Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Exactly. The guys we are fighting are coming from loosely connected cells from lots and lots of different countries. The main thing they have in common is that they are all gunning for us. They are extremely flexible, and to fight them effectively we need to be too. Everything that needs to be included, can be.

It includes the fight against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and also the fight in Iraq (since, you know, Al Qaeda and other groups are operating in Iraq and have been for years). However, it is not necessarily limited to those places or those groups. If another terrorist group starts throwing their weight around, they can be added to the list.

Ironhide wrote:To quote an old adage, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter."

Meh, there’s a difference between a civilian who takes up arms against government by targeting military targets, and a guy who hijacks a civilian plane and flies it into a building. Call them whatever you want, but they’re very different things.

We Americans loved these terrorists when they fought against the Soviet Union as the Mujehadeen in the 80s. Hell, we even supplied them with weapons and ammo then abodoned them when it didn't fit our political views anymore. Same goes for Saddam Hussien. When he was fighting the Iranians in 80s, he was an okay guy to us, but then he invaded Kuwait and showed us what a real dictator he is.

You’re right, the US has supported plenty of dodgy governments. It’s later turned on those governments and started listing their failings, when it was happy to ignore those failings as long as they were towing the US line.

Funny story about Kuwait, and bare in mind this is very much an ‘apparently’ kind of story, but apparently Saddam inquired to the US ambassador what the US would think of an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. The US ambassador replied ‘the US has no opinion on that at this time’ which is diplomat speech for ‘I don’t know, where did that come from I haven’t briefed on that why are you asking these questions I’ll talk to state dept and get back to you’. Saddam understood it as ‘we don’t care, do whatever’. And well, now we’re where we are.

You think these guys deserve a bullet in the head because they are terrorists, but if the situation were reversed and it was american terrorists being held in a prison off the coast of Iran for conducting attacks against Iran, you'd be screaming for their right to a trial.

Followed to its logical conclusion, Fraz and co would be alright if Russia kidnapped US citizens, and then explained to the US those citizens don’t deserve a trial because they’re not Russian citizens.

Unless it’s the kind of morality than only works when you’ve got the guns.

I'm glad we got a president who finally sees these guys as people and has moral compass. Unlike Bush who went to war in Iraq for oil and money.

It’s a lot more complicated than that.

Hordini wrote:As to the rest of your post, I've already addressed it several times, but comparing the War on Terror the the War on Drugs, Hunger, and Poverty, is an absolute fallacy. Mainly because it's actually a war. You know, with soldiers, and bombs, and shooting, on a relatively large scale by modern standards. There's even been a few actual battles.

There’s guns and soldiers is the war on drugs as well. There’s even bombing runs and lots of shooting if you go to the right parts of South America.

The point is not to discredit the efforts of the soldiers in pointing that this isn’t a war, the point is to discredit the line of thinking that assumes it can be won with military means. You win a war by marching your army towards the enemy capital. There is geography to take and military facilities to blow up.

The war on terror sometimes has these things. There were terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, and so a military operation there made sense. But there are key differences between counter-terrorism and war, and ultimately treating it as such fails every time.

In a war, you kill a soldier and there’s one less guy fighting against you. In a terrorist operation, killing a terrorist produces two more. It’s a simple but unavoidable piece of arithmetic and as a result bodycounts are the worst measure of success. Instead you have to focus on prevention. While you still need to take measures you oppose terrorists, you can’t mistake successful operations at that level with strategic success.

Hordini wrote:Exactly. The guys we are fighting are coming from loosely connected cells from lots and lots of different countries. The main thing they have in common is that they are all gunning for us. They are extremely flexible, and to fight them effectively we need to be too. Everything that needs to be included, can be.

It includes the fight against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and also the fight in Iraq (since, you know, Al Qaeda and other groups are operating in Iraq and have been for years). However, it is not necessarily limited to those places or those groups. If another terrorist group starts throwing their weight around, they can be added to the list.

Okay, so we only need to knock off: Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Lebanon, Sudan, North Korea, Somolia (already tried with Ethiopia's army and failed) and about a dozen or so other countries to go then.

EDIT - missed the point by a long way.

Mentioning that there are other countries who support terrorism that we don't have troops in right now isn't really much of a counterpoint. Realistically, we have to start somewhere, and we can't fight everyone at once.

