Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 63
  1. #51  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by AmPat View Post
    Roger, I'm tracking. I know that the regs changed for off post guns. They did not have to register them if off post. As for on post, I guess it's better than nothing. I'd still take my chances off post with my own firepower.
    Yes, but if they are on post, then they don't have their own firepower. The Provost Marshall needs to have round the clock protective details on them. They are a huge target.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #52  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Yes, but if they are on post, then they don't have their own firepower. The Provost Marshall needs to have round the clock protective details on them. They are a huge target.
    The Army leadership loves them some control, a whole lot more than it does results or individual liberty. Which can become a problem if you have a personal stake in the results, or the individual liberty concerned.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #53  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    I don't understand why people are treating this like the crime of the decade, a horrible shocking display that is impossible to understand, but no one seems to consider the effects of the war itself.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilia...0%93present%29

    Civilians are being killed all the time in these wars. Suddenly it's horrifying because a soldier killed some without the proper permission?

    Of course most civilian deaths are simply brushed off because they are "collateral damage" in an otherwise "legitimate operation". Do the Afghans care? If a dozen women and children are killed in 'collateral damage' during a strike, do the Afghans think that's totally cool because the foreign occupying military was looking for a bad guy? Come on. When a bomb drops and kills an innocent family, the survivors aren't going to just smile and say "I understand, there were rumors that an insurgent was here". They're more likely to become insurgents themselves.

    Why is occupying a foreign country and causing thousands of civilians deaths A-Okay, until some guy decides to go renegade and stop the evil Muslims without clearance? It's a ridiculous mindset that deaths are nothing to think twice about, as long as you follow the "rules" while you do it.

    Something is seriously wrong when a person is willing to take the firmest possible stand against murder, but War is acceptable.

    As for the idea that this soldier may have had psychological problems? No shit sherlock. How can you have a decade of continuous war with some people on multiple redeployments without psychological problems. At that point it's not even abnormal psychology it's expected psychology. Lt. Col. Dave Grossman wrote “It is not too far from the mark to observe that there is something about continuous, inescapable combat which will drive 98 percent of all men insane, and the other 2 percent were crazy when they go there.”
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #54  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    I found that quote from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman in an article by Chris Hedges on this killing rampage. Hedges is a journalist who has been in many warzones.

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/..._war_20120319/

    -snip-
    War perverts and destroys you. It pushes you closer and closer to your own annihilation—spiritual, emotional and finally physical. It destroys the continuity of life, tearing apart all systems—economic, social, environmental and political—that sustain us as human beings. In war, we deform ourselves, our essence. We give up individual conscience—maybe even consciousness—for contagion of the crowd, the rush of patriotism, the belief that we must stand together as a nation in moments of extremity. To make a moral choice, to defy war’s enticement, can in the culture of war be self-destructive. The essence of war is death. Taste enough of war and you come to believe that the Stoics were right: We will, in the end, all consume ourselves in a vast conflagration.

    A World War II study determined that, after 60 days of continuous combat, 98 percent of all surviving soldiers will have become psychiatric casualties. A common trait among the remaining 2 percent was a predisposition toward having “aggressive psychopathic personalities.” Lt. Col. Dave Grossman in his book “On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society,” notes: “It is not too far from the mark to observe that there is something about continuous, inescapable combat which will drive 98 percent of all men insane, and the other 2 percent were crazy when they go there.”
    -snip-
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #55  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    I don't understand why people are treating this like the crime of the decade, a horrible shocking display that is impossible to understand, but no one seems to consider the effects of the war itself.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilia...(2001–present)

    Civilians are being killed all the time in these wars. Suddenly it's horrifying because a soldier killed some without the proper permission?
    Yes, it is. Because we aren't barbarians. I realize that it flatters you to think of us that way, but we fight to protect non-combatants, not to deliberately put them in harm's way.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Of course most civilian deaths are simply brushed off because they are "collateral damage" in an otherwise "legitimate operation". Do the Afghans care? If a dozen women and children are killed in 'collateral damage' during a strike, do the Afghans think that's totally cool because the foreign occupying military was looking for a bad guy? Come on. When a bomb drops and kills an innocent family, the survivors aren't going to just smile and say "I understand, there were rumors that an insurgent was here". They're more likely to become insurgents themselves.
    Collateral damage isn't brushed off. We investigate every incident and people go to jail for failing to prevent civilian casualties.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Why is occupying a foreign country and causing thousands of civilians deaths A-Okay, until some guy decides to go renegade and stop the evil Muslims without clearance? It's a ridiculous mindset that deaths are nothing to think twice about, as long as you follow the "rules" while you do it.
    It would be a ridiculous mindset, but it isn't ours. We occupied Afghanistan because they harbored Bin Laden, who used it as a base from which to kill 3,000 Americans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    Something is seriously wrong when a person is willing to take the firmest possible stand against murder, but War is acceptable.
    Again, you flatter yourself by denigrating us.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    As for the idea that this soldier may have had psychological problems? No shit sherlock. How can you have a decade of continuous war with some people on multiple redeployments without psychological problems. At that point it's not even abnormal psychology it's expected psychology. Lt. Col. Dave Grossman wrote “It is not too far from the mark to observe that there is something about continuous, inescapable combat which will drive 98 percent of all men insane, and the other 2 percent were crazy when they go there.”
    If this were true, then there would be far more incidents like this, but out of over 50,000 troops who have more than four deployments, only one has committed this kind of atrocity. Clearly, this argument doesn't hold water in the face of the facts, but does present you with an opportunity to show us your morally superior stance. You can stop now. We've heard it before and it's not impressive. You have to have a chest before you can thump it.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #56  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by Wei Wu Wei View Post
    I found that quote from Lt. Col. Dave Grossman in an article by Chris Hedges on this killing rampage. Hedges is a journalist who has been in many warzones.

    http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/..._war_20120319/
    Chris Hedges? Really? Did you think that we wouldn't remember him? He was the crank who ruined the Rockford College graduation ceremony in 2003 in order to spew a bigoted tirade against the US and Israel, resulting in his being booed off the stage and his subsequent removal from the NY Times. He went from the far-left Times to the farthest-left magazine, The Nation. He has zero credibility on this or any other subject, but by presenting this leftist hack as a war correspondent and omitting his history, you demonstrated why you have zero credibility, too.
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #57  
    Senior Member DumbAss Tanker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    2,694
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Chris Hedges? Really? Did you think that we wouldn't remember him? He was the crank who ruined the Rockford College graduation ceremony in 2003 in order to spew a bigoted tirade against the US and Israel, resulting in his being booed off the stage and his subsequent removal from the NY Times. He went from the far-left Times to the farthest-left magazine, The Nation. He has zero credibility on this or any other subject, but by presenting this leftist hack as a war correspondent and omitting his history, you demonstrated why you have zero credibility, too.

    He sounds like an ideal prospect for TruthOut(TheWindow).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #58  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,815
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Chris Hedges? Really? Did you think that we wouldn't remember him? He was the crank who ruined the Rockford College graduation ceremony in 2003 in order to spew a bigoted tirade against the US and Israel, resulting in his being booed off the stage and his subsequent removal from the NY Times. He went from the far-left Times to the farthest-left magazine, The Nation. He has zero credibility on this or any other subject, but by presenting this leftist hack as a war correspondent and omitting his history, you demonstrated why you have zero credibility, too.
    Leftist hack is being kind. Hedges now plies his hatred at such credible "news" outlets as Alternet...CommonDreams...and AdBusters (the folks behind OWS)...going back to just writing for those terrorist loving sycophants at The Nation would be an upgrade for his credibility.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #59  
    Senior Member txradioguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Bavaria
    Posts
    7,815
    Quote Originally Posted by DumbAss Tanker View Post
    He sounds like an ideal prospect for TruthOut(TheWindow).
    He's got stuff at RawStory...that's just as bad.
    In Memory Of My Friend 1st Sgt. Tim Millsap A Co, 70th Eng. Bn. 3rd Bde 1st AD...K.I.A. 25 April 2005

    Liberalism Is The Philosophy Of The Stupid

    To Achieve Ordered Liberty You Must Have Moral Order As Well

    The libs/dems of today are the Quislings of former years. The cowards who would vote a fraud into office in exchange for handouts from the devil.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #60  
    Our widdle friend. Wei Wu Wei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    6,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Odysseus View Post
    Chris Hedges? Really? Did you think that we wouldn't remember him? He was the crank who ruined the Rockford College graduation ceremony in 2003 in order to spew a bigoted tirade against the US and Israel, resulting in his being booed off the stage and his subsequent removal from the NY Times. He went from the far-left Times to the farthest-left magazine, The Nation. He has zero credibility on this or any other subject, but by presenting this leftist hack as a war correspondent and omitting his history, you demonstrated why you have zero credibility, too.
    Calling him a leftist doesn't address a single point he makes.
    Quote Originally Posted by Adam Smith - Wealth of Nations
    It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •