Shouldn't we stop discussing here today's America's policies vs. Iraq or Afghanistan?
I introduced the comparison with current policies of the United States as a means of illustrating the position taken by the German Government towards Italian partisans taken in arms fighting against its forces in 1944.
That is a legitimate way of explaining an event in the past. The way of thinking of a foreign government in the past, with which we are not familiar and which therefore seems strange and incomprehensible to us, can be made comprehensible through a comparison with the way of thinking of a government in the present, with which we are familiar.
Such a comparison does not imply that the ways of thinking of the two governments are exactly the same; what it does do is show the points of similarity of thought in a similar situation, that of fighting an unconventional enemy.
I do not intend to become involved in a discussion on current policies of the United States. Nor do I intend to address the issue of the legality or morality of the policies of either the German Government in 1944 or of the United States Government in 2003 adopted in response to the problem of invading a foreign country and engaging in guerilla warfare with unconvential forces based in that country. My concern is to identify the factors that induced both governments to take a similar attitude toward irregular forces which opposed their respective invasions, and the factors that created both similarities and differences in the actions of the forces of the two governments, eg the constraints that have prevented the forces of the United States from summarily executing "illegal combatants", in contrast with the practice of German forces in Italy in 1944.
You will note that in all cases where I mentioned current policies of the United States Government, I did so in the context of comparing them with German Government policies in Italy in 1944, the topic of this thread.