Thursday, November 26, 2009

What Hillier Ignores - At Our Peril (Jackass, Scene 2)

It's amazing what comes out of that man's mouth.

Safely-retired ex-general Rick Hillier isn't too worried about the likelihood that Afghan detainees turned over by Canadian Forces to Afghan authorities were in fact tortured. He sort of dismisses all that by claiming that most of them were probably Taliban anyway. I think the term he used was "farmers by day, Taliban by night." Using Hillier's perverse logic, in Afghanistan there are no innocents.

But wait, there's more!

Everybody - Karzai, the White House, NATO, you name it - says the key to this conflict is to drive a wedge between the moderate Taliban and the extremists, the terrorists. Karzai wants to set a place for them at the table. He's been trying for years to win them over.

Even if that bemedalled jackass is right, most of those detainees, the 'farmer/insurgent' types, would be the very moderate Taliban we're supposed to be working to win over. Rick, you moron, that's 'win over' not 'work over.' Is this guy so dense that he doesn't get that?

I'm just guessing here but it seems to me that when you deliver moderate Talibs into the hands of torturers, your odds of winning them (or their brothers and kids) over go straight down the toilet.

7 comments:

Dr.Dawg said...

Rick, you moron, that's 'win over' not 'work over.'

Heh.

"Grab 'em by the balls and their hearts and minds will follow." Same crap, different pile.

LeDaro said...

Dr.Dawg, LoL, man you are funny. Those damn balls hurt and unfortunately the torture is not.

Anonymous said...

Doing it the 'Hillier' way elimates the need for a judge and jury. Hey, aren't we helping them set up a criminal justice system? LK

Cherniak_WTF said...

I was taken aback when the "safely retired" Hillier was saying that we had to win the war within the next 18 months (or else it would be a failure).

What the fuck was he doing during all these years? The farce is Afghanistan (as far as Canada's involvement) is all his responsibility.

JimBobby said...

Implicit in the dismissal that "they were probably Taliban" is the message that it's okay to torture Taliban. Maybe it's only okay to torture hardcore Taliban and not part-timers, though.

There's whole ugly thread weaving its way through this scandal: that when Taliban are tortured by our Taliban-lite warlord opium merchant allies, it's not a big deal. Some comments I'm seeing in the MSM actually applaud the mistreatment.

The Mound of Sound said...

Anybody who even remotely condones torture in Afghanistan has never heard of the code of Pashtunwali, especially the chapter on Badal:

"...to seek justice over time or over space to avenge a wrong. This applies to injustices committed yesterday or 1000 years ago if the wrongdoer still exists. Justice in Pashtun lore needs elaborating: even a mere taunt (or "Paighor") is regarded as an insult - which can only usually be redressed by shedding of the taunter's blood (and if he isn't available, then his next closest male relation). This in turn leads to a blood feud that can last generations and involve whole tribes with the loss of hundreds of lives. Normally blood feuds in this all male dominated setup are then settled in a number of ways."

It's no fluke that Western forces are now seen as indistinguishable from the reviled, corrupt central government. We're seen as an enforcement arm of a predatory pack of bandits and thieves.

This whole thing is utterly FUBAR.

Mentarch said...

"This whole thing is utterly FUBAR."

'Been sayin' so for a long while, MoS ...

(sigh)