Scans_Daily

Now there is an interesting topic.

Let's take Mr. McVeigh. He was militia, of course. Because the second you leave the army you are no longer military.

The fact that he was on military bases (as a visitor or something, I have no idea why he was there) when he was part of the militia, and he had direct military support from parties is the military (and I have no idea who they were, how much they helped him, or how highly they were placed, all I'm saying is "he still had friends in the military.") is entirely irrelevant. As he was not part of a government military he was a terrorist and acting as a terrorist. All this was perfectly clear when he died, on June 11th 2001. But it becomes murky again later that same year.

Because now we designating people "enemy combatants" regardless of their affiliation or nationality. We essentially have an enemies list. Because we fighti populations who absolutely will not join a "recognized" military and put on uniforms (and not only because it would be suicide but because it's meaningless in their culture. They aren't fighting us as a military, they're fighting us as a culture. I don't mean that in any hyperbolic way, I'm analyzing technique).

So we fight "insurgents" and "enemy combatants" and, my personal favorite, "illegal combatants." I have a difficult time imagining a less meaningful phrase than "illegal combatant" but anyway. Now, how do we know who these people are? They wear no uniforms, by definition. So we identify them by their actions -- they take hostile action towards the US, either by direct attacks or supporting those who attack. It's entirely on a case-by-case basis.

This is an enemies list. The rosters of "enemy combatants" is nothing less than a large enemies list. Nationality is meaningless to this, I believe Lindh was an enemy combatant even though he's an American. It will be very interesting to see if Hasan will be tried as an enemy combatant or as a traitor. If McVeigh was around now would he be tried as an enemy combatant? How about the 9-11 conspirators in NYC? Will they be charged differently for the NYC (a civilian target) and the Pentagon (a military target)?

So, due to Bushian monkeying with the terminology, the difference between soldier and para-military and civilian has greyed out. Soldier has come to mean "American military and (practially) no other." Anyone who attacks this military is an enemy combatant. Doesn't matter where they're from or what sort of affiliation they have. These guys are no different from Cobra. Isn't that interesting?

And how does this relate to your point? Well, to say that it's all where you draw the line, and that the line has grown even murkier since this was written. These folk in this issue were clearly connected to the US Military and drew support, training, and culture from it. Obviously it's not the same. It's clearly a bad-child-of-a-"good"-father situation. Bad apples from a good tree.

Because the American military, as we all know, is "good." And no one could expect these sorts of things to happen.

As we will see as the series goes on, Cobra is a world-spanning threat that springs directly from America and the American way of life. Even in our imagination we know we are the cause of our own troubles.