Guest_ikonboard Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 This just in from a fellow Marine! Those of you Liberals out there that think the world is peachy , read this ! Next time a punk like Dan Rather spouts off about our boys killing unarmed terrorist, think back to this! They're Called Security Rounds In response to the news blurb about the Marine who put two rounds in a wounded insurgent's head in Falluja, here's a response from a Marine: It's a safety issue pure and simple. After assaulting through a target, put a security round in everybody's head. Sorry al-Reuters, there's no paddy wagon rolling around Fallujah picking up "prisoners" and offering them a hot cup a joe, falafel, and a blanket. There's no time to dick around in the target, you clear the space, dump the chumps, and move on.org. Are Corpsman expected to treat wounded terrorists? Negative. Hey libs, worried about the defense budget? Well, it would be waste, fraud, and abuse for a Corpsman to spend one man minute or a battle dressing on a terrorist, it's much cheaper to just spend the $.02 on a 5.56mm FMJ. By the way, terrorists who chop off civilian's heads are not prisoners, they are carcasses. UPDATE: Let me be very clear about this issue. I have looked around the web, and many people get this concept, but there are some stragglers. Here is your situation Marine. You just took fire from unlawful combatants shooting from a religious building attempting to use the sanctuary status of their position as protection. But you're in Fallujah now, and the Marine Corps has decided that they're not playing that game this time. That was Najaf. So you set the mosque on fire and you hose down the terrorists with small arms, launch some AT-4s (Rockets), some 40 mm grenades into the building and things quiet down. So you run over there, and find some tangos wounded and pretending to be dead. You are aware that suicide martyrdom is like really popular with these kinds of idiots, and like taking some Marines with them would be really cool. So you can either risk your life and your fire team's lives by having them cover you while you bend down and search a guy that you think is pretending to be dead for some reason. Also, you don't know who or what is in the next room, and you're already speaking English to each other and its loud because your hearing is poor from shooting people for several days. So you know that there are many other rooms to enter, and that if anyone is still alive in those rooms, they know that Americans are in the mosque. Meanwhile (3 seconds later), you still have this terrorist that was just shooting at you from a mosque playing possum. What do you do? You double tap his head, and you go to the next room, that's what. What about the Geneva Conventions and all that Law of Land Warfare stuff? What about it? Without even addressing the issues at hand your first thought should be, "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6." Bear in mind that this is a perpetual mindset that is reinforced by experience on a minute by minute basis. Secondly, you are fighting an unlawful combatant in a Sanctuary which is a double No No on his part. Third, tactically you are in no position to take "prisoners" because there are more rooms to search and clear, and the behavior of said terrorist indicates that he is up to no good. No good in Fallujah is a very large place and the low end of no good and the high end of no good are fundamentally the same... Marines get hurt or die. So there is no compelling reason for you to do anything but double tap this idiot and get on with the mission. If you are a veteran then everything I have just written is self evident, if you are not a veteran then at least try to put yourself in the situation. Remember, in Fallujah there is no yesterday, there is no tomorrow, there is only now. Right NOW. Have you ever lived in NOW for a week? It is not easy, and if you have never lived in NOW for longer than it takes to finish the big roller coaster at Six Flags, then shut your hole about putting Marines in jail for war crimes. Be advised, I am not talking to my readers, but if this post gets linked up, I want regular folks to get this message loud and clear. Froggy OUT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fugdbdt Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 "...Rather be judged by 12 - Than carried by 6." We are fucking lucky to have them protecting us. Thanks, Danny Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
porkchop Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 That Marine should get a medal. Not a court of inquiry! Fuck the bleeding heart liberal media! We don't need imbedded reporters. We need them on Point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_ikonboard Posted January 11, 2005 Author Share Posted January 11, 2005 The people who talk about the Geneva Conventions usually have never read them all the way through. They only know the few parts that are brought out by people with agendas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 A. If the marine is the one who did the shooting, and he opened his mouth, he deserves to be judged. Kind of interesting how many idiots are video taping themselves doing shit that they know isn't the 'correct' way, or sending letters or emails tellying eveyone how they just made their own rules. B. If not him, then find the idiot that opened his mouth and double tap his ass. C. War is not fun, nor a game. If they want to play dead - make them that way. D. There's a reason they call it surviving. E. If you want to stay in the gene pool - don't fuck with the U.S. military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_ikonboard Posted January 11, 2005 Author Share Posted January 11, 2005 The Geneva Conventions and supplementary protocols make a distinction between combatants and civilians. The two groups must be treated differently by the warring sides and, therefore, combatants must be clearly distinguishable from civilians. Although this obligation benefits civilians by making it easier for the warring sides to avoid targeting non-combatants, soldiers also benefit because they become immune from prosecution for acts of war. For example, a civilian who shoots a sholdier may be liable for murder while a soldier who shoots an enemy soldier and is captured may not be punished. In order for the distinction between combatants and civilians to be clear, combatants must wear uniforms and carry their weapons openly during military operations and during preparation for them. The