MaxedOutMama

WALLACE: And always someone who knows just what they are going through. The Brook Army Medical Center in San Antonio is home to one of only two U.S. army amputee care centers in the country.

BAGGE: It's kind of like a brotherhood in there. We're all rooting for each other and pushing each other to do the best that they can.
...
WALLACE: Also available to amputees like Christian, state-of- the-art technology to create custom-made legs for any activity they choose. Christian's immediate goal, to run with President Bush. When the president visited the center on New Year's Day, Christian asked if they could jog together some time. He says Mr. Bush said yes.

BAGGE: He said that I would be an inspiration to other people and I think he's right, you know, hopefully, and then I can be an inspiration.

53. All right, I've had enough Why use the term "kidnapped" instead of "POW"?

It's pretty simple. All it takes is a few minutes of rational thought.

A POW is a combatant who is captured by an opposing combatant force. The capturing force must report that the POW has been captured. The capturing force must exercise proper care and protection of the POW. The capturing force must allow periodic inspection of POWs by international bodies such as the Red Cross. Is there anyone on this site who is so divorced from rational thought that they think al Queda will observe any of these criteria? Since the soldiers in question fail to meet the definition of POW, then some other word should be used to describe them. "Kidnapped" seems to fit pretty well.

Regarding "turnabout's fair play": Does anyone here seriously consider al Queda to be a legitimate combatant force, following the Geneva Convention? For the perpetually muddle-headed that would include a distinctive, identifiable uniform, protection of innocent civilians, protection of POWs, etc.

Frankly I'm a little fed up with those who see a moral equivalence between US and UK forces and al Queda Islamo-fascists. Have there been violations of prisoner rights by US troops? I'm sure of it. Have there been similar violations or worse by al Queda? Certainly. The difference is that with the U.S. troops such violations are contrary to policy and will be investigated and prosecuted. With al Queda, beheading seems to BE the policy.

Regardless of how despicable one may think the Bush administration is, it is a disgusting, deranged libel to claim that the privates, corporals, captains, majors, etc. in Iraq are engaging in wholesale torture and wanton killing. Those who spew that sort of slander against our troops have lost all capacity for reasonable thought. I know quite a few military personnel, many of which have seen service in Iraq or Afghanistan. They are without exception quiet, thoughtful, professional people who would be appalled at the thought of torturing or killing innocents. I'm getting sick and tired of having ignorant people characterize US troops as bloodthirsty savages just to advance their political position.