If insurgents are holding American soldiers captive, is it okay to subject them to “alternative methods of interrogation”, since George Bush has declared that to be legal?  And will torture be acceptable, since Alberto Gonzales considers the Geneva Conventions to be “quaint”?  And will killing those soldiers be “excessive force”, as the FBI describes the measures that resulted in “accidental” deaths at Guantanamo?  To the extent that any of these insurgents might be troubled by conscience, it certainly will be assuaged by George Bush’s acquiescene in the horrors of Abu Ghraib.

Strange, sad, and futile how the US military and media respond “like crazy” to the kidnapping of three.  Mere deaths descend to mention in paragraph three or an inside page.  We give insurgents a weapon even more potent than an IED: kidnap a handful, and they tie down thousands of US forces in a goose chase, kicking in doors, searching households, humiliating the population, and agitating all against the Occupation.  The passion to “just do something” may appeal to the home front and make a good lead story, but fail to retrieve the detainees and set back US goals.  Placing US troops in multiple insecure mini-posts only exacerbates the risk of further captures.