I'm not saying we should "knock off" all of even some of those countries, however. I'm just saying it's a ridiculous point, and I can't believe how many people still bring it up as some kind of "defense."


Sebster, I realize that there are guns and soldiers involved in some parts of the war on drugs, I still think it's significantly different to the war on terror, however. I do realize that counter-terrorism at times takes more subtlety than most military operations are capable of, and that is an important part of it, I agree. I'm certainly not claiming that a flat body count is how we're going to measure victory in this, but I do think that military operations are a big part of it. I understand that it is possible to produce more terrorists by killing them, but we will have to kill and capture some of them. As with most things, it's finding the balance that is tricky.

Hordini wrote:Sebster, I realize that there are guns and soldiers involved in some parts of the war on drugs, I still think it's significantly different to the war on terror, however. I do realize that counter-terrorism at times takes more subtlety than most military operations are capable of, and that is an important part of it, I agree. I'm certainly not claiming that a flat body count is how we're going to measure victory in this, but I do think that military operations are a big part of it. I understand that it is possible to produce more terrorists by killing them, but we will have to kill and capture some of them. As with most things, it's finding the balance that is tricky.

Yeah, it’s about balance. You will need to kill people at one time or another, but it’s important not to mistake killing people with moving towards success. I think emphasis on terms like ‘war on terror’ increases the chance of heading too far down the military path.

sebster wrote:

jp400 wrote:So let me get this straight Highspeed?

Someone sets off a EFP on your vehicle tarying to KILL YOU, and you can physically trace the wire back to some jerkoffs front door. He then tests positive for Nitro and when searching his house you find A copper plate, Wire, and a little book written by some guy named Saddam titled "What to do when America Invades" and you wont beat the living tar out of him?? (for those that dont know, EFP= Explosive Formed Projectile, made by takeing a Copper Plate and forming it over the shaped part of a shaped charge)

The idiot was lucky we didnt just shoot his sorry ass on the spot.
I dont know what panzy ass Guard transportation unit you were in, but thats the way I did it on OIF 1&2, and I did it again on OIF 5&6. I bet you think that going outside the wire ment going outside your Cat5 wire. I bet your not even combat arms, just some fobbit sucking up all the fobs hot water and Ac. (NO just because you have combat in your MOS title doesnt make you combat arms IE: Combat Box Packer)

Hang on, so you’re here on some random gaming board talking about your unit committing war crimes as regular policy? Completely unprompted.

I read something one time about Texas sheriff saying that if criminals were smart enough to keep their idiot mouths shut no-one hardly anyone would ever get caught. This really brings that home, doesn’t it?

Wow, Did you even read the rest of my post? Do you even know what a War Crime is? The My Lai Massacre was a war crime in case you cant tell the difference.

The second someone commits an act of agression (aka trying to kill you) in any way shape or form, doesnt matter if its by trying to drop a cinderblock on your head from a rooftop, or setting off an IED... they stop being an unarmed civilian and become a armed combative. Guess what you do when you come across armed combatives? You kill them.

I dont care if your a Man setting off an IED, a woman wearing a sucide vest at a checkpoint, or a child takeing aim with an Ak-47... If you try to kill me or anyone in my unit around me... I will not think twice about venting your head with 5.56. If you go about your normal lives and dont try to harm us, we wont screw with you. In fact you will most likely get some form of aid. (Which the US give out in the millions by the way)

I just love how people with no real life experience try to dictate how it should be.

sebster wrote:

Hordini wrote:Sebster, I realize that there are guns and soldiers involved in some parts of the war on drugs, I still think it's significantly different to the war on terror, however. I do realize that counter-terrorism at times takes more subtlety than most military operations are capable of, and that is an important part of it, I agree. I'm certainly not claiming that a flat body count is how we're going to measure victory in this, but I do think that military operations are a big part of it. I understand that it is possible to produce more terrorists by killing them, but we will have to kill and capture some of them. As with most things, it's finding the balance that is tricky.

Yeah, it’s about balance. You will need to kill people at one time or another, but it’s important not to mistake killing people with moving towards success. I think emphasis on terms like ‘war on terror’ increases the chance of heading too far down the military path.

Agreed. I feel the US should seriously cut back on any tactic which causes civilian casualties. Every time the US military is seen taking an innocent life, terrorist groups gain another piece of propaganda.

