue him. I believe it was a Canadian special forces group.

Thanks,
Cindi H.

[Barbara Moulton]

No Marg, not out of bounds, I just didn't understand what you were talking about. I was hoping for all opinions...I just didn't "get" yours!

Oh, and the US didn't rescue him. I believe it was a Canadian special forces group.

Thanks,
Cindi H.

From what I understand it was a joint British, Canadian and US operation. Apparently Canada has some elite anti terrorism squad, held in high regard, but which is clothed in secrecy. I didn't even know it existed until this incident. And it wasn't our government that released the news of their involvement. I think it was the British government that did that. Two of the hostages were Canadian of course.

I think what makes this case interesting is not that the individuals were critical of the war, being taken hostage while going about their business. They deliberately chose to go to Iraq, putting themselves in a dangerous, risk filled situation in order to lobby against the war.

I am not sure what our obligation is under those circumstances.

[Bruce Carriker]

I am not sure what our obligation is under those circumstances.

I'm fairly confident of what our obligataion is under those circumstances...nothing. That a decision was made to act does not mean that we were obligated to do so. That's not to take anything away from how this joint-op was conducted. The men (mostly men anyway) who are selected to serve in these elite, deep cover units are the very best at what they do.

Many of them are, sadly, "natural born killers", or have become highly lethal killing machines. I have known a couple of them in my lifetime, and the ones I knew do tend to fit the stereotype of the one fellow on The Unit, who said, "We get to jump out airplances, shoot people, and come home to our families. What could be better?" I have tremendous respect for these people, and would not want them looking for me, if I was a bad guy.

[BobHunt]

would hope that we would be human enough that we would rescue those who do not agree with our military policies. I think that our President would even be of favor of rescuing any of our people even though they very vehemently disagree with his involvement in Iraq. And even further, you do not want our people to be a hostage because it demoralizes our troops as well as those who support them back home. It also gives the emeny reasons to say they are winning. And thats not to mention any secrets that might be found out by torture or death threats.

[Ian Gentles]

It was a British SAS group that for months, dusguised as Iraqies, who found the location. British and Canadian SAS were involded with American Delta Force in funal resue. But also Isreals Mossad was very involved.

Kimber the Brit resued, a christian peace actavist is getting a hammering over here because people feel his thanks to those rescuing him is too little and too late. As a peace activist he is against military being in Iraq, and many feel he now needs to be much warmer in his thanks to them. But all accounts this was a long running, quite amazing operation, where especialy Brit SAS lived under cover for long weeks to make his rescue possible. We find people also very angry that such people endangered themselfs and military lives for their own convictions. It seems to many ironic, that the troops Kimber didnt beleive should be in Iraq, are the ones that saved his life!

[Marg Webb]

Now for a social mistake, mistake or just rushed,
I was at the Calling Hours of a friend of my husband
The son-in-law is in SAS. I so wanted him to know his wifes Father did approve of him as there had been a question of that.
So mouthy me I say "oh Paul was so proud of your work in SWAT, he really respected you". the Military man was very gracious as he knew what I meant, my husband all the time was saying in my ear, SAS. SAS, SAS.
I have learned to laugh at myself, and that was one time I was glad I could.
Thanks Hans and all, I think I should just read a little closer next time.
But it is a good discussion. I did not know they were 'antiwar', until news time. I was just glorying in rescue. Oh mercy.:)
Marg.

[Bruce Carriker]

Seems this has sort of devolved into three questions:

1. Should countries rescue their hostages, even if they disagree with national policy?

2. If yes, should the military be used in such rescues?

3. What level of gratitude should be shown by those rescued?

My answers:

1. Depends on the situation, but not on whether or not the hostage(s) agree/disagree with national policy.

2. Military should not be used. This is a law enforcement issue, or a State Department issue, or a CIA issue...or some combination of the three. But it's not a military mission.

3. Certainly the people who are rescued should be appreciative and express that appreciation, regardless of their political viewpoints.

[Judy Hamilton]

It speaks well of the grace and genrosity of the heart of the persons in this team, to put their lives on the line to rescue a person[s] who are in essence undermining the efforts of the military now in Iraq. I would only hope that in their reflective moments those who are denigrating the military will with a measure of humilty recogonize the freedoms for which the military are litterally living and dying was worth the cost for the SAS.

I commend the gentlemen in the SAS

[Ian Gentles]

Seems this has sort of devolved into three questions:

1. Should countries rescue their hostages, even if they disagree with national policy?

2. If yes, should the military be used in such rescues?

3. What level of gratitude should be shown by those rescued?

My answers:

1. Depends on the situation, but not on whether or not the hostage(s) agree/disagree with national policy.

2. Military should not be used. This is a law enforcement issue, or a State Department issue, or a CIA issue...or some combination of the three. But it's not a military mission.

3. Certainly the people who are rescued should be appreciative and express that appreciation, regardless of their political viewpoints.

This particular issue wasnt in regards to US citizens, though USA was involved in a BIG way.

[Ian Gentles]

It speaks well of the grace and genrosity of the heart of the persons in this team, to put their lives on the line to rescue a person[s] who are in essence undermining the efforts of the military now in Iraq. I would only hope that in their reflective moments those who are denigrating the military will with a measure of humilty recogonize the freedoms for which the military are litterally living and dying was worth the cost for the SAS.

I comend these gentlemen.

I agree !