RE: Limbaugh's other screwup

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup

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

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Limbaugh's other screwup

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 12:40:57 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

If one voluntarily joins the military with the preconcieved notion that he will do as he pleases seems a bit at odds with the sworn oath one would take to follow all lawful orders.

Okay. I'll play along but it'll bore me...

What makes you think that for one frickin' minute, the scenario I described wouldn't fall within the ROE? I don't get it. It's like you need to find one little thing to nit-pick with me. I tried to ignore it but you're moving into personal attack territory by way of trying to paint me into a position I never took.

Go ahead and straw man but you'll end up where the rest of the "farmers" are.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 61

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 12:42:41 PM

Hillwilliam

Posts: 19394
Joined: 8/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

If I'm wearing an American flag on my shoulder and they point a weapon at me, their life, as far as I am concerned is forfeit. I don't care why they're pointing that weapon at me. The plain, hard truth is: that weapon can kill me. I will go home, at the end of the day/tour. I will not become a martyr to people who think I should die to satisfy their morals. I wouldn't ask it of any soldier that keeps us safe.
h

If you are wearing an american flag on your shoulder you will follow the rules of engagement or you will find your (alive and breathing) ass in levenworth.

If one voluntarily joins the military with the preconcieved notion that he will do as he pleases seems a bit at odds with the sworn oath one would take to follow all lawful orders.

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/loac_2.htm

From the above:

"Unlawful Combatants. Unlawful combatants are individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so. For example, bandits who rob and plunder and civilians who attack a downed airman are unlawful combatants. Unlawful combatants who engage in hostilities violate LOAC and become lawful targets. They may be killed or wounded and, if captured, may be tried as war criminals for their LOAC violations."

This so-called "Christian Army" is defined as "Unlawful combatants"
Pointing a weapon is one of several definitions of "direct participation in hostilities".

From the same document under "Rules of Engagement"

"•The use of force in self-defense must be necessary and limited to the amount needed to eliminate the threat and control the situation.
•Deadly force should only be used in response to a hostile act or a demonstration of hostile intent. Deadly force is defined as force that causes or has a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm.
• Failure to comply with ROE may be punishable under the UCMJ.
•ROE questions and concerns should be promptly elevated up the chain of command for resolution."

Pointing a weapon is 'demonstration of hostile intent'.

_____________________________

Kinkier than a cheap garden hose.

Whoever said "Religion is the opiate of the masses" never heard Right Wing talk radio.

Don't blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 62

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 1:44:33 PM

Iamsemisweet

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

Have you ever "worn an American Flag on your shoulder"? Or are you just talking hypothetically here?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: hlen5

They are kidnapped, doped and coerced into fighting. Some of these "combatants" are forced to murder family members.

ETA: And the stolen girls are sexually enslaved, doped, and expected to fight as well.

I have nothing but sympathy for the plight of these children. It's a horrible thing that's going on over there. I know there's a few that like to jump on any chance to paint me as a bad guy but ...

If I'm wearing an American flag on my shoulder and they point a weapon at me, their life, as far as I am concerned is forfeit. I don't care why they're pointing that weapon at me. The plain, hard truth is: that weapon can kill me. I will go home, at the end of the day/tour. I will not become a martyr to people who think I should die to satisfy their morals. I wouldn't ask it of any soldier that keeps us safe.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 63

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 2:11:22 PM

thompsonx

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

If one voluntarily joins the military with the preconcieved notion that he will do as he pleases seems a bit at odds with the sworn oath one would take to follow all lawful orders.

Okay. I'll play along but it'll bore me...

I should care that you are bored for what reason?

What makes you think that for one frickin' minute, the scenario I described wouldn't fall within the ROE? I don't get it. It's like you need to find one little thing to nit-pick with me. I tried to ignore it but you're moving into personal attack territory by way of trying to paint me into a position I never took.

The roe are set for each environment. If your job is bait then returning fire would betray the purpose of the mission.
There is a reason for the term fire discipline.

Go ahead and straw man but you'll end up where the rest of the "farmers" are.

