Fallujah
- Thread starter Gonz
- Start date
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Gonz said:
MrBishop is absolutely correct on this one, Gonz. If we start ignoring the very laws we live by, then what control does the citizenry have over the military? We might as well live in a second-rate junta. Civil and military law are all the seperate us from those who would do us harm. Are you willing to sacrifice that for a 'trophy' on the wall? I'm not, because once you start down that path, there is no return to humanity.
A.B.Normal
New Member
Its been reported theat a US military team was there the previous day and removed the weapons and tended to the wounded,so that team must have felt they were know longer a threat or POW ,therefore making them civilian IMO.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138673,00.html
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,138673,00.html
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Gonz said:
I'd like that, too, Gonz, and the best way to assure that is to be open and honest, ergo that newscast, and any possible punishment for those who break the rules of engagement. As for that being the exact reverse of what you are seeing, think of it this way...how many reports like this have you seen vs how many days have we been there vs how many people do we have on the ground/in the air there? If people aren't intelligent enough to figure out that these stories are in the extreme minority, then they shouldn't be allowed to breed.
It's not that the story exists nor that the story was aired. It's that the story was released before anybody had a clue just to reopen the AbuGhraib wounds. It is politically motivated. Yes, I would prefer the WW2 model of journalism with one small exception.
The inbreds need to clear the story with the brass first. The journalists at the end of the pack can report it as they see it, just like they do at home. These people don't understand war & the intricacies involved. They are, for the most part, anti-war & will go out of their way to show damaging footage even if it was legal. I stand by my first post in this thread way. If we shoot POWs, the brig is ready. If we shoot illegal combatants...c'est la vie.
The inbreds need to clear the story with the brass first. The journalists at the end of the pack can report it as they see it, just like they do at home. These people don't understand war & the intricacies involved. They are, for the most part, anti-war & will go out of their way to show damaging footage even if it was legal. I stand by my first post in this thread way. If we shoot POWs, the brig is ready. If we shoot illegal combatants...c'est la vie.
Gato_Solo
Out-freaking-standing OTC member
Gonz said:
Exactly the point of the Marine and the wounded Iraqi. As for the embedded journalists, they're agenda is to do two things...
1. Survive any encounter they have.
2. Report what's going on.
If they decide to put a story out like the one with the Marine, whether the brass likes it or not, then they just don't get to go out again...but what will that say about our military? What will that say about the brass? Most importantly, what will that say about our country? That we don't live up to our own standards? Sorry, but I feel that they can have their one, or two, scoops a year, because they've got nothing else...and they will have to live with the consquences of their actions just as we all do. They are not the heroes, and they are not the ones who will be remembered for their work. Read your sig, and then say who is doing the right thing. It's not us vs them, and, no matter how the press wants to make it seem that way, it never will be that way. We are one country. In order to stay that way, we must all do what we are tasked to do, either through our jobs, or our hearts.