Koran Burning argument on Facebook

I was just reading an argument concerning a recent event where a number of copies of the Koran were burned by US military personnel in Afghanistan.  The rationale behind the burning was that the terrorists where using the pages of the Koran to send secret messages to each other.  The actual event was not as important, though, than the President's response.  He promptly apologized for the actions of these "morons".  What were the soldiers to do?  These sacred books, and Islam, were defiled by the Muslims themselves, something that they were doing anyway by killing civilians in the name of their faith.

The fact is that these terrorists are guilty of so much more, and yet no apology from anyone.  Let me try to explain why, as far as I know it.  The Islamic religion, unlike Christianity, is based around the community.  The community is the most important aspect of daily life.  There is no central authority of the Muslim religion, apart from the Caliphs and Imams of the past.  The local authority is centered around the mosque and the sheik in charge.  So when one "community" develops abhorrent versions of the religion, it doesn't have anything to do another community.

Now, that doesn't negate the responsibility of all good Muslims to speak up against the crimes committed by the terrorists groups and the countries that support them.  The rest of the world has, including the US and Europe.  Individual Islamic communities should also be standing up; but, silence.

And make no doubt about it.  These terrorists are the bad guys.  An example comes from my recollection of a couple years ago when I opened a local newspaper to the WORLD NEWS section on page 8.  It had three short "summary" articles, all in one column.  The middle one had to do with some controversy happening in Peru.  The other two were about Iraq.

The top article was about a report, to be released soon, about the actions of some US military personnel at a camp in Iraq.  The article went on to describe that the findings in the report would show that American soldiers struck an illegal combatant while in custody.  The article went on to describe how this report would probably result in official charges that could land these soldiers in federal prison for years.

The bottom article told how two terrorists in Baghdad detonated two bombs on a soccer field during a youth soccer game, killing 60 people and injuring many others.  Some of those killed were children.  What was their "crime"?  Any of us who have had kids play on a youth sport team knows exactly what their crime was. They wanted to watch and cheer on their children.  Instead, they get blown up.  What about the terrorist, who, by the way, got away?  I am sure that they got great kudos from their superiors and maybe a promotion within their ranks.

Here's the point.  Many decry the US as being decadent and immoral.  That if you look at TV and the movies, look to either Hollywood or Washington, that this country is just a terrible place.  But in the history of the world, there has never been a country that would jail their soldiers for striking an illegal combatant during an intense interrogation.

Illegal combatant is defined by the Geneva Convention.  These are rules that are signed and adopted throughout the world in order to reduce civilian deaths in a time of war.  It explains that soldiers are accorded certain rights while POWs.  It also defines who is not protected.  The convention, in summary, says:

• Combatants will operate under a specific leadership, either a government or a government in exile.

• Combatants will display a specific uniform, including appropriate insignia to identify them.

• Combatants will not use civilians to shield themselves, including residing and operating near civilian only locations.

• Combatants will not target civilian populations.

• Combatants are allowed to pursue enemy combatants, even if the later hide in civilian areas.  The former will not be held liable, the liability of civilian deaths lie with those hiding there.

• Combatants not following these rules are considered "Illegal Combatants" and are NOT accorded the privilege of POW status and are NOT protected by those rights.

Traditionally, these illegal combatants were either spies or saboteurs.  In most wars, those found in such a situation were summarily executed by firing squad.  There was no treating them nicely.  There was no according any rights whatsoever.  There was no Morandizing illegal combatants.

So the comparison of these two articles is interesting.  For the first time ever, military personnel are charged for assaulting an illegal combatant and may be jailed for five to ten years or more.  On the other side, the Muslim terrorists are not jailed for a crime much worse. And their story is relegated to the bottom of the page.

Believe it or not, I am very proud to have noticed this.  I am very proud of the fact that this ordeal will be investigated.  The reason has nothing to do with whether American military personnel are terrible or bullies, as many in the media, and unfortunately, the White House, would have us believe.  Instead, I see that this shows that the US is not a country in total moral decay.  In fact, I see this as an example the our country is the most moral country in the history of the world.  What other country in history would jail there own soldiers for this action in the face of such an enemy group of illegal combatants. 

So when our President apologizes to our enemies, maybe that's going too far.  Maybe we should hold back judgement until all the facts are in.  (Remember that teachable moment where the President made stupid remarks about the Boston PD who arrested his friend and fellow Harvard professor.)  And if the American soldiers are in the wrong, only a just and moral nation would hold them accountable with punishment to be appropriate.

Now, back to the burning of the copies of the Koran.  If this was a blatant act of aggression or disrespect for the Koran, that's one thing.  But if these books were being used to harm both military and civilian targets, then to destroy them only makes sense.  Please Mr. President, lets not rush to judgement again.  And lets understand that your actions have consequences.  So much was talked about how President Bush's actions were creating more terrorists.  What about President Obama's actions?  How often will this incident be played out in the madrases throughout the Islamic world in order to recruit new terrorists?  How many times will the President's own words be used by our enemies?

Finally, I am not some professor of religious studies.  I am not a priest or sheik.  I am just a guy who has read dozens of books, including the Torah, Bible and an English translation of the Koran.  I have read a number of books written about these religions.  And I have read a number of books about terrorism and about Bin Laden himself.  I feel I have some basic knowledge of the subject and can talk intelligently about it, albeit sometime I do ramble on a bit (sorry).