exceptions are medical and religious personnel, who are considered non-combatants even though they may wear uniforms. Medical personnel may also carry small arms to use in self-defense if illegally attacked. The other exception are mercenaries, who are specifically excluded from protections. Mercenaries are defined as soldiers who are not nationals of any of the parties to the conflict and are paid more than the local soldiers. Combatants who deliberately violate the rules about maintaining a clear separation between combatant and noncombatant groups — and thus endanger the civilian population — are no longer protected by the Geneva Convention. Combatants who do fall within the guidelines of the Geneva Conventions enjoy the following protections: Prisoners of war must be treated humanely. Specifically, prisoners must not be subject to torture or to medical or scientific experiments of any kind. They must also be protected against violence, intimidation, insults and public curiosity. The public display of POWs is also prohibited. When questioned — in the prisoner's native language — prisoners of war must only give their names, ranks, birth dates and serial numbers. Prisoners who refuse to answer may not be threatened or mistreated. Prisoners of war must be immediately evacuated away from a combat zone and must not be unnecessarily exposed to danger. They may not be used as human shields. Finally, and most importantly, prisoners of war may not be punished for the acts they committed during the fighting unless the opposing side would have punished its own soldiers for those acts as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefin Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Good One 02ISR ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCH Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 The people who talk about the Geneva Conventions usually have never read them all the way through. They only know the few parts that are brought out by people with agendas. That link does not work for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiefLoneWolf Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 As was said during Vietnam, "Kill'em all, let GOD sort'em out later"! It is absurb to punish a soldier(s) (who protects our right's) in a war situation!!! "If ya can read this, thank a teacher. If ya can read this in English, THANK A VET!!!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badcad Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 A. If the marine is the one who did the shooting, and he opened his mouth, he deserves to be judged. Kind of interesting how many idiots are video taping themselves doing shit that they know isn't the 'correct' way, or sending letters or emails tellying eveyone how they just made their own rules. B. If not him, then find the idiot that opened his mouth and double tap his ass. C. War is not fun, nor a game. If they want to play dead - make them that way. D. There's a reason they call it surviving. E. If you want to stay in the gene pool - don't fuck with the U.S. military. He doesnt deserve anything but a pat on he back and a "that a boy". It was ok for our boys in WW2 to adopt the take no prisoners mentality. They werent getting locked up then. Talk to an old vet who was lucky enough be on Bataan etc. The Japs did horrible things and you punkasses are dring thir cars now! Those arab fuck dont get shit on by the world be everyone knows they're ruthless fucks and the media agrees with thier plight against the evil americans. Its a joke that our media is allowed to be where they are. I dont care if our boys string up those sand niggers and let the dogs eat them and tape it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TribalChief Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Not a Vet, but it makes perfect sense. Not sure how anyone can argue it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afboomer Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 anyone with half a brain can't argue with it.only the libs that don't use theirs try Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_ikonboard Posted January 11, 2005 Author Share Posted January 11, 2005 The people who talk about the Geneva Conventions usually have never read them all the way through. They only know the few parts that are brought out by people with agendas. That link does not work for me. http://www.genevaconventions.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I am a vet, and it all depends on the orders they were given. We don't know if they were given orders for 'take no prisoners' or not. That's why I posted what I did earlier about making statements regarding things they shouldn't have been doing in the first place. There are rules to engagement, and since we aren't privy to the ones that squad was given for that engagement, all we can do is speculate based on what he did say. I agree they are doing a great job, and I support them 110%. That isn't the issue. The issue is whether they are 'supposed' to be taking prisoners or 'dispatching them with extreme prejudice", and at what point the enemy is still unable to be captured and so considered a threat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_ikonboard Posted January 12, 2005 Author Share Posted January 12, 2005 Falcon there was an NBC cameraman present when this Marine shot the terrorist , first thing the reporter did was send the tape to Rueters who gave it to Al-jezera! then the peter Jennings of America , made it sound like he indescriminately killed a poor defensless "human" (I say human with ill regard!) Three days prior to this incident the same Marine did a sweep through another Mosque , that time his buddy , stopped to see if the "Human" was alive or not , and in fact IT was alive briefly , long enough to pull the pin on his grenade and kill himself and the Marine with him! This young warrior on trial now had to wipe his face off with his buddys guts all over his body! He wasnt taking any chances this time! The little faggot newsman , never cleared the tape through the Marine command as is standard operating procedure , he wanted to make a name for himself! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
