a wise solider.
Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.
I joined to see exotic lands and ancient cultures and to be the first on my block with a confirmed kill.
I disagree.Flaming_Maniac wrote:
and I don't think we have any idiots on the forums in this case.
There is a difference. When l joined up l wasn't brain washed to belive l get 72 virgins when l die. The majority of people join the forces for adventure and the such. Majority of people become and extrimist because they are brain washed to belive they get 72 virgins on death, others join because they are threatened too and the rest join because they get more money a day firing a weapon at the enemy than they would for doing a different job.
Heres one for you.
This is a bod from another country thanking British forces. I can't seem to find one from someone thanking the extremist that blow themselves up and killed god knows how many kids and unarmed people.
Heres one for you.
This is a bod from another country thanking British forces. I can't seem to find one from someone thanking the extremist that blow themselves up and killed god knows how many kids and unarmed people.
That was generalizing Stingray ... unless US troops in Iraq are counted as civilians ...Stingray24 wrote:
The soldier puts on a uniform of his country and engages an armed enemy on the battlefield. A Muslim extremist engages unarmed civilians who are not committed to any battlefield.Braddock wrote:
My question is what is the difference between this mentality and that of a Muslim extremist who signs up to a terror group for the opportunity to "kill some infidels"?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
non uniformed combatants are criminals
Sun-Tzu realised in prehistory that engaging in warfare should, as far as is possible, always be avoided/prevented.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 12:24:49)
if our species was really prepared for that, there would be no use for guns or door locksCameronPoe wrote:
Sun-Tzu realised in prehistory that engaging in warfare should, as far as is possible, always be avoided/prevented.
Misconception ...God Save the Queen wrote:
non uniformed combatants are criminals
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
That is the goal of Sun-Tzu's Taoist-influenced teachings: prepare for all eventualities, appear formless to your enemies, engage in espionage and counter-espionage, never engage in battle if there is any chance of losing, always retreat from battle under a variety of unfavourable circumstances. First and foremost, take measures to make sure war never occurs.God Save the Queen wrote:
if our species was really prepared for that, there would be no use for guns or door locksCameronPoe wrote:
Sun-Tzu realised in prehistory that engaging in warfare should, as far as is possible, always be avoided/prevented.
Sorry buddy, completely untrue. Sometimes the strong are the wicked and the weak are the oppressed. For the weak to don a uniform would be suicide.God Save the Queen wrote:
non uniformed combatants are criminals
international law. get the fuck outta here misconceptions.Varegg wrote:
Misconception ...God Save the Queen wrote:
non uniformed combatants are criminals
oh yeah
...
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-10-20 12:32:16)
By not being uniformed, you are by definition breaking recognized and agreed upon international law, breaking the law is a crime. criminals commit crimes. blending in with a non combatant population is illegal and immoral, plain and simple.CameronPoe wrote:
Sorry buddy, completely untrue. Sometimes the strong are the wicked and the weak are the oppressed. For the weak to don a uniform would be suicide.God Save the Queen wrote:
non uniformed combatants are criminals
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-10-20 12:35:57)
International law is not something I have a lot of time for. It's also something most big powerful nations don't have that much time for. If Irish guerrillas donned uniforms and met the British on an open field of battle I'd a) never have been born or b) be ruled by some foreign crusty old bitch in London.God Save the Queen wrote:
By not being uniformed, you are by definition breaking recognized and agreed upon international law, breaking the law is a crime. criminals commit crimes. blending in with a non combatant population is illegal, plain and simple.
Disagree with your morality assertion.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 12:36:42)
by blending in with a civilian population, you are also creating targets out of people that shouldnt be. thats why there is a law for that.
So you attest that the French Resistance movement under Nazi occupation was criminal and morally wrong?God Save the Queen wrote:
by blending in with a civilian population, you are also creating targets out of people that shouldnt be. thats why there is a law for that.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-10-20 12:38:48)
Its in the Geneva Convention somewhere, non uniformed combatants can be shot.God Save the Queen wrote:
By not being uniformed, you are by definition breaking recognized and agreed upon international law, breaking the law is a crime. criminals commit crimes. blending in with a non combatant population is illegal and immoral, plain and simple.CameronPoe wrote:
Sorry buddy, completely untrue. Sometimes the strong are the wicked and the weak are the oppressed. For the weak to don a uniform would be suicide.God Save the Queen wrote:
non uniformed combatants are criminals
So insurgents with a clear objective to kill US troops must first purchase a uniform or they cant play ?God Save the Queen wrote:
international law. get the fuck outta here misconceptions.Varegg wrote:
Misconception ...God Save the Queen wrote:
non uniformed combatants are criminals
oh yeah
...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
by using the laws standards, yes. So is firebombing large civilian populations.CameronPoe wrote:
So you attest that the French Resistance movement under Nazi occupation was criminal and morally wrong?God Save the Queen wrote:
by blending in with a civilian population, you are also creating targets out of people that shouldnt be. thats why there is a law for that.
ok.....well quit fucking bitching when you hear about American military forces killing a family of iraqis. fucking christ.Varegg wrote:
So insurgents with a clear objective to kill US troops must first purchase a uniform or they cant play ?God Save the Queen wrote:
international law. get the fuck outta here misconceptions.Varegg wrote:
Misconception ...
oh yeah
...
Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-10-20 12:40:51)
Technically, yes. But remember, history is written by the victors.CameronPoe wrote:
So you attest that the French Resistance movement under Nazi occupation was criminal?God Save the Queen wrote:
by blending in with a civilian population, you are also creating targets out of people that shouldnt be. thats why there is a law for that.
Yup, non recognised uniform so it doesn't cover them.SgtHeihn wrote:
Its in the Geneva Convention somewhere, non uniformed combatants can be shot.God Save the Queen wrote:
By not being uniformed, you are by definition breaking recognized and agreed upon international law, breaking the law is a crime. criminals commit crimes. blending in with a non combatant population is illegal and immoral, plain and simple.CameronPoe wrote:
Sorry buddy, completely untrue. Sometimes the strong are the wicked and the weak are the oppressed. For the weak to don a uniform would be suicide.
What people regard as moral, which differs from person to person and culture to culture, is not based on technicalities.SgtHeihn wrote:
Technically, yes. But remember, history is written by the victors.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. I am a firm advocate of the use of guerilla warfare by the weak and oppressed when the cause is just as it is the only manner in which they could ever possibly have a chance of succeeding against a vastly more powerful aggressor. 'War' and 'Laws' don't really seem to mesh for me, because when the shit hits the fan everyone breaks them and the victors get off scot free (e.g., Dresden firebombing).God Save the Queen wrote:
by using the laws standards, yes. So is firebombing large civilian populations.
no difference.
There was a show on BBC1 panorama a few weeks ago called "the undercover soldier" where a guy goes undecover, joins the army and trains with other new recruits.
there was a point where this guy was taking to someone who said he only joined to army to kill "ragheads".
there is no doubt the army is used by some people as a way to kill and commit crimes similar to that of religious extremists.
The army is not whats wrong, its some of the people that join it that have sick, twisted minds and join to kill and commit crimes
There was a show on BBC1 panorama a few weeks ago called "the undercover soldier" where a guy goes undecover, joins the army and trains with other new recruits.
there was a point where this guy was taking to someone who said he only joined to army to kill "ragheads".
there is no doubt the army is used by some people as a way to kill and commit crimes similar to that of religious extremists.
The army is not whats wrong, its some of the people that join it that have sick, twisted minds and join to kill and commit crimes
Last edited by rammunition (2008-10-20 13:13:30)
Easy there Sherlock .... i can fully understand your frustration and the danger involved in such situations where the civilian and millitary part are mixed like that looking fairly much the same ... but do you honestly believe that the insurgents should start paying attention to international law when their conception of the conflict is that the US broke the very same set of rules when they invaded ?God Save the Queen wrote:
by using the laws standards, yes. So is firebombing large civilian populations.CameronPoe wrote:
So you attest that the French Resistance movement under Nazi occupation was criminal and morally wrong?God Save the Queen wrote:
by blending in with a civilian population, you are also creating targets out of people that shouldnt be. thats why there is a law for that.ok.....well quit fucking bitching when you hear about American military forces killing a family of iraqis. fucking christ.Varegg wrote:
So insurgents with a clear objective to kill US troops must first purchase a uniform or they cant play ?God Save the Queen wrote:
international law. get the fuck outta here misconceptions.
oh yeah
...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................