BF2S Forums 12 killed, 31 injured in Fort Hood shooting spree

Mekstizzle wrote:

FEOS wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

lol. Interesting that you left in the whole 'whether they asked them to or not'. Are you in total denial about middle eastern sentiment towards America? Team America:World Police was a satire, not a manifesto... What happens domestically in America is fine, it's the tentacles extending across the world that people have issue with. Your belief in your government's military altruism is amazing. This ain't WWII. The US had to hit Afghanistan for their role in 9/11 and now they can't leave Afghanistan because whichever president does earns the 'you lost Afghanistan' badge. Iraq had about as much to do with US security as the weather in Belarus - it was primarily to do with strategic interests. Surely you can't be as gullible as all that. I may be ridiculously sceptical but you swing the other way to a fairly ridiculous extent if you think soldiers were sacrificed by your government purely 'for people in the middle east'.

Sure the sentiment and intention of the average US soldier is pure and well meaning, but don't try and use that as some kind of qualifier of unwanted and unwarranted intrusions and interferences across the world, well beyond the borders of the nation.

Given that the fucker was not killed in the incident we will no doubt get to hear some testimony from him, if he hasn't found means to commit suicide before that.

I'm not talking about why we are there. I'm talking about the actions of the soldier, airmen, marines, and sailors who are there. I'm talking about the ROE that force them to put their lives at an increased risk now than before in order to prevent hurting/killing civilians while the enemy has no such restrictions and in fact, takes advantage of those restrictions. I'm talking about October 09 being the most deadly month of an 8-year old conflict because of those restrictions. So I'm not talking about macro-level sacrifices...I'm talking about micro-level sacrifices.

I knew you wouldn't get what I was talking about and would automatically jump to the ridiculous without putting any thought into it.

This guy was medical corps. He knew full well he was likely neither going to be shot at nor shoot at anyone, regardless of whether he went to Iraq or Afghanistan. There simply is no excuse, on any grounds, for his actions.

The ROE is there for a reason. People think the war would be won if the ROE was torn up and thrown away and you could just go in and kill everyone Soviet style. It's not even a proper war anyway. The reality is that it's an insurgency/guerilla conflict. The Soviets barely had an ROE and they still lost badly.

FEOS wrote:

Karbin wrote:

Stubbee wrote:

I can't believe this to be true. Link?

http://usmilitary.about.com/library/mil … rt-118.htm

Look at the statement after the described definitions.
Also, ask anyone that has been in the service, be it under UCMJ or QO&R's.
It MAY be written "In order to support a finding of "guilty," the government must prove each and every element of the offense, beyond a reasonable doubt. ", the realty is that as the charged, you are Guilty when you walk into the court.

That is utter bullshit. Served on many courts martial, have you?

FEOS wrote:

Karbin wrote:

FEOS wrote:

That is utter bullshit. Served on many courts martial, have you?

Been a Court Guard on two, been a witness in three.

How about you?

Yes--served on, not just observed. And what you've said is complete and utter BS.

Innocent until proven guilty, just like in civilian courts. Burden of proof is on the prosecution, not the defense.