Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any...


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any... Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 8:44:35 AM   
Musicmystery


Posts: 30259
Joined: 3/14/2005
Status: offline
quote:

The truth is you don't believe that guy's message but you can't refute it so you attack his character...typical liberal tactic.

Actually that's a typical petty human tactic, and common across the political spectrum. You make good use of it yourself.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 9:17:23 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim
Kerry self-incriminated himself as a traitor and war criminal.


As did John McCain


When, where, why and under what conditions?



In his book "Faith of my Fathers" he admits freely to being a liar a cheat and a pimp.
He goes on to admit signing a confession admitting being a war criminal and giving interviews to communist journalist. How many of his fellow prisoners did the same? Consider his treatment vs. the treatment of one pfc Bobby Garwood usmc.
Consider also the current relationship Garwood and McCain have with the Vietnamese...Garwood wants nothing to do with them while Ace McCain is constantly sucking thier collective cocks.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 9:22:10 AM   
thompsonx


Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline
FR
Herfacechair:
As a stock holder in Halliburton, Ratheon,Olin Matheson and Winchester Western I would like to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks to you and your comrads in arms for helping with the black ink on the bottom line.

Happy stockholder

(in reply to thompsonx)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 10:06:59 AM   
rulemylife


Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RacerJim

The bottom-line is that Kerry was awarded each and every medal based solely on his words.


Neither the Purple Heart, the Bronze Star, nor the Silver Star are awarded based solely on the recipient's word.

Being the Vietnam veteran you claim to be I would think you would be aware of that.

(in reply to RacerJim)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 10:14:34 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
Just think, our failure to go into Iraq would have had Iran with a nuclear program, Saddam developing his, North Korea detonating a bomb.  Iran detonating one later and Iraq detonating one much later.  Throw a bunch of radical regimes into the mix. 
Not going into Iraq would have been a long term DISASTER for us.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That was one of his old posts, with most all of them very similar in ideological certainty and thoughtlessness.  So, he is slanted heavily in his spin of things (and quite wrong in his acertainment of what was and is to be) whether he is indeed a vet or not. 

Ron


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to rulemylife)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 10:17:49 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
nevertheless, I have a question for herfacechair to answer:

Once upon a time you said this:
World War II was a symmetrical war.  The war on terrorism is an ASYMMETRICAL war.  If you try to fight an asymmetrical war with a symmetrical mindset, YOU WILL LOSE.  Our enemy is a network of terrorists and regimes that directly or indirectly support them. 
-----------------------

My question, what asymmetrical operations  do you see now, or did you see in times past that the US is exploiting to good advantage, or are we going to lose? (for my part, I have constantly espoused that we do not possess the ku, fu, chi, sui, ka to decisively win this, once and forever).


< Message edited by mnottertail -- 5/7/2010 10:19:13 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:02:56 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
To those who thanked me for my service, Sanity, Heritic, Thishereboi, DaddysredheadX, Vendaval, kana, RacerJim, and everybody else. Thanks.

Sanity, despite the attempts of many jokers on this thread, I'm going to do what I have to do to let people here know what I observed. The opposition on this thread thinks that they're being logical, reasoned, etc in their disagreement with what I'm saying... but they don't come across as such. They're like people reacting as if their team lost, desperately scratching for something, anything, they could use to validate their own misconceptions about Iraq, the Iraq War, and the larger argument covering what we're doing.

When I read their replies, I can't help but picture a child reacting to something he doesn't want to hear, protecting a belief he once held but is realizing that isn't true, hands to his head, shaking his head, repeatedly saying "no," etc.

Daddysredhead, you and I have something in common, re, being from a long line of service members that served in the U.S. military, who participated in the major wars this country was involved with. Both you and Kana show an understanding of the situation that many posters, arguing against me and others on this thread, simply can't... or refuse... to understand.


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:07:03 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: auditguy

Joining the sentiment of most everyone here, thanks for your service. 

However, the most important question no one is asking: how is the scene over there?  Any good S&M clubs (the Flying Burka, perhaps)?


My work in Iraq is strictly military... crossing the wire to go on missions ranging from a simple mounted patrol to combat operations. As far as BDSM in Iraq, there may be some interest, but our version of BDSM, especially with Female Domination... falls outside most the paradigm of the Iraqi population, where many women are required to sit in the back of a car when enough males are present to sit in the front, and are required to take submissive roles to their husbands.

There may be some underground S&M going on, but I'm not aware of it. The POGs, at the major FOBS, might know whether there's S&M going on at those FOBs. Either way, it'd be underground.

(in reply to auditguy)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:10:00 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

Herfacechair..just ignore Pahunk and Real One, most of us do...they are batshit crazy conspiracy fruitcakes


LOL! I could see that.

However, I can't let their comments, as well as the rest of these posters arguing against me, I can't let their comments stand. They're blatantly in error, and I can't help but take sadistic pleasure in taking their arguments apart.

(in reply to Arpig)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:13:13 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DarkSteven

Fella, you've got a tough job.  And I appreciate the fact that you're on leave and could do a thousand things, and chose to spend that time with us.

Personally, I'd be chasing wimmins instead of dealing with some of the posters here...



You're preaching to the quire when it comes to having a tough job on the message boards, I've done this for years... go on sites where there's plenty of people that disagree with my side of the argument, make a comment, then clash with the crowds that come in to argue with me.

I could still do this, and thousands of other things. And speaking about chasing women, well, I tried to teach a new woman how to do facesitting... she came close but no cigar... better luck next time.

(in reply to DarkSteven)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:15:43 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy


quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

they bus in prostitutes like any other war.      some of them even join the Army.


I think pops was hinting he might give the guy a hummer if he would go shoot some Hispanic insurgents in Arizona.


That's one heck of a translation from a statement that asks for what troops do for sexual release in the "having sex with women" category. Get with the program guy.

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 151
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:19:44 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

I would like to know when and why you enlisted?


I enlisted for reasons I've debated on this and other message boards over the years. Change the bad guy from the terrorists to the Soviets, and you'll get a good idea as to why, and when, I enlisted the first time.

Every post I've made on this message board, to the best of my knowledge, I've made while in the military.

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 152
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:21:59 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arpig

Herfacechair..just ignore Pahunk and Real One, most of us do...they are batshit crazy conspiracy fruitcakes



yeh take ars advice he never gets anything right



Considering the disparity between your claims on the video that we both saw, and what the video actually depicts, you've got no legs to stand on when claiming that other people don't get anything right.

He and I clashed on this board before, however this time, I agree with many of his comments. We're both seeing the same thing from your posts; we both can't be wrong on this one, especially when our observation matches that made by others that posted here.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 153
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:24:57 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

HFC, if it is acceptable to address you in that manner Sir, thank you. You are fighting for your country and I think that it's pretty cool that you came here to spread the word, even though it is your version.

Now I don't really want to discuss the horrors of war so much, war is pretty much hell and I don't think there is any way to change that much. I know that there is probably quite a bit going on that you don't know, but not everyone knows eveerything.

You might not be up on my opinion but I will make it succinct. Man has forgotten how to make war. You don't do it lightly, but when you do you walk through there and leave no Man, Woman or child alive, nor any domesticated animals. Livestock are butchered and served to the victors. In the long run this results in less human suffering actually.

But we get into these protracted, controlled wars in the attempt to control a foreign people and their resources. I believe this to be wrong. That does not make you wrong. You had a good faith belief you were doing right and I respect that.

My questions will of course be of a different character because I learned differently. I see things differently.

Now let's say Iraq actually did have WMD. So what. Iraq was blamed for gassing the Kurds many years ago but that was proven wrong, when did they ever attack US ? There was no Al Queida there, but I know the real reasons the war started. We knew that 911 was from Afghanistan, yet attacked Iraq. Why do you think this happened ?

Well here is the deal, Saddam is about to convert to euros, and is sitting on huge stores of US currency. I mean ALOT of US currency. And he was pissed, his former friends who had put him into power years ago were against him now, so of course he was against them and everybody knew it. They knew what he planned to do, which was to start doing business in euros while flooding the market with USDs.

And the public support you enjoy there was not because Saddam was such a butcher, that country had a pretty good infrastructure going which we destroyed most of, and things were not all that bad. Saddam was actually one of the more moderate and liberal of the Arab type leaders. BinLaden was an old schooler who wanted Women's faces all covered in public and all that. They did not get along, at least on those points. If BinLaden trained anyone from or in Iraq, it was certainly not under the auspices of the Iraqi government at the time.

Now of course these people are emenies now, we have been fucking with them too long. And most of it was over oil. And that popular support ? The opposition has been killed off. The Iraqi government passed out assault weapons and militized (sp) the able bodied males to combat us. We were an invading force, and even if there was a wide spectrum of political beliefs at the time, I find it damn hard to believe that any citizen of any country would welcome a foreign invasion. 

In fact in the UN charter, peace is specifically defined as the ansence of opposition. It says nothing about how it was achieved.

I must go soon, but look to the words of Smedly P. Butler. He made Major General in the USN IIRC and he had a very profound statement in his waning years. He also believed in his best intentions, but later realized what he was doing and said straight out that he would not make war again. His reasons were quite valid I think.

T


When I talk about what's happening there, right now, I'm calling it as I see it. It doesn't fall under a "his version/my version" category. I'm simply reporting what I've seen and experienced... which happens to be different from what they report on the news for the most part.

There's allot going on in Iraq, many of these events are not being reported. The division and brigade offices are putting press releases up documenting what we've done, what the coalition has done, yet many of these press releases get ignored... unless they say something about someone, a service member, getting killed.

On the part about forgetting to make war. There's lots of mention of that taking place during the ancient times. Back then, civilization and culture wasn't the way it is now, our mindset was different. Those were the days when we had large disparities between civilizations... even situations where you had civilizations versus barbarism. The days are gone when we could go into a country, kill every man woman and child, then call it a day. A different approach has to be taken, people have a different mindset today.

In terms of attempting to control a foreign people and their resources... In Iraq, the Iraqis are controlling the Iraqi people, and Iraq's resources. In fact, the Iraqi government put allot of contracts up for bids... contracts dealing with oil, oil field development, etc. US companies were present, yet they didn't bid. Most the bidding went to foreign companies. This whole pressing being ran by the Iraqi government. Iraq has strong control of its own resources.

In terms of Iraq and WMD, WMD were in Iraq. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, and on other threads on this and other boards, sarin and mustard agents are WMD. Their existence, and use, in Iraq post invasion proves wrong the fallacy that Iraq had "no" WMD. This isn't just logic, it's common sense.

