US aproves...

[PornoDoggy]

Originally Posted by Inabon

they say they did not shoot civilians ofcourse they did not they were surgical about it


yeah right

You are aware of the fact that the fighters in Falujah were not members of a regular army, and were not playing by anything resembling "the rules of war", right?

You are aware of the fact that terrorists live for the opportunity to open fire on troops or police with the expressed INTENTION of drawing civilian casualtiest? You know that the hope that they can get us to return fire and kill innocents often drives their tactics, right?

You are aware of the fact that by the time U.S. troops attempted to retake Falujah more than enough time had elapsed to allow innocent civilians the opportunity to evacuate, right?

I'm no dummie. I have no doubt that there are more than enough Lt. Calley-wannabes and "Christian" soldiers on a killaragheadforchrist trip on the ground in Iraq, and if they catch those cocksuckers I think we ought to turn them over to the Iraqis for trial as war criminals (not that it will every happen).

But don't get pissy about U.S. troops using nasty weapons to kill bad guys.

[Inabon]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

You are aware of the fact that the fighters in Falujah were not members of a regular army, and were not playing by anything resembling "the rules of war", right?

You are aware of the fact that terrorists live for the opportunity to open fire on troops or police with the expressed INTENTION of drawing civilian casualtiest? You know that the hope that they can get us to return fire and kill innocents often drives their tactics, right?

You are aware of the fact that by the time U.S. troops attempted to retake Falujah more than enough time had elapsed to allow innocent civilians the opportunity to evacuate, right?

I'm no dummie. I have no doubt that there are more than enough Lt. Calley-wannabes and "Christian" soldiers on a killaragheadforchrist trip on the ground in Iraq, and if they catch those cocksuckers I think we ought to turn them over to the Iraqis for trial as war criminals (not that it will every happen).

But don't get pissy about U.S. troops using nasty weapons to kill bad guys.

no man

i am pissy about the fact that you dismissed an article (well not you i think) just because it was from someone in iraq

now military says it used it after all you guys almost put hand in fire saying it was paranoid.


and now you all try to just justify it by saying well the others are not regular army etc etc

the point is the article may have not been so paranoid as you all said.

[Nickatilynx]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

You are aware of the fact that the fighters in Falujah were not members of a regular army, and were not playing by anything resembling "the rules of war", right?

You are aware of the fact that terrorists live for the opportunity to open fire on troops or police with the expressed INTENTION of drawing civilian casualtiest? You know that the hope that they can get us to return fire and kill innocents often drives their tactics, right?

You are aware of the fact that by the time U.S. troops attempted to retake Falujah more than enough time had elapsed to allow innocent civilians the opportunity to evacuate, right?

I'm no dummie. I have no doubt that there are more than enough Lt. Calley-wannabes and "Christian" soldiers on a killaragheadforchrist trip on the ground in Iraq, and if they catch those cocksuckers I think we ought to turn them over to the Iraqis for trial as war criminals (not that it will every happen).

But don't get pissy about U.S. troops using nasty weapons to kill bad guys.

Bad guys???

Ummm the assumption here is that The US had the right to invade.

The majority of the terrorists are and were in Saudi , Syria and Iran

We know that the invasion was carried out on false inteligence in extemis with most nations being against it.

Perhaps from the point of view of the average Iraqi they were merely defending there home land.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Nickatilynx

Bad guys???

Ummm the assumption here is that The US had the right to invade.

The majority of the terrorists are and were in Saudi , Syria and Iran

We know that the invasion was carried out on false inteligence in extemis with most nations being against it.

Perhaps from the point of view of the average Iraqi they were merely defending there home land.

I ponder the difference between an iraqui fighter and myself if the united states was invaded.

Don't really come up with much difference, other than better taste in clothes and I don't partake of sheep fucking.

[Inabon]

Originally Posted by Anthony

I ponder the difference between an iraqui fighter and myself if the united states was invaded.

Don't really come up with much difference, other than better taste in clothes and I don't partake of sheep fucking.

well in your case you would probably take out 500 with the weapons you have before they even get close to you.

[Inabon]

Originally Posted by Nickatilynx

Bad guys???

