Pages: 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 15

 

2008-11-14 01:24:15
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6860

usmarine wrote:

now.  my whole point in this thread was my squad in afghan took an amazing amount of fire from a town back in early 2002.  no kia's but two guys were hit.  we didnt fire back because there were civilians all around.  so, i dont like when people tell me about "the rules" of war when they have never had bullets flying all around them yet had it in them not to fire back.  we broke off contact.  set up a perimeter with ambush sites.  then nailed those fuckers when they decided to move. 

so, you are trying to fight people who dont give one rats shit about civilians at all.  those are the people i bitch about.  why wouldnt i?
So you did observe the Rules of Engagement and the Rules of War. You carried out your paid employment as decreed and nobody innocent died. That's all I wanted to know.

Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-11-14 02:03:34)

2008-11-14 01:32:40
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,817|6411|eXtreme to the maX
now.  my whole point in this thread was my squad in afghan took an amazing amount of fire from a town back in early 2002.  no kia's but two guys were hit.  we didnt fire back because there were civilians all around.  so, i dont like when people tell me about "the rules" of war when they have never had bullets flying all around them yet had it in them not to fire back.  we broke off contact.  set up a perimeter with ambush sites.  then nailed those fuckers when they decided to move.
And this is relevant to closing down Gitmo how?
Fuck Israel
2008-11-14 03:09:43
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6716|'Murka

Varegg wrote:

This thread is funny ... the best part is when one argue over anothers lack of the right experience without having it oneself ...

I think you guys value millitary experience way to high, some of you idolize destruction more than you value construction and that is very scary!
Why do you equate military experience with "idoliz(ing) destruction more than you value construction"? Have you never heard the saying "No one desires peace more than the warrior, for he must pay the highest price in war"?

Generalizations.

ftl.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-11-14 04:11:53
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7067

Dilbert_X wrote:

And this is relevant to closing down Gitmo how?
it doesnt.  Cam asked me a question.  so go fuck right off.
2008-11-14 04:42:02
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6824|Πάϊ

FEOS wrote:

oug wrote:

coz a copy of the geneva convention is given to every man in uniform
No, but every person in uniform is trained on the GC annually.
Then how come marine knows jack shit about it.
ƒ³
2008-11-14 04:52:03
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7067

oug wrote:

Then how come marine knows jack shit about it.
ummm..... how do you know what i know?

btw, all you prove on a forum is that you can google.
2008-11-14 05:05:33
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6458|what

usmarine wrote:

btw, all you prove on a forum is that you can google.
that's how I found this place

https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
2008-11-14 07:24:33
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7115|Nårvei

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

This thread is funny ... the best part is when one argue over anothers lack of the right experience without having it oneself ...

I think you guys value millitary experience way to high, some of you idolize destruction more than you value construction and that is very scary!
Why do you equate military experience with "idoliz(ing) destruction more than you value construction"? Have you never heard the saying "No one desires peace more than the warrior, for he must pay the highest price in war"?

Generalizations.

ftl.
Out of context FEOS ... read it again ... the trick is to read behind the lines
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-11-14 08:39:21
M.O.A.B
'Light 'em up!'
+1,220|6528|Escea

oug wrote:

FEOS wrote:

oug wrote:

coz a copy of the geneva convention is given to every man in uniform
No, but every person in uniform is trained on the GC annually.
Then how come marine knows jack shit about it.
He seems to demonstrate the knowledge that terrorists aren't recognised by it, which few others seem to be grasping here.
2008-11-14 08:46:10
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7115|Nårvei

M.O.A.B wrote:

oug wrote:

FEOS wrote:


No, but every person in uniform is trained on the GC annually.
Then how come marine knows jack shit about it.
He seems to demonstrate the knowledge that terrorists aren't recognised by it, which few others seem to be grasping here.
Keep in mind then that part of the training becoming an "terrorist" is to watch amongst other things pictures from Abu Graib where obviously the ROE and Geneva convention was followed 100%

Not an excuse i know but mostly what the insurgency know about their counterpart following the rules ...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-11-14 10:48:57
MGS3_GrayFox
Member
+50|6472
Its funny some people (well, actually one, Sealxo) suggesting to keep these people locked until the end of the war...

You're fighting terrorism, there is no end to that fight.
2008-11-14 11:25:50
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6995|Tampa Bay Florida
What the fuck ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty in a court of law"?
2008-11-14 14:31:08
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6824|Πάϊ

usmarine wrote:

oug wrote:

Then how come marine knows jack shit about it.
ummm..... how do you know what i know?

btw, all you prove on a forum is that you can google.
You know what, I don't really give a flying fuck about your knowledge or any convention. This is common sense we're talking about here. Innocent people being held captive with no option for a trial. And instead of admitting the obvious you rather talk about anything else.

Common fucking sense.
ƒ³
2008-11-14 14:32:28
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7067

oug wrote:

usmarine wrote:

oug wrote:

Then how come marine knows jack shit about it.
ummm..... how do you know what i know?

btw, all you prove on a forum is that you can google.
You know what, I don't really give a flying fuck about your knowledge or any convention. This is common sense we're talking about here. Innocent people being held captive with no option for a trial. And instead of admitting the obvious you rather talk about anything else.

