PDA

View Full Version : Nat'l Security No way to win if you have stupid rules like this


HonestChieffan
09-28-2009, 08:12 AM
Troops 'release half of Taliban prisoners after four days'
British troops have to release captured Taliban militants after only four days because of Nato rules limiting the time they can be held.

By Chris Irvine
Published: 11:39AM BST 27 Sep 2009

Official Foreign Office figures claim that since July 2006, UK Forces have detained 630 individuals, who were either transferred or released. According to officers, around half of those detained are then freed.

"It's a joke," one officer told The Sunday Times upon returning from Afghanistan. "We can only hold them for 96 hours and then we have to hand them over to the Afghans. If we can't do that, we have to let them go. We end up releasing about half those we capture and they just go off, join their friends and come back to attack us."


Figures from the Foreign Office show that in the two years to the end of 2008, 200 captives were handed over to Afghan forces. That would mean a similar number have also been freed.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman confirmed that British troops operated under NATO detention policy, "which authorises commanders to detain individuals where necessary for a maximum of 96 hours".

"This applies to all other nations undertaking detention operations", the spokesman said. "Individuals are then transferred to the Afghan authorities or released. Since detention operations began in July 2006 UK Forces have detained 630 individuals all were subsequently transferred or released."

patteeu
09-28-2009, 08:47 AM
Wow. Direckshun will be happy about the "due process" afforded to these guys though.

Bill Parcells
09-28-2009, 08:55 AM
Wow. Direckshun will be happy about the "due process" afforded to these guys though.

He's the new youth of the country..lol..we are doomed!

***SPRAYER
09-28-2009, 09:36 AM
I don't even want to talk about it.

wild1
09-28-2009, 09:49 AM
Wow. Direckshun will be happy about the "due process" afforded to these guys though.

Yes, while they would love to be pinning our soldiers down with gunfire tomorrow or implanting IEDs in a road this afternoon, we can comfort ourselves on the fact that we gave enemy combatants caught in the act of fighting against us "due process" and released them.

Winning a war like this would be like trying to catch all the fish in a pond while throwing back every one you reel in.

tiptap
09-28-2009, 10:03 AM
I thought the released document on increasing troops also had a strong statement that endorsed due process and reabilitation in order to focus on providing Afghans a view of an effective government that met their needs. After all we reabilitated the sunni awakening in order to find that measure of success in Iraq.

HonestChieffan
09-28-2009, 10:06 AM
Yes, while they would love to be pinning our soldiers down with gunfire tomorrow or implanting IEDs in a road this afternoon, we can comfort ourselves on the fact that we gave enemy combatants caught in the act of fighting against us "due process" and released them.

Winning a war like this would be like trying to catch all the fish in a pond while throwing back every one you reel in.

These people have no desire to win anything.

patteeu
09-28-2009, 10:07 AM
I thought the released document on increasing troops also had a strong statement that endorsed due process and reabilitation in order to focus on providing Afghans a view of an effective government that met their needs. After all we reabilitated the sunni awakening in order to find that measure of success in Iraq.

That's not what's being discussed here. When I mentioned "due process", I wasn't really talking about due process. I was talking about the idiotic policy of releasing unreformed Taliban back into nature so that they can carry on their insurgency against American/coalition troops and the Afghan government.

wild1
09-28-2009, 10:15 AM
These people have no desire to win anything.

I know. His only concern is that he not pay a political price because of those conflicts.

Trying to win involves political risk. Surrender involves political risk. He's minimizing political risk by pretending nothing's going on and keeping it out of the headlines.

tiptap
09-28-2009, 10:21 AM
That's not what's being discussed here. When I mentioned "due process", I wasn't really talking about due process. I was talking about the idiotic policy of releasing unreformed Taliban back into nature so that they can carry on their insurgency against American/coalition troops and the Afghan government.

The distinction you wish to raise fails to recognize that the beginning point in winning with reforming Taliban recruits, is to err on the side of due process and even forgiveness. Ultimately you want those youths released to families but in Afghanistan the inversion of population distribution makes orphans the norm. This is a different problem than in Iraq and may require a reeducation process before release. I grant that.

HonestChieffan
09-28-2009, 10:24 AM
Due process should look like this...

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/A9vOO3Ef8-o&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/A9vOO3Ef8-o&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>