The Uighers were unaware they were in a battle with the US, silly them.
Yes, I can see how you’d view dispatching through execution defeated or surrendered (renditioned?) foes more appropriate. :-|
Why not use the method your hero once suggested? (Don’t forget he was a POW once, too.)
“I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected”
Winston Churchill - 12th May 1919 re Use of tear gas on Kurdish Tribesmen in Iraq
Looks like even your hero wasn’t too keen on killing everyone.
Perhaps Saddam got the idea from Churchill, but did not stick to the idea of using lachrymatory tear gas to simply inconvenience them and instead used the deadlier types.
Simon_Jester almost 15 years ago
No…what is the conenction between the detainees and ethnic unrest in China?
Gladius almost 15 years ago
They’re talking about the ethnic Uighers that we had at gitmo. The conflict in that region is between native Uighers and the Han influx.
OmqR-IV.0 almost 15 years ago
Church: Not your problem? Just how did the Uighers end up in Gitmo?
OmqR-IV.0 almost 15 years ago
The Uighers were unaware they were in a battle with the US, silly them.
Yes, I can see how you’d view dispatching through execution defeated or surrendered (renditioned?) foes more appropriate. :-|
Why not use the method your hero once suggested? (Don’t forget he was a POW once, too.)
“I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected”
Winston Churchill - 12th May 1919 re Use of tear gas on Kurdish Tribesmen in Iraq
Looks like even your hero wasn’t too keen on killing everyone.
Perhaps Saddam got the idea from Churchill, but did not stick to the idea of using lachrymatory tear gas to simply inconvenience them and instead used the deadlier types.