Common fucking sense.
ok thank you.  i guess being picked up for shooting at people means we assume they are innocent.  lulz.   fuck fuckity fuck fuck fuck.
2008-11-14 14:36:07
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6824|Πάϊ

usmarine wrote:

ok thank you.  i guess being picked up for shooting at people means we assume they are innocent.  lulz.   fuck fuckity fuck fuck fuck.
Prove that you picked them up for shooting at people in a court of law. Then lock them up for ever, I don't care. But first thing's first.

TRIAL

CONVICTION

SENTENCE
ƒ³
2008-11-14 14:39:31
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7067

they werent picked up for watering daisy's.  jesus christ.
2008-11-14 15:33:53
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6824|Πάϊ

usmarine wrote:

they werent picked up for watering daisy's.  jesus christ.
see what I mean? it's not like you're stupid or anything, you're just playing stupid because you can't admit you're wrong.
ƒ³
2008-11-14 16:03:33
FEOS
Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate
+1,182|6716|'Murka

Varegg wrote:

Keep in mind then that part of the training becoming an "terrorist" is to watch amongst other things pictures from Abu Graib where obviously the ROE and Geneva convention was followed 100%

Not an excuse i know but mostly what the insurgency know about their counterpart following the rules ...
One of the laws of war is "proportionality". Executing your captives (by, say, cutting off their heads on TV) is not a proportionate response to humiliating pictures. Even insurgents understand that distinction.

Oh...and the insurgents get rewarded for violating the GC. The US people get prosecuted.

Another key difference.

oug wrote:

Prove that you picked them up for shooting at people in a court of law. Then lock them up for ever, I don't care. But first thing's first.

TRIAL

CONVICTION

SENTENCE
You are thinking of this from a civil/criminal view. It is not. It is a martial issue, which operates under different rules (like the GC). Are you subject to the GC for robbing...I'm sorry...allegedly robbing a bank? Of course not. Yet you have no qualms about repeatedly (and incorrectly) applying the same logic in the other direction.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
2008-11-14 16:05:12
SealXo
Member
+309|6841
well this thread has grown...
2008-11-14 16:11:08
oug
Calmer than you are.
+380|6824|Πάϊ

FEOS wrote:

You are thinking of this from a civil/criminal view. It is not. It is a martial issue, which operates under different rules (like the GC). Are you subject to the GC for robbing...I'm sorry...allegedly robbing a bank? Of course not. Yet you have no qualms about repeatedly (and incorrectly) applying the same logic in the other direction.
So you're telling me that because this is a martial issue the "innocent until proven guilty" is not valid?

I find that hard to believe. But even if that were the case, surely you can see why it would be wrong yes?
ƒ³
2008-11-14 16:25:59
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7115|Nårvei

FEOS wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Keep in mind then that part of the training becoming an "terrorist" is to watch amongst other things pictures from Abu Graib where obviously the ROE and Geneva convention was followed 100%

Not an excuse i know but mostly what the insurgency know about their counterpart following the rules ...
One of the laws of war is "proportionality". Executing your captives (by, say, cutting off their heads on TV) is not a proportionate response to humiliating pictures. Even insurgents understand that distinction.

Oh...and the insurgents get rewarded for violating the GC. The US people get prosecuted.

Another key difference.

oug wrote:

Prove that you picked them up for shooting at people in a court of law. Then lock them up for ever, I don't care. But first thing's first.

TRIAL

CONVICTION

SENTENCE
You are thinking of this from a civil/criminal view. It is not. It is a martial issue, which operates under different rules (like the GC). Are you subject to the GC for robbing...I'm sorry...allegedly robbing a bank? Of course not. Yet you have no qualms about repeatedly (and incorrectly) applying the same logic in the other direction.
Tbh FEOS if your country was invaded i think you would have seen through the ROE and GC easily ... and when was the Insurgents invited to a signing of the GC ?

For them it's just a piece of paper of absolutely no value and especially after their counterparts have broken the rules why should they follow them?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
2008-11-14 18:13:38
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7067

Varegg wrote:

Tbh FEOS if your country was invaded i think you would have seen through the ROE and GC easily ... and when was the Insurgents invited to a signing of the GC ?
al-q doesn't have a country dude.  they are all over the place.
2008-11-14 19:16:50
MGS3_GrayFox
Member
+50|6472

usmarine wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Tbh FEOS if your country was invaded i think you would have seen through the ROE and GC easily ... and when was the Insurgents invited to a signing of the GC ?
al-q doesn't have a country dude.  they are all over the place.
Chinese people too, so?
2008-11-14 19:19:31
usmarine
Banned
+2,785|7067

MGS3_GrayFox wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Varegg wrote:

Tbh FEOS if your country was invaded i think you would have seen through the ROE and GC easily ... and when was the Insurgents invited to a signing of the GC ?
al-q doesn't have a country dude.  they are all over the place.
Chinese people too, so?
are you saying Chinese people are terrorists?
2008-11-14 19:26:45
MGS3_GrayFox
Member
+50|6472

usmarine wrote:

MGS3_GrayFox wrote:

usmarine wrote:

al-q doesn't have a country dude.  they are all over the place.
Chinese people too, so?
are you saying Chinese people are terrorists?
I'm saying Chinese people are all over the place, and I asked you how that has to do anything with whatever this thread is supposed to be about.

 

Pages: 1 … 8 9 10 11 12 … 15

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard