Dirty tricks

Professur

Professur

Well-Known Member
I might get in trouble for this one, but what the hell. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.


Saddam's irregulars have been accused of using 'dirty tricks' and of not fighting by the rules. But (am maybe my history lessons weren't the same as yours) I recall that dirty tricks were used very sucessfully in another war. The American Revolutionary War. While the British, wearing their nice clean uniforms, lined up rank and file as was the custom of the day, americans hid belly down in the brush and shot from hiding. They wore branches and leaves to conceal themselves.

How does this differ from what's happening today?



BTW, the dirty tricksters won against all odds.
 
That is true, Prof. Dirty tricks are dirty tricks. I don't recall us having a unit waving the white flag and then opening fire though. I realize war is the nastiest, ugliest thing we civilized people like to participate in, but there is some honor in it too.

btw, why the fuck did we used to just stand in line and shoot each other? :retard:
 
Coz it made a nice wall between our leaders and theirs. And more precisely, between the leaders and the other guys bullets.

Naw, it was a leftover from the sword and lance days.
 
I consider myself somewhat intelligent, but even the dumbass down the road probably would have figured out the "LAY DOWN, IT MAKES A SMALLER TARGET" theory pretty quick, I'd think.
 
The "DON'T WEAR A RED SUIT" theory would probably come to mind soon after.

But at the time, those were the customs of war. Today ... Well, the VC in 'Nam pulled the "hide in a crowd" routine too. That didn't work out too well for us, did it?
 
I said this very same thing to my wife the other day. Yes, it is dirty. But who really determines what is "dirty"? THE VICTOR!!

History is written by the victorious.

Saddam's irregulars have been accused of using 'dirty tricks' and of not fighting by the rules. But (am maybe my history lessons weren't the same as yours) I recall that dirty tricks were used very sucessfully in another war. The American Revolutionary War. While the British, wearing their nice clean uniforms, lined up rank and file as was the custom of the day, americans hid belly down in the brush and shot from hiding. They wore branches and leaves to conceal themselves.
Click to expand...

It is no different today. We are just on the other side of the fence this time. I'm SURE that the British said "Those dirty rotten spinless Colonists!!! They won't fight fair!!!"

Not that i condone what the Iraqis are doing.
 
....the only thing is, we can't resort to tactics such as fake surrender. 1. No one would buy it anyway. 2. Even if they DID buy it they'd still shoot us...

the Iraqi defense minister said a couple days ago that they considered anything fair in defending their country....

So be it.....what it means is that at the conclusion of this, should there be any surviving policy makers such as this guy, he'll hang. He won't even get to die like a soldier by firing squad...he'll just hang...out of uniform and hooded...

That works too.....

But the argument, Prof...is sound. The British had the same outspoken contempt for guerilla and non conventional formation tactics as well.

Even in more modern history there have been officers and other personnel in our own forces that weren't warm to our own tactics. Example: One of my relatives was a sniper in Vietnam...a very...successful...one. And there were elements in his branch of service that thought of the snipers as less than honorable or otherwise looked down on them...

...strange....

MADrin
 
There's more cases of false surrender every day, and it's really pissing me off. Do these people not realize what they are doing now? Or even more sadly, maybe they do.:disgust2:
 
They know exactly what they're doing. They're making it impossible for the americans to accept surrenders. And thereby forcing their own soldiers to fight.
 
war is the nastiest, ugliest thing we civilized people like to participate in
Click to expand...
So then, you think we're civilized. I'm not so sure. I know they're not.
They know exactly what they're doing. They're making it impossible for the americans to accept surrenders. And thereby forcing their own soldiers to fight.
Click to expand...
That, and making it impossible for us to trust civilians.
Another thread I'll nominate for the "Right Wing" forum....
Click to expand...
Squiggy, we're frequently on the same page, but I have to disagree here. This one isn't a right/left issue. It's a survival issue for our troops.
 
While I don't like these "dirty" tactics, I understand why they are using them. I think terrorism is, in all cases, morally inept and evil on many different levels, but these "dirty" tactics are different IMO. They are killing our soldiers, not our civilians (for the most part). I do think this is much like the Revolutionary war. Do what you have to do to win.

However, it is a choice that they have to make (and have made), and they must understand the consequences. It makes it difficult for us to be 'good'. It makes it difficult for us to accept surrenders. It makes it difficult for us to reduce civilian Iraqi casualties. It will cost them more lives, more damage to their infrastructure, etc. It will cost them the humiliating execution of their leaders when all is said and done. If they think the benefits (possibility of victory) outweight these negatives, then they are "right" in using such tactics.

If it was my home, and I felt that was the only way of defending it, I might make such a choice as well. I would have to realize that making that choice puts not only myself but now also my familiy in grave danger. I would have to weigh that against the benefits of using those tactics. It is a choice they have to make as well. It is a choice they have made. The consequences will naturally follow.
 
Well, I heard last night on the news that the Iraqis got what I assume they were after. If anyone approaching a coalition barricade or camp does not stop immediately on being ordered to do so, troops have permission to fire. I don't think I necessarily like the idea, but I don't have a better one. I think it's what I'd do.
 
The problem with the new method of shoot first, ask questions later is that...not that many people in Iraq speak english.

The guerilla tactics work well enough, and when faced with long-distance bombing and targets of opportunity (see assaniation via Cruise missile), there's little else that the Iraquis CAN do....the Americans won't stand and fight anything that they havn't bombed into oblivion before hand. "Softened them up" blah blah blah...well, I guess that the Iraquis are 'softening up the coalition troops', in the only way that they can. Suicide bombers and guerilla tactics.

BTW...if you think that 'dressing up as civilians' or false surrenders are bad...just wait until Baghdad is breached with ground troops. "Watch Blackhawk down" if you need examples of how bad it can get.

In other news...Iraq stated that over 5000 people re-entered Iraq to help fight for their country. CNN verified that fact, if not the exact number. Looks like civilians will soon be getting involved.
 
The problem with the new method of shoot first, ask questions later is that...not that many people in Iraq speak english
Click to expand...
They say they have people at all check points that speak arabic. I don't know about kurdish though...
 
Translator: **Hmmm...I owe money to this guy**
Translator: (English) - I'll tell him to stop right there
Troops: Good..go for it
Translator : (Arabic) - If you wish to surrender, run here as quickly as you can
Troops: Hey...he's charging us....FIRE!!!!
Translator: (english) Damn....that's the third one today...hey, guys..how about a game of Poker?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top