Page 7 of 45 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 446

Thread: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

  1. #61
    Sage
    soccerboy22's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    A warm place
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 10:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    10,723

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Terrible tragedy. I do not think an apology to the civilian families is out of the question though.
    Boston: City of Champions. New England Patriots: 2001, 2003, 2004, 2014, and 2016 Boston Red Sox: 2004, 2007 and 2013 Boston Celtics: 2008 Boston Bruins: 2011 Boston University Men's Hockey: 2008



  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    [QUOTE=StillBallin75;1060280706]
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post

    I'm talking about the initial invasion - you said it takes a long time to move 2 divisions and equipment. We moved FOUR divisions (plus a couple more smaller units) and equipment INTO Kuwait in a matter of a months. Now I understand withdrawing isn't exactly the same thing, but my point remains that the quickness of our withdrawal is not a matter of ability.
    Kuate and Iraq have sea ports. afghanistan is land locked. We used Pacistan sea ports to enter Afghanistan. Today we arent friends with Pacistan and cant use their sea ports. The whole reason my unit is here at all is to build an exit through turkey to sea ports we can use.

  3. #63
    defected to kekistan
    beerftw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    kekistan
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 01:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    13,376

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Sparky View Post
    Too bad the the Libs and the MSM didn't have the same sympathy during the aftermath of the Fort Hood shooting. They could care less about thoise victims and families. Their main concern was to downplay the fact that the shooter was a radical Muslim.
    i was put on lockdown when that shooting happened,and a few of my coworkers were at the site the time of the shooting.our goal of lockdown was to present other people from dying in the even there would have been a second shooter.


    the army and other service branches have strict ways of dealing with psychological problems.in the case of the fort hood shooting,most people saw him beforehand as a little screwed up in the head,but did nothing about until he came in guns blazing.that was no surprise to alot of us his problems were ignored,after he was an officer,officers are perfect and cant have problems.

    a soldier that should have been under watch for psychological problems in afghanistan should have had their weapon taken away,and left with the buddy system to make sure he couldnt do anything without supervision.this ofcourse never happens they usually take away their firing pin then send them on missions like nothing has changed,and the last thing you want is to leave someone unstable unsupervised in a base with a minimum of 1 weapon per person,some people had 2 firearms.

    most likely the military did not fail in this situation but rather it was probably a failure at the unit level to follow sop(standard operating procedure)much in the same in how the fort hood shooter was left to do his business no matter how many red flags he raised.military units tend to ignore sop for mission convenience,to them just because your crazy doesnt mean you cant do your job,but in reality the military says if your an emotional wreck,you cant do your job and will not be allowed to work until cleared by a mental health specialist to do so.


    i can already say the military will not hand him over to afghanistan,he will likely be sent to a military prison for life,and be tried under court martial,which doesnt work in the same manner as civilian court.also knowing the military they will take numerous sworn statements and try to punish the lowest ranking person that admitted to seeing any mental problems with that soldier,as far as the military is conserned if you saw a problem and said nothing your just as guilty.
    “[The metric system is the tool of the Devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that’s the way I likes it!” – Abe “Grampa” Simpson”

  4. #64
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    [QUOTE=Jerry;1060280718]
    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    Kuate and Iraq have sea ports. afghanistan is land locked. We used Pacistan sea ports to enter Afghanistan. Today we arent friends with Pacistan and cant use their sea ports. The whole reason my unit is here at all is to build an exit through turkey to sea ports we can use.
    This is true. My point remains that if someone lit a fire under the military's ass and told it to withdraw completely with all due haste and no concern for Afghan political ramifications, it could do so in a matter of months. I have a hard time believing that it takes en entire two years to move all that equipment, sea ports or not. The reason we aren't withdrawing as quickly as most Americans would like is because of the fear that a quick withdrawal would lead to chaos when it comes to the stability and security of the country. It is not a matter of ability.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  5. #65
    defected to kekistan
    beerftw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    kekistan
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 01:42 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    13,376

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    [QUOTE=StillBallin75;1060280728]
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post

    This is true. My point remains that if someone lit a fire under the military's ass and told it to withdraw completely with all due haste and no concern for Afghan political ramifications, it could do so in a matter of months. I have a hard time believing that it takes en entire two years to move all that equipment, sea ports or not. The reason we aren't withdrawing as quickly as most Americans would like is because of the fear that a quick withdrawal would lead to chaos when it comes to the stability and security of the country. It is not a matter of ability.
    do you realize the massive amount of equipment in afghanistan that would need to be moved,even with a new seaport we still have alot of sensitive and classified items that need to be sent through air,and last time i checked the military doesnt just have end endless supply of c-17 and c-5 laying around to do 24-7 chalk movements to move all equipment in that short of a time.
    “[The metric system is the tool of the Devil! My car gets forty rods to the hogshead, and that’s the way I likes it!” – Abe “Grampa” Simpson”

  6. #66
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    [QUOTE=beerftw;1060280739]
    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post

    do you realize the massive amount of equipment in afghanistan that would need to be moved,even with a new seaport we still have alot of sensitive and classified items that need to be sent through air,and last time i checked the military doesnt just have end endless supply of c-17 and c-5 laying around to do 24-7 chalk movements to move all equipment in that short of a time.
    I realize that. I just don't think it would actually take two years.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  7. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    This is true. My point remains that if someone lit a fire under the military's ass and told it to withdraw completely with all due haste and no concern for Afghan political ramifications, it could do so in a matter of months. I have a hard time believing that it takes en entire two years to move all that equipment, sea ports or not. The reason we aren't withdrawing as quickly as most Americans would like is because of the fear that a quick withdrawal would lead to chaos when it comes to the stability and security of the country. It is not a matter of ability.
    Oh so it's that we're lazy.

  8. #68
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,915

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Oh so it's that we're lazy.
    That's not what he said, though.

  9. #69
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Vilseck, Germany
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 07:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    21,896

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Oh so it's that we're lazy.
    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    That's not what he said, though.
    What nota said.

    Compared to you, I'm relatively new to this site. From what I've heard from other posters, you have the reputation of a solid debater. Building straw man arguments doesn't really behoove you, unless you're here just to troll.
    Last edited by StillBallin75; 03-11-12 at 02:35 PM.
    Nobody who wins a war indulges in a bifurcated definition of victory. War is a political act; victory and defeat have meaning only in political terms. A country incapable of achieving its political objectives at an acceptable cost is losing the war, regardless of battlefield events.

    Bifurcating victory (e.g. winning militarily, losing politically) is a useful salve for defeated armies. The "stab in the back" narrative helped take the sting out of failure for German generals after WWI and their American counterparts after Vietnam.

    All the same, it's nonsense. To paraphrase Vince Lombardi, show me a political loser, and I'll show you a loser.
    - Colonel Paul Yingling

  10. #70
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Official: U.S. soldier opened fire on Afghan civilians

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    That's not what he said, though.
    That's exactly what he said.

Page 7 of 45 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •