Pro/Forums - View Single Post

Tempus · 11-17-2004, 01:50 PM

I gotta chime in here again.

You have to be very careful describing this as a soldier/sailor/marine vs. iraqi civilian. Thats a pretty rough and broad catagorization.

Its very rare that soldiers just go out and "waste" civilians. Yes, the odds are high that everyone is in a high state of personal alert, weapons are hot and its green and loose. But that doesn't mean go and shoot anything that moves - until you are engaged.

Then it gets tricky. When you raid a building thats known hostile (good intel and/or shots fired) then you assume that anything not positively identified as friendly or non-com must be the enemy. If you don't you greatly increase the odds that you, and your battle buddies, will die.

When clearing a room, if it moves you shoot it. Once the room is secure you do the EPW search. Thats the standard. If someone is there that should not be (an innocent happens to be around) the odds are high that they will be shot. It sucks. Thats why war is hell and should only be a last resort. Maybe we (we everyone not just the usa) need to pause and rethink what is worth fighting, killing, and dying over.

-----------

As for the overarching issue of the legitimacy of the war. Thats something different and should be talked about at a different level. Argue that where the bullets are not flying. Partial and total war are strategic concepts. When its at the boots in the mud level, all conflicts are total war. Its your duty to accomplish your mission AND come home alive.

So even if we shouldn't be there and if Bush/Washington is completely ****ed, that still doesn't change how individual soldiers fight their engagements.

The Marine did what he should. The RoEs were spelled out. His actions were within the scope. Case closed.

If the backseat chairborn rangers have an issue with that, go enlist and fight it YOUR way.

11-17-2004, 01:50 PM	#534
Tempus Cooling Savant Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Michigan, USA Posts: 456	I gotta chime in here again. You have to be very careful describing this as a soldier/sailor/marine vs. iraqi civilian. Thats a pretty rough and broad catagorization. Its very rare that soldiers just go out and "waste" civilians. Yes, the odds are high that everyone is in a high state of personal alert, weapons are hot and its green and loose. But that doesn't mean go and shoot anything that moves - until you are engaged. Then it gets tricky. When you raid a building thats known hostile (good intel and/or shots fired) then you assume that anything not positively identified as friendly or non-com must be the enemy. If you don't you greatly increase the odds that you, and your battle buddies, will die. When clearing a room, if it moves you shoot it. Once the room is secure you do the EPW search. Thats the standard. If someone is there that should not be (an innocent happens to be around) the odds are high that they will be shot. It sucks. Thats why war is hell and should only be a last resort. Maybe we (we everyone not just the usa) need to pause and rethink what is worth fighting, killing, and dying over. ----------- As for the overarching issue of the legitimacy of the war. Thats something different and should be talked about at a different level. Argue that where the bullets are not flying. Partial and total war are strategic concepts. When its at the boots in the mud level, all conflicts are total war. Its your duty to accomplish your mission AND come home alive. So even if we shouldn't be there and if Bush/Washington is completely ****ed, that still doesn't change how individual soldiers fight their engagements. The Marine did what he should. The RoEs were spelled out. His actions were within the scope. Case closed. If the backseat chairborn rangers have an issue with that, go enlist and fight it YOUR way. __________________ Thou art God.