I hate to say it, but I sometimes come off as a juvinile dumbass. I recognise this, and in an attempt to prevent any confusion, lemme lay it out for you.
I believe in efficiency, and effectiveness. This means that one strives to get the most work, with the least amount of effort out of any situation. so when I see things like this or this, my kneejerk response is "kill 'em all".
Like I said, juvenile dumbass.
I just think that when a house bomb is used to kill our soldiers, It is only prudent to demonstrate to the offending people just how unhappy we are with that act. I like thermobaric weapons like the BLU-96 for the job.
Snipers in town? I favor the mongol approach to city pacification (SEE: The Battle of Bagdad (1258)). After a couple of completely destroyed towns/cities (i.e. no two stones atop each other, only one citizen allowed to survive to spread the tale) the word will spread, that the Mujahdin bring only death to their own people. Pretty soon, civilians with guns will be killed by the townspeople, in order to avoid their own deaths. When the Mullahs and the Imams preach Jihad and praise the Shaheed, they will be censored, silenced ands even killed by the very people they intend to inflame.
Think about it, is it better to spend the lifeblood of our country in dribs and drabs, trying to pacify a region that historically is unplacatable or let a conquered people police their own country? Eventually, the Mujahadin movement will cease to function, if for no other reason than they will become synonymous with names like; Benedict Arnold and Vidkun Quisling. Given the choice of expending a several hundred American lives, or several thousand Iraqi, Iranian and Afghani lives, the choice is clear.
It's not that I'm a juvenile dumbass, it's just that "kill 'em all" is the most efficient response I can come up with.
Just my opinion, but you know what they say about opinions.