BloodofOrks wrote:

sebster wrote:

Hordini wrote:Sebster, I realize that there are guns and soldiers involved in some parts of the war on drugs, I still think it's significantly different to the war on terror, however. I do realize that counter-terrorism at times takes more subtlety than most military operations are capable of, and that is an important part of it, I agree. I'm certainly not claiming that a flat body count is how we're going to measure victory in this, but I do think that military operations are a big part of it. I understand that it is possible to produce more terrorists by killing them, but we will have to kill and capture some of them. As with most things, it's finding the balance that is tricky.

Yeah, it’s about balance. You will need to kill people at one time or another, but it’s important not to mistake killing people with moving towards success. I think emphasis on terms like ‘war on terror’ increases the chance of heading too far down the military path.

Agreed. I feel the US should seriously cut back on any tactic which causes civilian casualties. Every time the US military is seen taking an innocent life, terrorist groups gain another piece of propaganda.

Sorry, but I disagree.
This train of though caused my second tour to be alot harder then it had to be. We couldnt use any type of AOE within city limits for fear of collateral damage. No grenades, Mk19, Laws, At4s, Javs, Tows, 25mm, 120's ect ect ect.

However Haji could take down an overpass trying to crush Strykers under the tons of concrete then fire RPG's from as far away as they want. (Anything over 75m tends to become very corkscrewish and tends to fly off in any direction)

Go figure.

Hordini wrote:
Except that Iraq is not a colonial territory of the U.S., and is not connected to our legal system. If Iraq is a U.S. colonial territory, then Germany, Japan, South Korea, and other countries must be U.S. territories too. After all, we still have troops in all those places.

Colonial territory isn't defined by the presence of troops, but by the relationship of the states involved. We don't practice formal vassalage, but it comes pretty close in some cases. Certainly close enough that we should at least open up our legal proceedings, involving foreign nationals, for external review.

Ironhide wrote:
It doesn't. It is an un-winnable war. You can't defeat an idea or emotion. Did we win the "War on Drugs? The "War on Poverty"? The "War on Hunger"? Nope. All three are still around.

It was a rhetorical question.

jp400 wrote:

However Haji could take down an overpass trying to crush Strykers under the tons of concrete then fire RPG's from as far away as they want. (Anything over 75m tends to become very corkscrewish and tends to fly off in any direction)

Go figure.

Yep. It's called a double standard and it sucks. But it's the reality of the situation and we have to deal with it.

BloodofOrks wrote:

Hordini wrote:
Stop saying the "War on Terror" is a war against an emotion or a war against a tactic. It's not, and to claim that it is is a disgrace to anyone who has fought or suffered in this conflict. I'll tell you right now, none of the men and women we have over there have been shot at, bombed, wounded, or killed by an emotion or a tactic.

Please define exactly who the "war on terror" is against. Is it confined specifically to the fight against the Taliban and Al Queada? Is Iraq included? How about the US-Ethiopian joint venture into Somalia? Would that be included as a part of the "war on terror"? IMHO the "war on terror" has had a funny way of meaning anything the Bush administration needed it to be at the time.

The "war on terror" doesn't mean crap, and in its own way is a form of terrorism against both foreign populations and domestic left wingers. It's like calling a conflict the war on evil, it means nothing and is little more than an easy way to defame anyone that disagrees with what falls under the umbrella.

jp400 wrote:Sorry, but I disagree.
This train of though caused my second tour to be alot harder then it had to be. We couldnt use any type of AOE within city limits for fear of collateral damage. No grenades, Mk19, Laws, At4s, Javs, Tows, 25mm, 120's ect ect ect.

Of course, things started getting better in Iraq and stopped getting worse when exactly?

However Haji could take down an overpass trying to crush Strykers under the tons of concrete then fire RPG's from as far away as they want. (Anything over 75m tends to become very corkscrewish and tends to fly off in any direction)

Go figure.

Yeah, there’s a double standard. Like when a player on the home team lays a bad tackle and the crowd doesn’t make a noise, but when an away player does it the whole crowd erupts. Well when you invade someone else’s country you’re the away team, and you’ve got to play really cleanly to convince anyone you’re the fair team. If you don’t like it stop invading other countries.

