Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel: You Deal with Terrorists by Leaving behind Their ‘Crying Widows’

[rangerrebew]

 
Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel: You Deal with Terrorists by Leaving behind Their ‘Crying Widows’


By Rusty Weiss |  6,739 views


Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel and Fox News contributor Ralph Peters is back at it again, offering what may be the best advice you’ll ever hear on how to deal with terrorists.

Peters once famously explained that the only way to deal with radical Islamic terrorists is to “kill them, keep on killing them until you kill the last one, then you kill his pet goat.”

Once again he doesn’t hold back, explaining that the only way to deal with terrorists such as those involved in the recent Charlie Hebdo massacre is to “exterminate them.”

Peters added, “you leave behind smoking ruins and crying widows.”

Watch the incredible commentary below…



Via Fox News Insider:

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters tonight gave a detailed plan to Bill O’Reilly on how he would fight terror.
 
“One: You accept that you are in a war. Two: You name the enemy, Islamist terrorists. Three: You get the lawyers off the battlefield […] you accept there will be collateral damage and you do not apologize for it. You do not nation build, you don’t try to hold ground. You go wherever in the world the terrorists are and you kill them, you do your best to exterminate them, and then you leave, and you leave behind smoking ruins and crying widows. If in five or 10 years, they reconstitute and you gotta go back, you go back and do the same thing, and you never, never, never send American troops into a war you don’t mean to win,” Peters said.

Col. David Hunt said that there must be economic pressure in addition to the military campaign that Peters detailed. Hunt said that just killing terrorists has not worked.

“Killing them is the only thing that works,” Peters fired back.

Perhaps, if President Obama can ever find a way to grow a spine when it comes to dealing with terrorists, he will heed the Colonel’s advice.

Share your thoughts on the plan to leave ‘smoking ruins and crying widows’ below.


Read more: http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/retired-army-lieutenant-colonel-you-deal-with-terrorists-by-leaving-behind-their-crying-widows/#ixzz3OipgfjfS

[aligncare]

Okay. When do we begin?

 :sword:

[truth_seeker]

Fact:
During the 3.5 years of US involvement in WWII, ten percent of the US population of 160 million, served in uniform. That is 16 million served in uniform.

These days we drag matters out endlessly, as if we are embarrassed to actually deploy the worlds most powerful military, which we have ALL been paying for for over 60 years.

We did not fight WWII with precision pinpricks, fearing to harm innocent civilians in the enemy country.

We considered the German and Japanese civilians to be part of the enemy camp. Their soldiers were the sons of these civilians.

We  felt that if the civilians felt the full force of their losses, they would sue their government to surrender unconditionally.

We actually took the war so seriously, that we isolated some Germans, Italians and Japanese identity people in camps, in the US.

And guess what was the result of these tactics? We defeated Germany and Japan on several continents in 3.5 years and it has stayed that way ever since.

Contrast that with 13 years beyond Sept. 11, 2001 when muslim terrorists must feel emboldened to be wearing the US down, as we abandon Afghanistan and Iraq.

To bring Eisenhower into the discussion, why even have a great military-industrial complex, if you do not have the willingness to use it?

Simply put, what we have been doing since 9/11/2001 has not worked. It has consistently been not enough. Too few troops, too few enemy dead, to many cities left unharmed.

Too many years to still be in a standoff.

[alicewonders]

Fact:
During the 3.5 years of US involvement in WWII, ten percent of the US population of 160 million, served in uniform. That is 16 million served in uniform.

These days we drag matters out endlessly, as if we are embarrassed to actually deploy the worlds most powerful military, which we have ALL been paying for for over 60 years.

We did not fight WWII with precision pinpricks, fearing to harm innocent civilians in the enemy country.

We considered the German and Japanese civilians to be part of the enemy camp. Their soldiers were the sons of these civilians.

We  felt that if the civilians felt the full force of their losses, they would sue their government to surrender unconditionally.

We actually took the war so seriously, that we isolated some Germans, Italians and Japanese identity people in camps, in the US.

And guess what was the result of these tactics? We defeated Germany and Japan on several continents in 3.5 years and it has stayed that way ever since.

Contrast that with 13 years beyond Sept. 11, 2001 when muslim terrorists must feel emboldened to be wearing the US down, as we abandon Afghanistan and Iraq.

To bring Eisenhower into the discussion, why even have a great military-industrial complex, if you do not have the willingness to use it?

