BF2S Forums U.S. military threatens Afghan village.

Mekstizzle wrote:

Apparently the reason this guy is kidnapped in the first place is because he was gaurding a post, but he decided to leave his armour and rifle at the post and go for a walkabout on his own. Which led to his capture. If that's true, this guy is facepalm

Another story I've read says he was lagging behind in a patrol and was ninja'd.  In anycase..  The patrol leader is a jack ass for not keeping tabs on his people.

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Interesting to see all the psychologists, PSYOP experts, and Afghan cultural experts here who are critiquing the leaflets referenced in the articles.

If only there were entire groups of people (including Afghans) who were experts in the tribal issues in the area(s) targeted who crafted the message and pictures to go on the leaflets, then told the US and Afghan military where to distribute them.

If only.

You knuckleheads act like some random soldier got drunk, wrote this on some toilet paper and said "hand THIS shit out, bro!"

Case in point:

In Somalia, some leaflets were distributed that said (roughly) in that region's specific tribal dialect: "The UN is here to feed your children."

The press got hold of it and translated it using Modern Standard Arabic. It (roughly) translated using MSA to: "The UN is here to eat your children."

Hence the use of MSA (vice Iraqi dialect) in the PSYOP leading up to and during the Iraq invasion. So we ended up with Iraqis burying their aircraft instead of grounding them.

The point being that properly targeted PSYOP messages many times do not always translate properly for those whom they were not intended.

You know what, come to think about it, I find it pretty spectacular that you come in here and berate people who argue and speculate about the message, and do so while talking in arrogant terms about military procedure and what sort of consideration these messages were made with. Somehow, though, you fail to provide one single source to document any of these claims.

At best, you're engaging in precisely the same type of speculation that you just criticised, lacking precisely the qualifications that you argued would validate such an opinion.

Actually, you're 100% wrong.

How does one document actual life experience? I work with PSYOP professionals daily, and have for more than 8 years...to include the head of the Joint Psychological Operations Task Force (JPOTF) at HQ USCENTCOM during OEF and OIF.

I could really give a shit if you believe me or not. It doesn't change the fact that what I posted was the truth. If you're too fucking arrogant to believe that your uninformed opinion might be wrong, I can't help you.

Dilbert_X wrote:

If you're too fucking arrogant to believe that your uninformed opinion might be wrong, I can't help you.

LOL

What's so funny? You've got "LOL"--but that's all you've got.

The key difference being that my opinion on this issue is informed by more than 8 years of firsthand experience. I'm fairly certain if GS popped in on this thread, he would back me up as well (he's a trained Army PSYOPer).

Just how much do you and mikkel have?

Or have you read something on the internets?

Last edited by FEOS (2009-07-21 03:48:00)

Dilbert_X wrote:

You know, this is an internet discussion forum, just because you say you are who you are doesn't necessarily mean you're always right.

I'm not always right...never claimed to be. But I'm right on this.

Dilbert_X wrote:

If you can't debate something evenly without being arrogant and pompous then too bad.

You should repeat this ten times before you enter D&ST, then.

FEOS wrote:

I'm not always right...never claimed to be. But I'm right on this.

If you, and people like you, are right how come Afghanistan is going so badly?

FEOS wrote:

I'm fairly certain if GS popped in on this thread, he would back me up as well (he's a trained Army PSYOPer).

He's also an offensive foulmouthed gimp, so his opinion doesn't carry a lot of weight, nor does 'being trained by the Army' add much.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2009-07-21 05:08:43)

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

You know what, come to think about it, I find it pretty spectacular that you come in here and berate people who argue and speculate about the message, and do so while talking in arrogant terms about military procedure and what sort of consideration these messages were made with. Somehow, though, you fail to provide one single source to document any of these claims.

At best, you're engaging in precisely the same type of speculation that you just criticised, lacking precisely the qualifications that you argued would validate such an opinion.

Actually, you're 100% wrong.

How does one document actual life experience? I work with PSYOP professionals daily, and have for more than 8 years...to include the head of the Joint Psychological Operations Task Force (JPOTF) at HQ USCENTCOM during OEF and OIF.

I could really give a shit if you believe me or not. It doesn't change the fact that what I posted was the truth. If you're too fucking arrogant to believe that your uninformed opinion might be wrong, I can't help you.

However you fail to document your involvement in the creation of these images, and you fail to document your claims that these messages were even created in cooperation with any of these "PSYOP professionals" that you reference. You didn't document any claim you made. At all.

You criticise people for speculating without having direct knowledge, and then you.. speculate without having direct knowledge. It's absurd in the first place to write off any speculation that isn't based in professional knowledge when you're posting on a debate forum, and it's even more absurd to have to characterise people negatively through hyperbole for doing so.

If I was "too fucking arrogant" to believe that my opinion is wrong, I wouldn't need to write countless posts in this thread arguing it. If you want to prove me wrong, I'd be happy to hear it, but you come in here offering unproductive name-calling, and pure speculation without a single source cited, while speaking in terms suggesting that you're "too fucking arrogant" to believe that your opinion might be wrong.

If you want to participate in the discussion, then you really need to learn to do so in a proper, civil manner.

Show me how one documents personal, firsthand experience then. Go ahead.

Show me how to cite sources for personal, firsthand experience. Go ahead.

I'm waiting.

You have no clue if I have direct knowledge or not. And since it can't be sourced to your satisfaction, you can sit there in your arrogant, uninformed manner and cast aspersions on those who actually ARE informed (whether arrogant or not). And because it can't be sourced to your satisfaction, you won't open your arrogant mind enough to--just maybe--learn a little bit from someone who DOES have the experience you don't.

So go ahead and willingly wallow in your arrogant ignorance on this topic. I really couldn't care less at this point.

FEOS wrote:

It's not going nearly as badly as the media wants us to believe. Good news doesn't sell.

July was the bloodiest month in Afghanistan since the US-led invasion.

FatherTed wrote:

Beduin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

It's not going nearly as badly as the media wants us to believe. Good news doesn't sell.

July was the bloodiest month in Afghanistan since the US-led invasion.

Maybe something to do with the fact there's more soldiers there?

Maybe... we sure hope so?

FEOS wrote:

mikkel wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Actually, you're 100% wrong.

How does one document actual life experience? I work with PSYOP professionals daily, and have for more than 8 years...to include the head of the Joint Psychological Operations Task Force (JPOTF) at HQ USCENTCOM during OEF and OIF.

I could really give a shit if you believe me or not. It doesn't change the fact that what I posted was the truth. If you're too fucking arrogant to believe that your uninformed opinion might be wrong, I can't help you.

However you fail to document your involvement in the creation of these images, and you fail to document your claims that these messages were even created in cooperation with any of these "PSYOP professionals" that you reference. You didn't document any claim you made. At all.

You criticise people for speculating without having direct knowledge, and then you.. speculate without having direct knowledge. It's absurd in the first place to write off any speculation that isn't based in professional knowledge when you're posting on a debate forum, and it's even more absurd to have to characterise people negatively through hyperbole for doing so.

If I was "too fucking arrogant" to believe that my opinion is wrong, I wouldn't need to write countless posts in this thread arguing it. If you want to prove me wrong, I'd be happy to hear it, but you come in here offering unproductive name-calling, and pure speculation without a single source cited, while speaking in terms suggesting that you're "too fucking arrogant" to believe that your opinion might be wrong.

If you want to participate in the discussion, then you really need to learn to do so in a proper, civil manner.

Show me how one documents personal, firsthand experience then. Go ahead.

Show me how to cite sources for personal, firsthand experience. Go ahead.

I'm waiting.

You're obviously very irate, but this is bordering on the ridiculous. For the sake of this thread, you really ought to read the last two posts again. The whole point is that you're offering precisely the same speculative arguments as the rest of us are, despite your outburst against doing just that. Your hissy fit is the result of a gross misunderstanding of what this debate forum is about, and you don't even attempt to vindicate it by posting to your own standards.

FEOS wrote:

You have no clue if I have direct knowledge or not. And since it can't be sourced to your satisfaction, you can sit there in your arrogant, uninformed manner and cast aspersions on those who actually ARE informed (whether arrogant or not). And because it can't be sourced to your satisfaction, you won't open your arrogant mind enough to--just maybe--learn a little bit from someone who DOES have the experience you don't.

You don't even attempt to suggest that you had any sort of involvement with the creation of these images, or that you have any sort of credible testimony contrary to the speculations made, yet you credit yourself as being "informed". If you want to make informed opinions to the satisfaction of the rest of us, you need to qualify your involvement, which you haven't even attempted to.

You claim to have information and experience, but so far what you've offered to establish qualification is that you "work around" people who you assume were involved in the creation of the messages. That makes just about the same basis for informed opinion as "working around military types" would make, had the debate been on the undisclosed details of some military action somewhere.

You seem to think that you can participate in a debate and have your unsubstantiated word considered law based on claimed credentials that include neither direct nor indirect involvement in the topic of discussion, while claiming others to be arrogant.

I'd be happy to learn about the topic from someone who could, reliably and factually, recount the details that are subject to speculation in this thread, but you're simply not that person.

FEOS wrote:

So go ahead and willingly wallow in your arrogant ignorance on this topic. I really couldn't care less at this point.

This is no place to vent your narcissism.

Last edited by mikkel (2009-07-22 06:06:39)

Dilbert_X wrote:

FEOS wrote:

It's not going nearly as badly as the media wants us to believe. Good news doesn't sell.

Except this years casualties are the third highest since the invasion, and we are only halfway through the year.
2009 looks set to be the worst year on record for casualties, and nothing is being achieved.

Counting casualties is not an effective metric when determining how well a military operation is doing.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Actually, being trained by the Army in PSYOP would make him an expert on this topic.

Not really, the US army are shit at PSYOP so being trained by them doesn't mean a thing.

And you are qualified to make that judgment how?

FEOS wrote:

Counting casualties is not an effective metric when determining how well a military operation is doing.

I would say you judge by looking at the goals of the particular military operation and the casualties it takes to get there.

After 8 years... are the goals fulfilled?

Beduin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Counting casualties is not an effective metric when determining how well a military operation is doing.

I would say you judge by looking at the goals of the particular military operation and the casualties it takes to get there.

After 8 years... are the goals fulfilled?

Do you even know what the goals are?

Do you refer to strategic goals, operational goals, or tactical goals? Do you refer to political goals or military goals? Do you refer to the goals of the Afghan government or the US?

Before you start claiming something has failed, you have to understand the metrics involved.

Beduin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Beduin wrote:

I would say you judge by looking at the goals of the particular military operation and the casualties it takes to get there.

After 8 years... are the goals fulfilled?

Do you even know what the goals are?

Do you refer to strategic goals, operational goals, or tactical goals? Do you refer to political goals or military goals? Do you refer to the goals of the Afghan government or the US?

Before you start claiming something has failed, you have to understand the metrics involved.

Failed ALL of it.. I dare you m8

Put up or shut up. m8.

You have to know what those things are before you can say whether or not they've failed.