copcars1 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Well put Badcad!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Mike Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 I remember when this first aired. I was watching TV with my twenty-one year old son. I remember saying something disaraging about liberals in general. He promptly quoted a definition of a liberal, "someone so open-minded their brains have fallen out". Seems so appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Falcon Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 I knew that there had to be more to the story. Thanks, 02ISR. Still think they should ban reporters from any mil-ops. And charge them with treason when they release items and info not approved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_ikonboard Posted January 12, 2005 Author Share Posted January 12, 2005 Agreed , Falcon!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badcad Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 I think its time for some strategicly timed "blanket parties" on these embedded reporters. If that was me that fucking reporters equipment would get trashed, and he would think twice before pulling those kind of stunts! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
advanced Posted January 13, 2005 Share Posted January 13, 2005 I lived in the now for eleven days once, of course it was a long time ago in a little forgotten place called Hue City. My battalion went into Hue with a little over 600 men and came out with about 250, the rest KIA and wounded. City fighting is the worse. Though I saw action in Arizona Territory, Happy Valley, etc., The fighting in Hue will always stand out in my mind as the most intense experience of my life. We called ourselves the “Green Killing Machine,” highly skilled, deeply motivated, and to the last man, or death before dishonor are not trite phrases to me. Quite simply, Marines are put into extremely intense combat situations, we meet the enemy and change the rules of engagement. To be described as “Upholding the Highest Traditions of the Marine Corps” is a great honor. Though we had no mosques, we had the Citadel, the ancient imperial palace of Viet Nam. Initially we were told not to harm it if possible because of it’s historic significance. But, just like now the gookers were using it as a defensive position. After tearing the Citadel a new asshole, I can’t explain the flood of emotions I and those with me felt as we saw our American flag flying from atop that shit hole. It took us several more days to make the city secure. It has been estimated that we killed over 7,500 North Vietnamese Regulars and VC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest_ikonboard Posted January 14, 2005 Author Share Posted January 14, 2005 Well if no one told you this before Russ , Thanks! And welcome back! Semper Fi! Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
longhair74 Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 Hi. Lets set some groud rules right now. I am nor have never been in the service. But from what i know about the enemy our men are fighting at this time the real movers and shakers over there bail out long before our guys get their and leave a bunch of brain washed selots behind to do their cause(what ever that is). It has been my experence that anyone who has seen war never wants to talk about it the asshole behind the desk he wants everybody to know what a great hero he was!that's why i think it takes guts to put this post out there and educate some of us morons. every thing has a moral rule untill you are faced with a problem,and their will allways be someone who doesn't have a clue to tell you what it is. once agian so many things went wrong with this situation over there like most other wars that some folks who really control the power are more than willing to send our men and women to die for and spout how it was the right thing to do.The sad end is the united states will never run out of those brave folks,that trust these people and go to war hoping it will benifit us and what ever poor folks who did not get born in a country like ours.the moral of this story is get the folks who lied to us,used our men and women. did not have the forsight to give them all the tools they needed and tap them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
campbell Posted March 19, 2005 Share Posted March 19, 2005 The media have never been on our side in any war or conflict since Viet Nam. Once they found out how much influence they had over the gullible public and how much notoriety they could achieve for themselves, things have never been the same. Walter ("The most trusted man in America") Cronkite deliberately lied about the situation during the Tet offensive in '68, proclaiming that what was actually a huge defeat of the NVA was a humiliating defeat.....to the U.S. and ARVN forces. Talk to people who were there--I have. Some of the members here were probably there, also. The North Vietnamese and Chinese found they had a powerful ally in the American media, and used it to their advantage, finally achieving their goals of "uniting" the North and South. Walter didn't have a whole lot to say about the many that were liquidated by the North in the aftermath, though. This process has been repeated consistently since then.... I have nothing but contempt for the "reporters" who decide their wholly moral and upright views trump fact and reality. Read some battlefield stories about these "reporters" and their actions when the enemy mortars came in.....pretty damn funny. I certainly don't have blind faith in the righteousness of our elected officials, but it really pisses me off when some POS crybaby imbed gets to act as judge and jury to millions of fat, dumb, and happy ignoramuses that condemn a man (who has put his life on the line for them) through a 30 second soundbite just before they switch to an educational re-run of "The Simpsons". I never saw combat, and I don't want to. But I have the ultimate respect for those that have and are, and I realize that you can't judge people in that situation while you are sitting on the sidelines from the comfort of your recliner. We are not getting the real story about Iraq from CBS (good riddance Dan, you piece of pompous shit), ABC, or NBC. I'll look for the real story from people who are there. And making the captive prisoners wear panties isn't the worst thing in the world. My message to the media: Talk to some survivors of the Nazi death camps and get a real education on what evil is.... campbell My highest regards to those that are serving.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indiandav1 Posted March 20, 2005 Share Posted March 20, 2005 THEY SAY,"IN LOVE AND WAR THERE ARE NO RULES" BUT IF THERE ARE RULES,GO BY THE ONES THE OTHER GUY IS PLAYING BY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.