Simply put, what we have been doing since 9/11/2001 has not worked. It has consistently been not enough. Too few troops, too few enemy dead, to many cities left unharmed.

Too many years to still be in a standoff.

 

[Bigun]

There is only one reason to go to war and that is to WIN!  If you can't bring yourself to do what is necessary to do that then DON'T GO!

[GourmetDan]

“Killing them is the only thing that works,” Peters fired back.

Actually, defiling their bodies so that the ones still living are convinced that they won't get their 72 virgins would work even better...

[alicewonders]

There is only one reason to go to war and that is to WIN!  If you can't bring yourself to do what is necessary to do that then DON'T GO!

Absolutely right, Bigun! 

[olde north church]

Crush your enemies.
See them driven before you.
Hear the lamentations of their women.

[Fishrrman]

aligncare asked above:
[[ Okay. When do we begin? ]]

Did you get measured for your new suit yet?
Looks like this:


What's yer size?

[Fishrrman]

From truth_seeker's post above:
[[ To bring Eisenhower into the discussion, why even have a great military-industrial complex, if you do not have the willingness to use it?
Simply put, what we have been doing since 9/11/2001 has not worked. It has consistently been not enough. Too few troops, too few enemy dead, to many cities left unharmed. ]]

The horrible as-yet-unspoken reality is that if The West is to win the struggle before it, it is not only the jihadis who will have to be killed.

Perhaps it's best not to say more at this point, less I be branded "a hater"...

[Oceander]

There is only one reason to go to war and that is to WIN!  If you can't bring yourself to do what is necessary to do that then DON'T GO!

Absolutely.  I would only add that nation-building isn't a valid reason either.  You don't go to war to nation build or do anything other than beat your opponent into submission.

[Dexter]

I think a key difference to think about is Japan and Germany had standing armies. We knew who to attack and so we could get in there and get the job done. We weren't dealing with civilian insurgencies. It's hard to know who you're fighting or where to find them when they could be literally anybody. Are you proposing that to solve the Iraq/Afghanistan problem we should have just carpet bombed entire cities and killed off millions and millions of people?

[Dexter]

Actually, defiling their bodies so that the ones still living are convinced that they won't get their 72 virgins would work even better...

Do you really believe that with all of the insane rationalizations extremists already make they wouldn't be willing to make one more to say Americans defiling their bodies does not stop them from getting their rewards after death? All that would do is piss them off more, and all pissing them off more would do is convince more young people to join their ranks. Also if we brought ourselves to that level we'd need to stop pretending to be the moral authority. If you're going to be the moral authority you need to act like the moral authority. We lost approximately 3000 people on 9/11, and in response we started two wars that have cost us over double that in U.S soldiers as well as the deaths of countless thousands of innocent civilians. Is the blood of their innocent civilians not worth the same as the blood of our innocent civilians? Where does it end? At one point do we realize we're wasting our time and cut our losses completely?

[aligncare]

I think a key difference to think about is Japan and Germany had standing armies. We knew who to attack and so we could get in there and get the job done. We weren't dealing with civilian insurgencies. It's hard to know who you're fighting or where to find them when they could be literally anybody. Are you proposing that to solve the Iraq/Afghanistan problem we should have just carpet bombed entire cities and killed off millions and millions of people?

That's what some have suggested. Of course that's ludicrous. No one of sound judgment would seriously consider that a viable option.

[alicewonders]

That's what some have suggested. Of course that's ludicrous. No one of sound judgment would seriously consider that a viable option.

I think when you see remarks like "turn the middle east into glass", it is just a reflection of the huge frustration many of us are feeling.  I've had those thoughts myself when I read something particularly heinous.  Of course, I don't think that is the solution.  I can't imagine how hard of a decision it had to have been to carpet bomb whole cities during WWII.  Takes a real leader to be able to make those hard decisions.  I don't see the "free" world ever doing something like that again. 

I do think we need leaders that will make difficult decisions though.  Such as putting a moratorium on letting undocumented people waltz over our borders, putting a moratorium on people coming here that are from these countries that are fomenting terrorism (brings up another issue of what do you do about the refugees from these countries), etc.

Another thing I think needs to be addressed is the issue of ISIS and other terrorist organizations posting these videos that are seen by the entire world.  Surely, there is a way to stop these from making their way to the Internet, especially the popular social networking sites!  I know if I say the wrong thing, my comments will be taken down pretty quickly - yet they can post the most vile things! 

