WalterM140 wrote:

I believe he used the term "highest levels of civilian control" or words to
that effect.

So you didn't even read the article? What a boob. His "highest levels of
civilian control" ended at the SecDef, not the President. Post an article and
then not even know what it says. Typical troll.

No comment about Webb? He's one of my heroes, and he did call the invasion
of
Iraq the greatest strategic ---blunder- may have been the word he used.

Why should I? I could do a 10 minute search on the internet and find an article
written by someone touting OIF as the greatst political-military victory in
history. Would you post that if you happened across it?

I haven't said they -never- had been granted the protections of the GC. What
seems obvious is that by last fall, pressure was being put on some that was
well outside the bounds of what the GC calls for.

Now we can talk about lies.

On 11 May you posted this:

I said:

"From the beginning of the conflict captured Iraqis (including Saddam Hussain)
were accorded everything due them in the Geneva convention."

You responded:

"Many have not been. In fact, I don't know that the record shows that any
large
number have."

Again, I tried to attach abuse reports to the growing involvement of foriegn
fighters when I wrote:

"It wasn't until the introduction of foreign fighters that things got blurry."

You retorted:

"You can try and show that."

So once again you a proven troll, and now I think my job is done. In fact I
notice I'm the only one dealing with you which means I'm the only one dense
enough to have not realized how hopeless you are. See ya troll.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"