Morals and the Implied Task

The military is fond of implied tasks. As a Joe, I've had this phrase spoken to me on numerous occasions. Usually, it's in the tones of talking to a particularly slow toddler. For instance, when I claim I could not mop the floor because the mops were frozen, the "Implied Task" is to run water over the mops till they thaw you effing moron.

Keep that in mind when you read this article, an excellent (and very brief) piece by a lawyer and OIF vet about war crimes.

"Every single Taliban wearing the civilian clothes of the surrounding villagers is committing a war crime. Every single Hamas fighter who launches his rockets at an Israeli town from a school courtyard commits a war crime. Every single al Qaeda suicide bombing of a hospital, restaurant, or even military checkpoint is a war crime.

These war crimes are designed not merely to make it easier for terrorists to engage American soldiers (whom they could never defeat in open combat); they are also deliberately chosen to inflate civilian casualties....So what possible moral justification exists for incentivizing these illegal acts by bestowing on captured terrorists the privilege of the full and comprehensive due process protections of a civilian trial? A prisoner of war captured in uniform would not enjoy such protections. Does the Left not understand that imposing such burdens on our justice system leads not to respect from our enemies but to contempt and exploitation?

Further, does the Left not understand that civilian trials (together with the consequent evidentiary requirements) would require our soldiers to act, essentially, as detectives in the middle of a shooting war?"

Funny thing about war. People tend to shoot at you during it, which makes the conducting of a forensic investigation a bit difficult.

Part of what's puzzling to me about the entire affair is why there is even an argument to begin with. Those who have never, will never, and could never face a real battlefield should hesitate before making value judgements about the morality of those who do. War is an ugly thing, and it makes necessary ugly actions.

So, what does this all mean to the Joe? When he's told that if he takes a prisoner, that prisoner will likely become a media circus show in the States? That he has to risk life and limb to gather enough evidence to convict if he wants the prisoner to be put away and prevent the enemy from being released by the Enemy At His Six to again become the Enemy At His Twelve?

What is the Implied Task?

Simple. Don't take prisoners.

Problem solved.

Ah, the Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again.