The "war on terror" doesn't mean crap, and in its own way is a form of terrorism against both foreign populations and domestic left wingers. It's like calling a conflict the war on evil, it means nothing and is little more than an easy way to defame anyone that disagrees with what falls under the umbrella.

To call the term 'war on terror' a form of terrorism is just a ridiculous, rhetorical point. Terrorism lean on physical actions for the production of an emotional response. Fire-bombing Dresden was terrorism. Hiroshima, and Nagasaki, were terrorism. Poorly conceived polemic is not terrorism.

jp400 wrote:Wow, Did you even read the rest of my post? Do you even know what a War Crime is? The My Lai Massacre was a war crime in case you cant tell the difference.

You were testing a guy for nitro, so he was in your custody. When the test confirmed, you beat him. Damn right that ain’t cool.

The second someone commits an act of agression (aka trying to kill you) in any way shape or form, doesnt matter if its by trying to drop a cinderblock on your head from a rooftop, or setting off an IED... they stop being an unarmed civilian and become a armed combative. Guess what you do when you come across armed combatives? You kill them.

And when they’re taken captive you stop trying to kill them. We should write a book together called ‘Things that aren’t rocket science’.

I just love how people with no real life experience try to dictate how it should be.

I like it when people on the internet claim ‘War is hell and you weren’t there. How could you possibly understand how important it is to beat captives!’

jp400 wrote:

I just love how people with no real life experience try to dictate how it should be.

As opposed to who ? People who come across as traumatised at what they've seen and/or done ?

Or do you mean people like the ex President of the USA and his cabinet ?

jp400 wrote:

sebster wrote:

jp400 wrote:So let me get this straight Highspeed?

Someone sets off a EFP on your vehicle tarying to KILL YOU, and you can physically trace the wire back to some jerkoffs front door. He then tests positive for Nitro and when searching his house you find A copper plate, Wire, and a little book written by some guy named Saddam titled "What to do when America Invades" and you wont beat the living tar out of him?? (for those that dont know, EFP= Explosive Formed Projectile, made by takeing a Copper Plate and forming it over the shaped part of a shaped charge)

The idiot was lucky we didnt just shoot his sorry ass on the spot.
I dont know what panzy ass Guard transportation unit you were in, but thats the way I did it on OIF 1&2, and I did it again on OIF 5&6. I bet you think that going outside the wire ment going outside your Cat5 wire. I bet your not even combat arms, just some fobbit sucking up all the fobs hot water and Ac. (NO just because you have combat in your MOS title doesnt make you combat arms IE: Combat Box Packer)

Hang on, so you’re here on some random gaming board talking about your unit committing war crimes as regular policy? Completely unprompted.

I read something one time about Texas sheriff saying that if criminals were smart enough to keep their idiot mouths shut no-one hardly anyone would ever get caught. This really brings that home, doesn’t it?

Wow, Did you even read the rest of my post? Do you even know what a War Crime is? The My Lai Massacre was a war crime in case you cant tell the difference.

The second someone commits an act of agression (aka trying to kill you) in any way shape or form, doesnt matter if its by trying to drop a cinderblock on your head from a rooftop, or setting off an IED... they stop being an unarmed civilian and become a armed combative. Guess what you do when you come across armed combatives? You kill them.

I dont care if your a Man setting off an IED, a woman wearing a sucide vest at a checkpoint, or a child takeing aim with an Ak-47... If you try to kill me or anyone in my unit around me... I will not think twice about venting your head with 5.56. If you go about your normal lives and dont try to harm us, we wont screw with you. In fact you will most likely get some form of aid. (Which the US give out in the millions by the way)

I just love how people with no real life experience try to dictate how it should be.

There is a clear moral and legal difference between shooting an armed person in the act of fighting, and shooting someone you have captured and disarmed, who was found in possession of a weapon.

There are many americans on dakka , so im pressured to not say whats on my mind.

The world is mad at US gov for A LOT of reasons , and i can tell you " oh terrorist are just jealous of our freedom and our way of life " is not one of them.

Weapon of mass destruction? ok Korea had one , if our technology is fueled by kimchi, Bush would have been there years ago.

Protect freedom and way of life? sure, Taiwan have been trying to stand as country for decades. China kept threatening with military pressure, they *practice fire their missle to Taiwanese coast every month for gods sake. Not to mention Tibet , Mongolia .