Al Qaeda was in Iraq prior to our invading. Salman Pak, the terrorist training camp in Iraq, trained Al Qaeda and other terrorists how to do things like hijack aircraft. There were no facilities in Afghanistan to conduct this training. Salman Pak's last Iraqi commander admitted, to the invading troops, that they trained Al-Qaeda. Saddam was well aware of this... he had his government and military under his thumb.

Anybody that did something in defiance of Saddam, and his son's wishes, were begging for death. The training at Salman Pak was too big to remain hidden from Saddam et al. The Iraqis label him as the grandfather of terrorists.

You claim that 9/11 was from Afghanistan, and implied that attacking Iraq was something "outside" of 9/11. Guess what? Non of the 19 hijackers were members of the Taliban, non were Afghani. They were from Saudi Arabia and one other country... yet we attacked the Taliban, we invaded Afghanistan. Under conventional warfare thinking, attacking either wouldn't make sense.

But, this war was never just about, 9/11, Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, etc. These were the catalyst that got us into a war that was already being waged against the west.

A war that should be called, "The terrorist war to exterminate western civilization and to establish Islamic holy law throughout the world," rather than just, "The war on terrorism." Iraq is/was very much a part of this war, the asymmetrical threat that faced/face us.

Saddam had to be done away with under asymmetrical warfare context. This fact was seen by Bush' predecessor, Clinton, who concluded that regime change had to take place in Iraq. Saddam's removal was a bipartisan conclusion, a conclusion to what both presidents saw as an ultimate threat to the US's security.

Iraq, under Saddam, didn't have a good infrastructure. If you see most the buildings, and infrastructure, in that country, you'd notice allot of decay, decades of decay. There's no way that those buildings got in that shape as a result of the war... they got that way for decades. Buildings that got destroyed as a result of the war are obvious... they have evidence on them, or a part of them, that they were destroyed by war. The majority of the buildings are simply dilapidated, and in different stages of ruin, due to decades of maintenance neglect.

Saddam was no moderate, or liberal, compared to the Arab leaders in the region. He hosted radical terrorist conventions, made death to America threats, filled mass graves, and had torture that involved shoving people down plastic shredders feet first.

This war was never about oil. If we were about invading countries with plenty of oil supplies, we would've invaded Venezuela. Again, we get the majority of our oil supplies from the western hemisphere, with Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela being our biggest oil suppliers.

We were more than just an invading force... we were a liberating force. We were invaders to Saddam and his supporters, we were liberators to everybody else. Saddam et all had the Iraqis to the point to where people were afraid to answer their phones... see mass graves. The people that we fought were mostly driven and lead by foreign fighters that fooled their Iraqi followers about what they had to offer. The Iraqis caught onto them, saw that we were helping them, hence turned around in droves against the Anti Iraqi Force.

You may find it hard to believe, but reality is reality. The Iraqis celebrated our invasion. It's amazing how quickly people forget the jubilation and celebrations that the Iraqis engaged in as a result of the completion of our invasion of Iraq. Remember that guy beating on a rug with Saddam's picture on it? Remember the guys dancing in the streets after we cleared the area of Saddam's forces?

Those are actions of people that were extremely grateful and happy for being liberated from tyranny and terror. And the Iraqis are appreciative of what we did both during and after the invasion. I see that in the way they interact with us today.

(in reply to Termyn8or)
Profile   Post #: 154
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:29:47 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
RealOne: And you think a commie assed democracy is a good thing? Do you have any clue what that word even means? Do you have any clue that this country is a republic? As a republic why woudl we establish a democracy there?

Yes, a democracy is a good thing for the Iraqis... the Iraqis that I've worked with, interacted with, and talked to, can't be all wrong when it comes to satisfaction with being a fledgling democracy, and their participation in it.

In reference to us being a republic, and what I know. To use your own words:

"You dont get it," - RealOne You used that in reference to what I said about your information sources. This same thing is applicable to you.

I've mentioned, both on this board and on other message boards, that we're a constitutional republic. Hmmm, don't see "constitutional" mentioned in your comments. To put it more accurately; we're a constitutional republic that runs on democratic principles.

Do realize that when you make assumptions about what I do know, or what I allegedly "don't" know, you're automatically WRONG. Nobody making the same assumptions that you've just made here has ever gotten it right about me. Anybody that thinks they could succeed where these others fail is being a fool.

I'm a history buff, if you haven't figured that out from my previous participation here. I know the difference between a pure democracy, a pure republic, and things in between. I could also tell you the story behind what our founding fathers thought about having a pure democracy.

You do realize that a straight up democracy is one where everybody casts a vote on every issue, do you? And a republic is a representative form of government, where we chose the people that represent us, who then turn around and create laws. Something the Iraqis have.

Like us, the Iraqis have a representative form of government. The Iraqis created that form of government for themselves, with the West's guidance. We didn't encourage the creation of something completely different, 100%, from what we have.

Do have a clue about democracy, republic, and what they entail, before telling me what you assume I know, or don't know, about that topic... or even rant about it on a message board.


RealOne: Oh yeh? You arent privy to the legislation behind anything and you are dealing with an 2 card deck and dont even know it.

Do you want to know how ridiculous this sounds when I compare it to my experiences being at one of the mayor cells over there? And given the fact that you don't come across as having been to that country?

Part of our duties involves security escort for the public affairs personnel, who go there to monitor the legislative process, as well as give public administration advice. I was privy during those times.

To use your own words:

"Dont jerk me and try to play me for the fool man." - RealOne.

Don't dismiss my seeing the complete picture as my "only" seeing a "part" of it.


RealOne:YO ujust admitted that you only seen the kids that you were thowing candy to not the ones with birth defects from all the fucking depleted uranium you are spreading all over the place and now you go back to avoiding my point again.

Show me WHERE, in MY posts, I "admit" to only seeing the kids that I was "throwing" candy to?

What I actually said:

"The Iraqi children that I saw, and interacted with, were healthy and normal. They just got to get used to the idea that we're not going to throw candy at them anymore." - herfacechair

You can't get straight what I said here, on a thread that both of us are looking at, and you expect me to believe that you saw the same tap that we're talking about here? Or even expect me to believe that you got your "facts" straight? Take it away RealOne:

"Dont jerk me and try to play me for the fool man." - RealOne.

And depleted uranium? Oh really?

Then why am I not getting the symptoms that you talked about? Why aren't my battles getting those symptoms? The Iraqis that interacted with us... healthy as an ox. Where are the symptoms that you're talking about?

And I've been all over our AO, certainly I should be feeling the symptoms... NOT. Don't know what Iraq you're talking about, but it doesn't describe the Iraq I've been to. Quit assuming that you're "people with defects" is a sure thing common place fact for that country, because it isn't.

And no, I'm not avoiding your point, I'm addressing every single one of them, as you can see by how I deal with your opinion pieces. Don't dismiss my disagreement with you, or my "failure" to follow a preconceived "script" as you see reality, as my "avoiding your point."

Get a grip on reality guy.


RealOne: You dont get it. I dont watch the news. Fuck I dont even watch tv its nothing but trash.

I was giving you the benefit of the doubt by indicated that you based your assumptions (what you mistake for "facts") on. So what I'm getting here is that you get your information elsewhere... perhaps websites/publications that make their conclusion from the media... hence providing you with 3rd hand information.

Or do you feed of fringe group paranoia?

That puts you in a worse position, with the worse vantage point, in this discussion, compared to my experience, than if you were to watch the news.


RealOne: I did see the helo cam so you dont need to tell me what they saw because I saw the same whit they did only the piss poor youtube blurry version not the tack sharp helo version and I could see there was no threat and how these idiots slaughtered those reporters and murdered children. Lawless fucktards with no damn respect for life.

I will tell you what they saw, since your description of what they saw, and what I've seen from the same video, contradict each other. The only piss poor I see here is your account of what happened, or didn't happen.

I watched the video, and they did present a threat.

Those "lawless fucktards," happened to be on aerial patrol during a time of the day that constituted a CURFEW for the Iraqi population. A CURFEW imposed by the Iraqi Government, a CURFEW to facilitate an ongoing ground assault operation taking place in an area that contained the area captured in the vide.

The only people that'd be out and about, based on precedence, were those trying to inflict harm directly or indirectly.

You're passing judgment on "innocence" and you impugn the actions of the real freedom fighters in the video, of honorable men, soldiers, without being present during that time, and without seeing the entire picture... you're basing your opinions (what you mistake for facts) on a segment, a small portion, of the total events that took place that day.


RealOne: Well the syndrome is the same because the radiactivity is the same and I was talking about after 911.

Again, neither my battles or me are suffering the symptoms you're talking about. We started using tungsten based rounds prior to 9/11. Again, what radioactivity?

RealOne: So now you want claim they were not press because they did not have correct markings?

Again, WHERE, in my posts, did I saw that they were not journalists?

I said that they didn't have proper identification, and they didn't follow proper procedures, and they didn't do the common sense things to do.

Smart journalists, in the combat zone, would follow the procedures given to them by the coalition, even if they have procedures from the organization that they work for. There's a reason to why we have these procedures, failure to abide by them causes you to suffer what those guys did in the video.


Those two journalists should've been nominated for the Darwin Awards.

RealOne: What they were under cover insrugents that just happened to be real reporters?

The fact that you've never deployed to Iraq, or even ben there, after 9/11, painfully shows with your posts here.

Yes, the Anti Iraqi Force would play, "regular professional" by day, then play terrorist at night. That guy that cleaned the latrines by day? He provided targeting data for mortar teams at night. Heck, it's more than a coincidence when mortar fire increased on the FOB when said latrine cleaner wasn't there.

You do realize that this is part of unrestricted warfare, do you? Use your job title to gain access for surveillance purposes, then provide attack data once you're done. This happened on a regular bases... still happens.

These guys were out and about during a curfew, and were at a scene involving illegal activity... in a larger area that was part of a ground assault... you know, the part not captured in the video that you saw.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 155
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:32:01 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
And now... drum rolls please.... A play by play of the video you claimed you saw...

RealOne: Hey that film showed it all. they were not even paying attention to those assholes in the helo. Say what you want the footage is the footage and no amount of your bullshit and waxing it over will change what we can all see for ourselves. No new reporter involved.

It definitely did show it all.

At 03:39, it shows a couple of people, 12 O'clock, holding weapons. One is an AK, the other is either a launcher or a weapon. They're part of a group of 3 people. At 03:44, the same group, now 4 people. The guy nearest the top of the screen swings his AK. The guy right next to him has a launcher (03:46).

The video is blurry, but like you said:

"I saw the same whit they did only the piss poor youtube blurry version not the tack sharp helo version" - RealOne

Since you admit that they had tack sharp helo version, then this holds validity:

"Have 5 to 6 individuals with AK47s.

At 04:47, the man near the corner has a weapon, which blends with his leg in the "piss poor YouTube blurry Version" video.

Oh WAIT! What's THIS?

At 04:08/04:09, a man with a launcher is preparing to engage contact with the helo... by the corner! By 04:10, it's obvious that they're paying attention to the helo! And it's obvious that he has an RPG launcher!

Ooh! And it gets BETTER! By 04:14, he's still pulling security around the corner, keeping the helicopter in his view! By 04:16, he's still at the corner, and he's inching away from his position from the corner to keep an open view on the helicopter!

He's "flagging" his launcher around the corner!

At 04:19, when the helicopter continues on outside his view, he STANDS UP to continue paying attention to the helicopter!

At 04:21, he's POINTING his launcher at the helicopter, which is followed by the pilots saying this: Hotel Two Six; have eyes on individual with RPG. Getting ready to fire.... Yeah, we had a guy shooting--- and now he's behind the building.

The RPG guy didn't get a shot, but his battle started firing.

Right then and there, with what I described above, the pilots had every right to take them out.

Like I said, the only people that'd be up and about during a curfew, in an area that's part of a ground assault, are those that have "something to hide," or are "up to no good!" Or, they're simply trying to get away from an impending ground assault.

At around 04:43, they talked about HumVs headed toward that direction... meaning that something happened here prior to this film that lead to people vectoring towards this scene.

At 04:49, they show one "reporter" on the phone... in cases like this, this usually involves someone providing targeting information, or someone warning pending raid targets (like high valued targets) to get out of the area about to be cleared. The other guy makes the mistake of slinging his camera on his shoulder... big mistake after one guy targeted the helicopter with his launcher.

In the video, the cameras don't look like cameras, but weapons with sensitive items mounted on them. Hey, you said it, "piss poor quality," or something like that.

By this point, it doesn't matter what those guys were, they had to be eliminated based on what was observed above.

Note to audience:

"Mike Bravo Five-four-five-eight eight-six-one-seven" is the 8 digit coordinate that the TOC could plot on their grids, for vectoring, shift fire missions, and other purposes. This is also for those with BFT's, who could plot the coordinates on their display.

At 07:30, one pilot reports a wounded man. They report him, then, at 07:50, the pilot says "Roger, we'll cease fire." At 07:53, the pilot says, "Yeah, we won't shoot anymore."
At 0800, they note that he's getting up, so they ask if he has a weapon. The answer is in the negative... they let him continue struggling. At 08:30, the pilot says, "Come on, buddy," as the wounded man continues struggling, and continues at 08:36, "All you gotta do is pick up a weapon."

Which contradicts your claim that they killed indiscriminately. They were following the rules of engagement, at 08:59: "If we see a weapon, we're gonna engage."

At 09:03, they report a van approaching the bodies... Here are realities that aren't depicted in the video, but are realities just the same.

There's a curfew in place. The people that are up and about are up to no good... as evidenced by their mode of operation. So, anybody coming to their rescue is violating the curfew, and are also up to no good...

To make this as plain as possible, the Anti Iraqi Force would be out violating a curfew, and would assist their battles. The normal Iraqis would remain in their homes, and won't lift a finger to help the Anti Iraqi Force.

The pilots are justified in engaging the people coming in with the van. Te wit (sp): 09:16, "We have individuals going to the scene, looks like possibly uh picking up bodies and weapons."

Note: You retrieve your fallen comrade's weapons and sensitive items, we do this, the enemy does it.

By 09:42, they're begging to shoot... you've got to understand this in the context of the environment they have to work in. What looks like more terrorists coming out to help, more terrorists that could get shot down so that we have less terrorists to deal with in the future.

At 09:23, you see people in the front seat of the SUV. Given the quality of the video, you can't discern if they're children, or small adults... especially if you're focusing on the adults. There are allot of adults in that area that are really short by our standards. Here's something to think about... Kids have school in the morning, what in God's name would they be doing in a van at night during a curfew? What parent, in their right minds, would endanger their kids by breaking curfew?

Keep in mind that even kids are involved with adult type work in Iraq. So either way, RealOne, you don't have an argument.

At 11:32, "No more shooting."

It's not till the dismounts arrive till there's positive ID of the kids in the van. Something not really discernable in the video, given the incident that started the shooting.

Oh lookie here! What do we have? At 14:44, we have 3 detainees in the back of an LMTV! Note, soldiers with kids running past the LMTV. They have the appearance of being partially restrained.

Meaning, some shit was going down that lead to this incident... like the ground assault that was taking place in an AO that included the scene captured in the video maybe?

At 16:02, they point to a couple of blotches, and identify them as children. Given what happened, with the guy with the RPG targeting the helicopter, you don't have the convenience of wondering if they're kids, or small adults, when you're dealing with a group that showed hostile intent.

The pilots were focused on the adults, and acted accordingly. People don't recognize every single detail of what they're looking at even when they're in the most relaxed environment, it's asinine to expect them to do that in the heat of battle.

Ahmad Sahib, AFP war photographer, demonstrated his lack of common sense when he said this, at 16:57:

"They had arrived, got out of the car and started taking pictures, and people gathered... it looked like the American helicopters were firing against any gathering in the area, because when I got out of my car and started taking pictures, people gathered and an American helicopter fired a few rounds, but they hit the houses nearby and we ran for cover."

Hmm, you go in an area involved with a ground assault... which included more than the area captured in the shot... realize that gatherings get shot at... remember, curfew... yet he was out here as a photographer... knowing that the press tends to gather crowds.

No, you don't run for cover from an American helicopter, you show indication that you're not a hostile. The only time someone would run for cover, from an American helicopter, is if you're OPFOR, aka, Anti Iraqi Force or their equivalent in Afghanistan.


< Message edited by herfacechair -- 5/7/2010 12:38:58 PM >

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 156
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:42:32 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
RealOne: No there is the appearance of some dumb assed kid scared of his own shadow playing rambo on his video game. Thats what I saw and my version was blurry as shit youtube and I could see there was no threat.

What happened is that you saw the video, and pulled out of it what you wanted to pull out of it.

I've watched it again, this time recording certain events to demonstrate that you don't know what you're talking about with regards to this film. You even admitted that the video quality was poor. Based on what I saw, you had guys demonstrate hostile intent to the helicopter.

If this were a normal media group, they'd have no fear, or point their weapons, at a helicopter representing a force that's not out to get journalists. The Anti Iraqi Force didn't have helicopter assets... so why even assume an engage contact with a helicopter, then continue to keep the helicopter in your sights, with a launcher in your hands?

This is the appearance of soldiers doing what they should've done given the circumstances in that area... the man with the launcher hiding behind the corner making like he was going to shot the helicopter down... and given that there was a major operation going on in the area where this incident took place.

A curfew was in place, and a ground assault was taking place in that area. The journalist would've been smart to move with coalition assets, and not move around with the guys that eventually got shot.


RealOne: You fucking people are so fucked up you start seeing things just for an excuse to waste people because you have a license to murder with impunity.

Again, there was positive ID of hostile intent, see the above narrative on the guy with the launcher. They acted the way they were supposed to act in an operation involving a ground assault in that area.

RealOne: Well a fucking stick would appear like one to a rambo idhit now wouldnt it

Go back and watch the vid, it definitely shows AKs and a launcher.

RealOne: How dare you question my ability to read the same video you got the crystal clear version of and I could see there was no threat. Who the hell do you think you are? You pretend I heard this from media and I watched the fucking video and was franklyu shocked that this kind of slaughter goes on.

Given what I've seen, and described above, I have every right to question your ability to read that same video. I got my interpretation from the same piss poor quality video that you watched. Your claims clearly don't match what's demonstrated in the video. There was a clear hostile intent.

Who do I think I am? Someone that has combat deployed to Iraq, and someone that knows what's going on there outside what's portrayed by cherry picked videos.


RealOne: Then when they were down they made damn sure they were all dead with what 2 more salvos.

Wrong. If you watched the video, you'd notice that they stopped shooting, and refused to shoot the wounded man while he was unarmed. It wasn't till the extra people came in that the shooting began. Had that van stayed out of the way, both the occupants and the wounded man would've escaped additional bullets.

RealOne: Then when people tried to rescue the one person who was not dead you fuckers killed all them too.

Hmmm, curfew, and attempts to rescue the wounded and weapons. Doesn't take a genius to figure out what's going on here.

RealOne: I suppose they had rpg's stuffed up there asses right?

Nope, one was in clear view in the video. Anybody that claims that there wasn't an RPG launcher is pulling stuff out of his/her azz.

RealOne: They zoomed right in on the littel kids in front.

No, wiki leaks did that during their analysis... the pilots were focusing on the adults.

RealOne: Stop pretending I got this from some news source

Hard to see that, given that your explanations fall under the conspiracy theory side of the house.

RealOne: and man up to the fact this is worse than fucking Nazis.

Again, don't mistake your unqualified opinion as a "fact," because it isn't. These guys acted according to the rules of engagement that they had in place. I'm not manning up to the product of someone's paranoid, conspiracy theory driven, interpretation of the tape.

RealOne: Yeh I know the routine but again there was no threat, just some dumb shit trigger happy rambo kids opinion of the "appearance" of a threat.

No, you don't know the routine, as painfully demonstrated by your posts. If you watched the video, as you claimed you did, you wouldn't be arguing your opinion that there was no threat involved.

A man showing hostile intent, as I demonstrate above, doesn't constitute being an "opinion" that he's a threat. You show hostile intent, then you're going to be treated as someone showing hostile intent.


RealOne: Like how to the iraqis do that carry a fucking sign on the back saying hey I am not hostile while some tard on his video game is playing "GIT SUM"?

The bonehead with the launcher screwed the entire group over. But even then, they could've lowered their weapons on the ground, and raised their hands over their heads in a clear sign of surrender. The pilots wouldn't have engaged them had they done that. The knucklehead that watched the helicopter should've ordered the group to surrender, thus show no hostile intent.

RealOne: There was not threat. there was no implied threat

Sorry, but when someone with a launcher stares at you, then shifts position to keep you in sight, that's a clear indication of a threat... the video didn't capture the fact that someone in the group fired, or gunshots were fired/heard, which lead the pilots to engaging the group.

RealOne: and the shit you talk about aint the reports I am getting back and I believe the people over that I know I can trust to give me the straight skinny not someone who justifies wholesale murder.

Time for a reality check:

"I have talked to more than a few vets coming home and most have stories similar to yours." -Kana

This is a story that's occurring across the US. We, the US military, can't all be wrong on what most of us observe while on the ground in Iraq.

Which begs the question, the quality of your sources. There's a very good chance that they're not privy to what's going on in Iraq as much as we are.


RealOne: Bullshit. good sounding bullshit but bullshit none the less. There are no rules that predicate you crawling up their asses so close they can take you out.

Ever do mounted patrols in Iraq? Mmm, let me answer that.. NOPE. Because if you did, clumped up trash, dead animals, newly repaired potholes, are located on the road that you're driving on, the road brings you there, and you're not aware that these things are in place prior to getting there... so you got to swerve around to avoid them.

RealOne: Its a clean sweep operation and we both know it.

Don't assume that we both agree, and see, that the scene in the video is what you say it is. Because I'm not in agreement with you. Please don't insult my intelligence with such attempts at comparisons, as that comparison disregards that fact that I have experience in the topic of this argument, and you don't.

Here's an example of what I'm talking about:


RealOne: "before they got there" unclear and no danger present. I would say that too if I fucked up eh? didnt show up on the recording. Are we like talking super man or what?

To use your analogy here, I didn't show up anywhere in that vid. Since I wasn't in that vid, I don't exist. Starting to see how ridiculous your, "it wasn't in the vid, it can't be true!" comments come across to a critical thinker?

If you paid attention to the conversations in the video, you'd notice that this helicopter was part of a larger operation going on in that area, a ground assault. When this happens, there's a curfew in place, meaning if you're out and about, you're a target. It works out to where the people that are out and about during the curfew are usually "crawlers," or leakers, people trying to get away from getting captured, thus crawl from one area to another to avoid capture... or "leak" from a building or area being cleared.

You're narrowing your understanding of the situation to the video... as filtered by your biases, emotions, and tendency to buy into conspiracy theories. I'm seeing this in the larger context that this is taking place in.


RealOne: oh so the us military informed all the iraqis that they wont get slaughtered if they keep their arms down right?

The Anti Iraqi Force know what to do to surrender. I never said anything about keeping one's arms down to avoid getting shot.

RealOne: How the fuck do you know?

Hmm lets see... during that one dismounted patrol that I did, I stopped my scan to focus on a man in a building... I focused on the window to the room the man was in.He saw me, put his hands up, walked outside with his hands up, and a smile on his face, to indicate that he wasn't a hostile.

Things like that are how I fucking know that they know what to do to indicate that they're not hostile, and they know how to surrender.

RealOne: they didnt have their arms up

Nope, big mistake on their part. Indicate surrender, and you won't have the appearance of hostile intent... especially if you're out and about during a curfew.

RealOne: and that is the posture if you wanna take out a helo.

The posture involving keeping the helo in your line of sight, adjusting accordingly as the helo moves, straining to keep your eyes on the helo, given that you have a launcher in your hands? Then you move to point it? Yup.

RealOne: No rpgs or anything that even looked close to an rpg. No weapons.

Then watch the video again, you could clearly see weapons, and an RPG launcher.

RealOne: Armed? Yeh right thats why they had to waste every motherfucker that came near them including the rescuers so the story would stick.

Armed, as indicated in the video, during a curfew, in an area where a ground assault was taking place. Not to bright for them to be up and about... should've been nominated for the Darwin Awards.

RealOne: Dont jerk me and try to play me for the fool man.

You need to do what you preach here, as that's precisely what you're trying to do with your posts.

RealOne: again there is no record of gunfore on the tape.

If you watched the tape, you'd notice that you only heard what was coming from sources in the helicopter. The communications with higher headquarters, the communications with the ground elements, and the rounds getting released.

You didn't hear noises that originated from outside the helicopter, or outside the camera's view.
You do realize, that the pilots had 180 degree panoramic view, which increased to 360 as they circled the engagement area, do you? That's a bigger view than what the camera was giving.

If you've ridden a military helicopter, you'd notice that there are more noises than what you just heard in the tape. The pilots heard something that the tape didn't capture, point blank.

RealOne: There was no fucking launcher.

Watch the tape, you'd see the launcher.

RealOne: Bullshit there were no weapons and no resemblemce to weapons.

Again, watch the video, watch it carefully, without your biases against the military.

RealOne: Great story man! Bravo! great performance. One problem you wasted a bunch of real reporters and kids not insurgents so your story is bullshit and you have no way out but to man up.

Man up to what? To a disillusioned interpretation to what's going on? The only way to deal with your conspiracy theory is to discredit it, not to man up to it's misguided conclusion.

These men acted according to the rules of engagement in place during the time captured by the video.

Common sense dictates that you don't show hostile intent towards the US military in a combat zone, in the middle of combat operations, when the Anti Iraqi Force doesn't have helicopter assets. And you definitely don't violate the curfew that's taking place when a ground assault is taking place. The reporter indicated that he understood the danger that he was in, yet did nothing to mitigate the risks he'd face. Like I said, he should've been nominated for the Darwin Awards.

The only bullshit that I'm seeing here is the conspiracy theory that your posts are spewing.

I have a better idea... how about manning up to the fact that I know what I'm talking about, based on first hand experience of how we do things in Iraq, compared to you and your conspiracy theory sources of information... which aren't exactly organic to Iraq?


RealOne: again I seen no threat the tape has no gunshots as claimed.

Again, you need to watch the tape, and understand that the tape didn't record sounds coming from outside the helicopter... sounds the pilots would be privy to and not you.

RealOne: Oh I wont mistake your bullshit cover for truth either and you can believe it.

Don't mistake the facts that I provide you as "bullshit," and don't mistake the bullshit you're feeding me as "facts." It doesn't help your case a bit given how our past experiences relate to a discussion about the Iraq War.

RealOne: Hey fuck you with your terrorist bullshit. Im not scared. I have more fear of the fucking reatard pdychopaths coming back than I ever will of the people over there. I heard enough bullshit in the last 10 years to last me 5 fucking lifetimes.

HENCE, your true feelings about the US military surfaces. If your post were a dissertation, this statement would be your thesis.

If you have more fear of the US troops than you do of the terrorists, or feel no real fear of the terrorists, then I challenge you to live among them... walk the walk instead of talking the talk here.


RealOne: Yeh I read you loud and clear pal.

Your claims of what I said in previous posts don't match what I actually said so no, you didn't read me loud and clear.

RealOne: yeh you could be my kid junior.

Get REAL, you need to post with the demeanor of someone older than me before you claim that I could be "your" kid.

RealOne: It shows the only solution in your mind is waste them.

No, it shows that if you indicate hostile intent to the US Military, you're liable to get shot and killed. That's a message that our enemies read loud and clear.

(in reply to Real0ne)
Profile   Post #: 157
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:46:17 PM   
Jeffff


Posts: 12600
Joined: 7/7/2007
Status: offline
Dude... you are wasting your time with RO.... sorry, that's just how it is...:)

_____________________________

"If you don't live it, it won't come out your horn." Charlie Parker

(in reply to herfacechair)
Profile   Post #: 158
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:51:54 PM   
ThatDamnedPanda


Posts: 6060
Joined: 1/26/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jeffff

Dude... you are wasting your time with RO.... sorry, that's just how it is...:)


He's wasting his time with a lot of other people, too. I agreed with a lot of what he said at first, and it sounded credible to me, until he made the assertion that our troops were attacked with sarin, mustard gas, and other chemical agents. Now I don't believe a word he says about anything, unfortunately. 

_____________________________

Panda, panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?


(in reply to Jeffff)
Profile   Post #: 159
RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer yo... - 5/7/2010 12:55:46 PM   
herfacechair


Posts: 1046
Joined: 8/29/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250


quote:

ORIGINAL: herfacechair


quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

HAND SALUTE! TWO!
Welcome home and *THANKYOU* FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTRY!
After Iraq is cleaned up how do you think the guys would like to go down to Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Calif along the border? They could sure use you guys down there!
And what do you do for "a little female company" (wink, wink) in Iraq?


Thanks.

In order for us to secure the border, you guys have to fight to repeal the Posse Comitatus Act, or have a national emergency declared for those areas due to illegal immigration. For now, securing the border is the domain for the border patrol, for the sheriff, state police, and the national guard while not working in a federal capacity... depending on what each of those states desire.

As for female company, that's hard to come by when you're in an infantry outpost. But, once you get to the major FOBS, you have Air Force women, as well as civilian women.



Chair, posse committatus doesn't apply in that situation. Bush (already) had Troops down there a few years ago but only for six months or so and not exactly "on" the border.
I remember reading something about the Army being in existance to "stem invaisions" and this certainly qualifies as an invaision in anyone's book.
We could have that entire border locked down tight just like S. Korea's if Obama would put Troops there but he's just another lacky for big business it seems.
Funny, we guard S. Korea's border but not our own? Hell, we were even guarding Iraq's border with Syria and Iran! Unbelievable!
People are getting angrier by the day at the current state of affairs. That's a "good" thing, you guys will have a lot of new managers in Washington after November.
So, do they have "Gentlemen's Clubs" in Iraq?


Posse Comitatus does apply in this situation.

The troops, Guardsmen if I remember right, weren't there to halt people coming across the border. They were there on a training mission involving monitoring the border. They were due to deploy to the Middle East. When they did see people attempting to cross, they notified border patrol, who had jurisdiction in this area.

In order for the US military to seal the border, using the military, and take action against people crossing illegally, the border has to be officially declared a "disaster area," or "national emergency" area, one requiring federal assets, including the military, to go in to neutralize, or mitigate, the threat.

One main problem is that there are laws on the books that deal with illegal immigration, yet many of these laws aren't being enforced.

We're not talking about an armed invasion coming from Mexico with the intent to invade the US using weapons. The places that you mentioned? Hostile North Korea exists in one area you mentioned, and the other area's borders are watched to prevent the flow of Anti Iraqi forces into Iraq.

I don't know of "Gentlemen's Clubs" in Iraq, I do know that there are whore houses there. The idea of women being dominant over men is a break in paradigm for many areas in this region. The POGS in the FOBS might be privy to any underground gentlemen's clubs within these FOBS... but I haven't gotten wind of their existence.

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 160
Page:   <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Back from Iraq for a short time, ready to answer your questions if you have any... Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109