More can be done than is currently being done, but that would require leadership that actually wants to stop this crap.

[GourmetDan]

More can be done than is currently being done, but that would require leadership that actually wants to stop this crap.

It's not just here.  Witness the governments of Europe...

[Bigun]

Well well! What have we here?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/09/03/egyptian-newspapers-explosive-allegation-president-obama-is-a-secret-muslim-brotherhood-member/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=ShareButtons

[GourmetDan]

 
Has a ring of truth to it in light of his behavior...

[Scottftlc]

The west has lost its ability - the stomach if you will - to go to war.  The best they will do is law enforcement or police actions.

Islam believes they are in an existential war with the non-Muslim world.  The west does not believe that "existential war" even exists as a concept.  The ruling class in the west maintains a moral position that places beliefs such as multiculturalism ahead of the idea of preservation.

How long the left-wing ruling class maintains power in the west will determine when, if at all, these nations respond in force to the Islamic threat.

We all know from Paris that the west is willing to die for its beliefs.  And I am certain the Isamists are more then happy to oblige them in ever increasing numbers.  What we don't know is if the west any longer has the stomach to kill for its beliefs...or even its existence.

[alicewonders]

I have no trouble believing that at all!  While we're at it - how about Hillary?  Her former assistant is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood. 

[Scottftlc]

I think a key difference to think about is Japan and Germany had standing armies. We knew who to attack and so we could get in there and get the job done. We weren't dealing with civilian insurgencies. It's hard to know who you're fighting or where to find them when they could be literally anybody. Are you proposing that to solve the Iraq/Afghanistan problem we should have just carpet bombed entire cities and killed off millions and millions of people?

Umm, by the way, in World War II, we did carpet bomb and fire bomb entire cities in Germany and Japan, inflicting hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties.  We turned most of the major cities in Germany into concrete rubble.  Just look up Dresden on Wiki. We targeted the civilian areas, the industrial areas, wherever the people and the equipment that made it possible for Germany to maintain armies in the field were.  Russia did the same, destroying most of Warsaw and Berlin.  In Japan, we fire bombed Tokyo and we nuked two major industrial cities.  Other cities in Japan received similar treatment from conventional means.

When you are in an existential war...which Islam fully believes it is in...you do things like that.  We have done them.  I doubt we have the will to survive that will allow us to do them again...I hope I'm wrong.

[aligncare]

Conspiracy theories aren't confined to the West. I dislike Obama as much as the next guy here but this is over the top.

[Bigun]

I have no trouble believing that at all!  While we're at it - how about Hillary?  Her former assistant is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood.

We both know someone who has been making this Allegation against Obama for a VERY long time now!

[Dexter]

Umm, by the way, in World War II, we did carpet bomb and fire bomb entire cities in Germany and Japan, inflicting hundreds of thousands of civilian casualties.  We turned most of the major cities in Germany into concrete rubble.  Just look up Dresden on Wiki. We targeted the civilian areas, the industrial areas, wherever the people and the equipment that made it possible for Germany to maintain armies in the field were.  Russia did the same, destroying most of Warsaw and Berlin.  In Japan, we fire bombed Tokyo and we nuked two major industrial cities.  Other cities in Japan received similar treatment from conventional means.

When you are in an existential war...which Islam fully believes it is in...you do things like that.  We have done them.  I doubt we have the will to survive that will allow us to do them again...I hope I'm wrong.

First of all we are not in an existential conflict. I know many here will disagree, but our existence is not at risk of being destroyed. Second of all in WWII killing innocent civilians was not the point; it was an unfortunate side effect of the mission we needed to complete. There are no industrial areas in Iraq/Afghanistan churning out war machines to destroy us. If we started carpet bombing their cities it would be with the intention of killing as many people as we could just because we didn't know which ones were bad. That is utterly insane when doing that is absolutely not necessary.

[Bigun]

First of all we are not in an existential conflict. I know many here will disagree, but our existence is not at risk of being destroyed. Second of all in WWII killing innocent civilians was not the point, it was an unfortunate side effect of the mission we needed to complete. There are no industrial areas in Iraq/Afghanistan churning out war machines to destroy us. If we started carpet bombing their cities it would be with the intention of killing as many people as we could just because we didn't know which ones were bad. That is utterly insane when doing that is absolutely not necessary.

Put me in the disagree column! Strongly in fact!

The current threat is the most existential threat we have EVER faced in my view!