Sure its easy to label your action as something noble when the situation have advantage towards you.

And then you revert back to your true intention the moment it doesnt benefit you anymore.

Half of my American friends agree with what i said, while the other half want to burn me to stake.
But there i said it, thats what i wanted to say.

sebster wrote:"War is hell and you weren’t there. How could you possibly understand how it is!"

Fixed the Typo for you!


You all think you may have some points, but the fact of it remains (and any real combat vet will tell you)..........

Until you live the life and have experienced the gak for yourself first hand, you just dont know Jack. Sure you see whats on the news and read whats in the paper, but nothing on this earth will ever come close to first hand experience.

Imagine this....
Your driving down the road in your vehicle with your family. (Wife/husband/kids/mom/dad/whatever) Suddenly a roadside bomb goes off and kills them right before your eyes. Turned into lets say a chunky red meatpile with one hand on you and the other in the trunk somewhere. Now lets say that you dont even have time to grieve before your thrown back into the gak chaseing the person that set off the roadside bomb. You then catch the guy a little while later..

Now tell me with a straight face....
You wouldnt want to beat the living crap out of him?
Let me guess, you would just walk up and calmly zipcuff him and haul him away without so much as a second thought? Knowing full well that the odds of him being set free cause some desk jocky at the local police station was too lazy to file the proper paperwork cause they were only makeing 20k a year deployed were pretty high??
If you just thought yes........
bs.

How many of you can say in all truth that you have stood toe to toe with someone hell bent on ending your life by any means possible and looked him in the eye through a set of Iron sights and pulled the trigger?

How many of you have slept in a hole that you dug behind your RV every night for months on end?
How many of you have had close friends, people you consider family killed right before your eyes?
How many of you had the guy standing next to you on patrol take a bullet that was so close that you heard the incomming round?
How many of you at oh dark thirty been awaken by incomming fire?
Who here did even 1 tour in any branch of military?
Who else here worked 24 hours a day, Seven Days a week, through holidays, with no paid vacation or sick days for 365 days x2?
I could go on for pages but I wont.........
This is why you hear vets say...
"Unless you were there, you just dont know."

Does indeed sound horrific.

You were of course drafted against your will right ?

I still don't actually see what point you're trying to make.

Fair enough, apparently no-one else here has any understanding of what it is you go through. Except other soldiers who post here but they don't count as...as they suck or are cowards.Or something.

...and ? Why does this make it acceptable for you to say things like

You find a half dozen people playing dumb. You line them all up and test them for GSR, Nitro ect ect. One guy in the house tests positive. Guess who is going to Gitmo after he plays the part of the Pinata in a GI roundup?

Now We have to accept the fact that people like him will be set free?

Hate to quote a marine......... but:
We should have killed them all and let god sort them out!

advocating the execution of civilians and you wonder why people might have a problem with that ?

You'll note that in criminal trials they disregard jurors who have or might be unable to judge fairly and coolly the facts of the situation. There's a reason for that, and the same need applies to things like defining what is legal, what is a war crime etc etc.

Now I'm sure you haven't shot executed people "just in case", but that's what you're advocating.

And you wonder why the Iraqis don't want you there ?

Really ?

BloodofOrks wrote:

Hordini wrote:Exactly. The guys we are fighting are coming from loosely connected cells from lots and lots of different countries. The main thing they have in common is that they are all gunning for us. They are extremely flexible, and to fight them effectively we need to be too. Everything that needs to be included, can be.

It includes the fight against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and also the fight in Iraq (since, you know, Al Qaeda and other groups are operating in Iraq and have been for years). However, it is not necessarily limited to those places or those groups. If another terrorist group starts throwing their weight around, they can be added to the list.

Okay, so we only need to knock off: Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan, Lebanon, Sudan, North Korea, Somolia (already tried with Ethiopia's army and failed) and about a dozen or so other countries to go then.

Sounds like a plan to me.

reds8n wrote:Does indeed sound horrific.

You were of course drafted against your will right ?

I still don't actually see what point you're trying to make.

Fair enough, apparently no-one else here has any understanding of what it is you go through. Except other soldiers who post here but they don't count as...as they suck or are cowards.Or something.

...and ? Why does this make it acceptable for you to say things like

You find a half dozen people playing dumb. You line them all up and test them for GSR, Nitro ect ect. One guy in the house tests positive. Guess who is going to Gitmo after he plays the part of the Pinata in a GI roundup?