Ummm the assumption here is that The US had the right to invade.

The majority of the terrorists are and were in Saudi , Syria and Iran

We know that the invasion was carried out on false inteligence in extemis with most nations being against it.

Perhaps from the point of view of the average Iraqi they were merely defending there home land.

no man they are not going to understand that. remember they were fed the idea that it was because of 911 and WDM that they went and invaded iraq.

but still according to their theory there is a bigger chance of iraquis being the bad guys cause they are defending their land from an army that decided to go there because of 911.

and please don't tell me that it was because of the WMD because what happened on 911 was lack of security not an invasion.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally Posted by Nickatilynx

Bad guys???

Ummm the assumption here is that The US had the right to invade.

The majority of the terrorists are and were in Saudi , Syria and Iran

We know that the invasion was carried out on false inteligence in extemis with most nations being against it.

Perhaps from the point of view of the average Iraqi they were merely defending there home land.

Excuse me, sir ... On a macro level, I don't disagree with you. I think that some of the fighting and the tactics on the part of the "resistance" in Falujah was directed by the same Saudi/Iranian terrorists, however.

In the context I was using the term "bad guys", I was referring to the cocksuckers who might be shooting at the grunt who used the weapon.

Whether or not the grunt who used the weapon should have been there to do so is a question for the politicians.

The fact of the matter is, he was there. Some cocksucker in a suit ordered a khaki-clad cocksucker to order the grunts to retake the town.

Don't blame the cocksucker on the ground trying to do his job (kill the cocksuckers trying to kill him, and keep his grunt ass alive).

[Nickatilynx]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

Excuse me, sir ... On a macro level, I don't disagree with you. I think that some of the fighting and the tactics on the part of the "resistance" in Falujah was directed by the same Saudi/Iranian terrorists, however.

In the context I was using the term "bad guys", I was referring to the cocksuckers who might be shooting at the grunt who used the weapon.

Whether or not the grunt who used the weapon should have been there to do so is a question for the politicians.

The fact of the matter is, he was there. Some cocksucker in a suit ordered a khaki-clad cocksucker to order the grunts to retake the town.

Don't blame the cocksucker on the ground trying to do his job (kill the cocksuckers trying to kill him, and keep his grunt ass alive).

LOL

On a microlevel I agree 100% Just yanking chains.

Frankly I think the dumbest idea is not suspending reporting in a war zone.

The populace should during an action be treated as a mushroom.

On a slight digress..

Did any soldiers refuse to go on the grounds that they believed it be an illegal action and thus the order was illegal?

[Inabon]

Originally Posted by Nickatilynx

LOL

On a microlevel I agree 100% Just yanking chains.

Frankly I think the dumbest idea is not suspending reporting in a war zone.

The populace should during an action be treated as a mushroom.

On a slight digress..

Did any soldiers refuse to go on the grounds that they believed it be an illegal action and thus the order was illegal?

i think they can not do that can't they? isn't it like once you go you go and follow orders?

[Inabon]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

Excuse me, sir ... On a macro level, I don't disagree with you. I think that some of the fighting and the tactics on the part of the "resistance" in Falujah was directed by the same Saudi/Iranian terrorists, however.

In the context I was using the term "bad guys", I was referring to the cocksuckers who might be shooting at the grunt who used the weapon.

Whether or not the grunt who used the weapon should have been there to do so is a question for the politicians.

The fact of the matter is, he was there. Some cocksucker in a suit ordered a khaki-clad cocksucker to order the grunts to retake the town.

Don't blame the cocksucker on the ground trying to do his job (kill the cocksuckers trying to kill him, and keep his grunt ass alive).

ok cool i think we are better if we talk macro. cause ofcourse i will not pretend soildiers saying excuse me sir can you move over i need to shoot at the guy that is shooting at me.

macro if we see it macro i think we may agree one day.

[Nickatilynx]

Originally Posted by PornoDoggy

You are aware of the fact that by the time U.S. troops attempted to retake Falujah more than enough time had elapsed to allow innocent civilians the opportunity to evacuate, right?

Did they have more or less time to evacuate than say...oh I dunno...say people told that a hurricane was coming?