Now We have to accept the fact that people like him will be set free?

Hate to quote a marine......... but:
We should have killed them all and let god sort them out!

advocating the execution of civilians and you wonder why people might have a problem with that ?

You'll note that in criminal trials they disregard jurors who have or might be unable to judge fairly and coolly the facts of the situation. There's a reason for that, and the same need applies to things like defining what is legal, what is a war crime etc etc.

Now I'm sure you haven't shot executed people "just in case", but that's what you're advocating.

And you wonder why the Iraqis don't want you there ?

Really ?

Thats the thing now days. Double standards everywhere, and doesnt apply if its against the person that holds power.

It all boils down to " im pissed off, and im going to kill you CUZ-I-CAN "

what Obama decided to do is the correct choice i believe. No he isnt been lenient , he is just showing the world "hey look, I have the power, but im not blood thirsty,
give us a chance to fix what Bush did wrong "

LunaHound wrote:
There are many americans on dakka , so im pressured to not say whats on my mind.

The world is mad at US gov for A LOT of reasons , and i can tell you " oh terrorist are just jealous of our freedom and our way of life " is not one of them.

Weapon of mass destruction? ok Korea had one , if our technology is fueled by kimchi, Bush would have been there years ago.

Protect freedom and way of life? sure, Taiwan have been trying to stand as country for decades. China kept threatening with military pressure, they *practice fire their missle to Taiwanese coast every month for gods sake. Not to mention Tibet , Mongolia .

Sure its easy to label your action as something noble when the situation have advantage towards you.

And then you revert back to your true intention the moment it doesnt benefit you anymore.

Half of my American friends agree with what i said, while the other half want to burn me to stake.
But there i said it, thats what i wanted to say.

You conveniently ignore the US Navy has been keeping Taiwan from being invaded for decades. Oh well.

It inevitably drags down to the standard line doesn't it. The US is evil.
So how about the evil US pull out completely? No troops in Korea. No Navy near Taiwan. China go for broke baby we don't give a .
No forces in Europe. Russia if they get snippy just cut off their gas and nuke 'em. After all, thats what the Evil US would do.
Who are you going to pick on when we've pulled out, and you just have to face yourselves? You think China is going to be your savior? Russia?

You say it like Europe couldnt defend itself? it just needs the political will- fact is for mainland europe having suffered 2 world wars the military is a big deal (the first is only just fading out of living memory).

If the americans said yeh we be pulling out I am sure you would see a European rapid reaction force pushed through ASAP.

It inevitably drags down to the standard line doesn't it. The US is evil.
So how about the evil US pull out completely? No troops in Korea. No Navy near Taiwan. China go for broke baby we don't give a .
No forces in Europe. Russia if they get snippy just cut off their gas and nuke 'em. After all, thats what the Evil US would do.
Who are you going to pick on when we've pulled out, and you just have to face yourselves? You think China is going to be your savior? Russia?

Well we are socialist apparently.


You're not actually suggestting that the reason the Russians don't instantly invade Europe is because of the few Ks worth of USA soldiers over here are you ?

I thinkn it much more interesting that it inevitably drags down to Americans complaining that they're viewed as evil or the bad guys regardless of what you do. No actual rebuttal or argument against the gakky things your military does, just the same old "why pick on us..blah blah.. fought communism.... saved you from the Nazis... etc etc etc.

You know you used to be such a forward looking nation, it really is disheartening for the rest of the world to see how small you've let the last few years of your government make you.

jp400 wrote:

sebster wrote:

jp400 wrote:So let me get this straight Highspeed?

Someone sets off a EFP on your vehicle tarying to KILL YOU, and you can physically trace the wire back to some jerkoffs front door. He then tests positive for Nitro and when searching his house you find A copper plate, Wire, and a little book written by some guy named Saddam titled "What to do when America Invades" and you wont beat the living tar out of him?? (for those that dont know, EFP= Explosive Formed Projectile, made by takeing a Copper Plate and forming it over the shaped part of a shaped charge)

The idiot was lucky we didnt just shoot his sorry ass on the spot.
I dont know what panzy ass Guard transportation unit you were in, but thats the way I did it on OIF 1&2, and I did it again on OIF 5&6. I bet you think that going outside the wire ment going outside your Cat5 wire. I bet your not even combat arms, just some fobbit sucking up all the fobs hot water and Ac. (NO just because you have combat in your MOS title doesnt make you combat arms IE: Combat Box Packer)

Hang on, so you’re here on some random gaming board talking about your unit committing war crimes as regular policy? Completely unprompted.

I read something one time about Texas sheriff saying that if criminals were smart enough to keep their idiot mouths shut no-one hardly anyone would ever get caught. This really brings that home, doesn’t it?

Wow, Did you even read the rest of my post? Do you even know what a War Crime is? The My Lai Massacre was a war crime in case you cant tell the difference.

The second someone commits an act of agression (aka trying to kill you) in any way shape or form, doesnt matter if its by trying to drop a cinderblock on your head from a rooftop, or setting off an IED... they stop being an unarmed civilian and become a armed combative. Guess what you do when you come across armed combatives? You kill them.

I dont care if your a Man setting off an IED, a woman wearing a sucide vest at a checkpoint, or a child takeing aim with an Ak-47... If you try to kill me or anyone in my unit around me... I will not think twice about venting your head with 5.56. If you go about your normal lives and dont try to harm us, we wont screw with you. In fact you will most likely get some form of aid. (Which the US give out in the millions by the way)

I just love how people with no real life experience try to dictate how it should be.

I'm not trying to get on your case, but for someone who came out on my side in the 2nd amendment thread, you certainly want to draw a line between unarmed civilians and combatives, and it sounds like you're drawing that line by who has weapons. That is the problem I have with all of this, I never thought we were supposed to be invading this country and taking over the machinery of government, I thought we were removing a dictator, with the help of other Iraqi's.

When you test someone for "nitro" what is meant by that? Are you talking about a test for an explosive like nitrocellulose or nitroglycerin, TNP, TNT, whatever, or is it more general, like a test for nitrate or nitrite or. Do you know if that particular test can produce false positives, and if so, from what?

Also, and I don't know this, I'm asking....Can these guys actually achieve a true EFP with an improvised device? Not saying they couldn't kill someone even if it didn't work perfectly.

reds8n wrote:

It inevitably drags down to the standard line doesn't it. The US is evil.
So how about the evil US pull out completely? No troops in Korea. No Navy near Taiwan. China go for broke baby we don't give a .
No forces in Europe. Russia if they get snippy just cut off their gas and nuke 'em. After all, thats what the Evil US would do.
Who are you going to pick on when we've pulled out, and you just have to face yourselves? You think China is going to be your savior? Russia?

Well we are socialist apparently.


You're not actually suggestting that the reason the Russians don't instantly invade Europe is because of the few Ks worth of USA soldiers over here are you ?

I thinkn it much more interesting that it inevitably drags down to Americans complaining that they're viewed as evil or the bad guys regardless of what you do. No actual rebuttal or argument against the gakky things your military does, just the same old "why pick on us..blah blah.. fought communism.... saved you from the Nazis... etc etc etc.

You know you used to be such a forward looking nation, it really is disheartening for the rest of the world to see how small you've let the last few years of your government make you.

Well Red, your response to Russia cutting off your gas has been "we'll sue you." yea that will bother the Russians.
Again, any problem with us just leaving, including pulling back our nuclear umbrella? We'll let you deal with the Middle East and Iran. We can always get our gas and oil from the north and south.

Its the perfect solution. We can balance our budget. After all, only the US is a threat to world peace apparently.

You do know the UK doesn't get much or require gas from Russia right ?

You appear to be confusing part of Europe with the whole thing.

A sizable % of the UK would indeed love you to pull all your nukes and military out of the UK, personally I'm ambivalent about it. I'd like to keep some of your stuff here as you are our allies. That said if you want to not fly people through here on the way to torture them, that's be good.

We're on much better terms with the Iranians and the Middle east as a whole than you guys.

..not least as we keep selling them football teams, but that's a whole other thread.

I'm talking greater Europa as a whole Red. I know you get lots of North Sea stuff.

I'm actually fully in favor of pulling back. Now. WWII is long over. No reason to have troops and spend money defending Europe any longer. Its not sane that we are still there.

said if you want to not fly people through here on the way to torture them, that's be good.

Well all those tourist flights to France have to land somewhere to refuel Red