Please consult a dictionary as to the proper use of the term "staw man"

Peace and comfort,

Michael

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 3/12/2012 2:15:49 PM >

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 64

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 2:12:41 PM

thompsonx

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

If I'm wearing an American flag on my shoulder and they point a weapon at me, their life, as far as I am concerned is forfeit. I don't care why they're pointing that weapon at me. The plain, hard truth is: that weapon can kill me. I will go home, at the end of the day/tour. I will not become a martyr to people who think I should die to satisfy their morals. I wouldn't ask it of any soldier that keeps us safe.
h

If you are wearing an american flag on your shoulder you will follow the rules of engagement or you will find your (alive and breathing) ass in levenworth.

If one voluntarily joins the military with the preconcieved notion that he will do as he pleases seems a bit at odds with the sworn oath one would take to follow all lawful orders.

http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/wars/a/loac_2.htm

From the above:

"Unlawful Combatants. Unlawful combatants are individuals who directly participate in hostilities without being authorized by governmental authority or under international law to do so. For example, bandits who rob and plunder and civilians who attack a downed airman are unlawful combatants. Unlawful combatants who engage in hostilities violate LOAC and become lawful targets. They may be killed or wounded and, if captured, may be tried as war criminals for their LOAC violations."

This so-called "Christian Army" is defined as "Unlawful combatants"
Pointing a weapon is one of several definitions of "direct participation in hostilities".

From the same document under "Rules of Engagement"

"•The use of force in self-defense must be necessary and limited to the amount needed to eliminate the threat and control the situation.
•Deadly force should only be used in response to a hostile act or a demonstration of hostile intent. Deadly force is defined as force that causes or has a substantial risk of causing death or serious bodily harm.
• Failure to comply with ROE may be punishable under the UCMJ.
•ROE questions and concerns should be promptly elevated up the chain of command for resolution."

Pointing a weapon is 'demonstration of hostile intent'.

None of the above is relevant if the roe says do not return fire.

(in reply to Hillwilliam)

Profile

Post #: 65

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 2:16:34 PM

Winterapple

Posts: 1343
Joined: 8/19/2011
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SternSkipper

quote:

Check yours. Talk radio, except for NPR, has done a nose dive in the past four years, and over the past two, down well over 35% (depending on which show).

I heard somewhere George Noory was catching up with Rush.

I don't doubt it. There are more tinfoilers
in America than there are teapartiers.
George is a Ron Paul man.

_____________________________

A thousand dreams within me softly burn.
Rimbaud

(in reply to SternSkipper)

Profile

Post #: 66

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 2:18:34 PM

DaddySatyr

Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

That's right, HW, the section that bears the header "Rules of Engagement" is irrelevant to the Rules of Engagement. I know this because I read it on the inter-webs.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 67

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 2:25:44 PM

Winterapple

Posts: 1343
Joined: 8/19/2011
Status: offline

One of the last places on earth the US or
NATO will ever put troops on the ground
is Uganda. So, the argument about the
necessity and morality of killing enslaved
child soldiers is moot one.
But while contemplating the subject does
anyone think killing ten year olds in
combat is good for overall morale?
It's not like killing ten year olds with
carpet bombing.
If you actually know soldiers who have
survived combat you know how haunted
some of them are from defending themselves
from other men. I'm sure knowing you
shot up brainwashed terrified ten year
olds wouldn't cause you any guilt or
PTSD.

_____________________________

A thousand dreams within me softly burn.
Rimbaud

(in reply to Winterapple)

Profile

Post #: 68

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 2:28:01 PM

thompsonx

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

quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

That's right, HW, the section that bears the header "Rules of Engagement" is irrelevant to the Rules of Engagement. I know this because I read it on the inter-webs.

Peace and comfort,

Michael

ROE (Rules of Engagement)

Competent commanders, typically geographic combatant commanders, after JCS review and approval, issue ROE. ROE describe the circumstances and limitations under which forces will begin or continue to engage in combat. Normally, execution orders (EXORD), operations plans (OPLAN), and operations orders (OPORD) contain ROE. ROE ensure use of force in an operation occurs in accordance with national policy goals, mission requirements, and the rule of law. In general, ROE present a more detailed application of LOAC principles tailored to the political and military nature of a mission. ROE set forth the parameters of an airman’s right to self-defense. All airmen have a duty and a legal obligation to understand, remember, and apply mission ROE. During military operations, LOAC and specifically tailored ROE provide guidance on the use of force. The standing rules of engagement (SROE) of the CJCS give commanders direction on the use of force in self-defense against a hostile act or hostile intent.

This may be helpful to those who have never been governed by roe.

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 3/12/2012 2:30:52 PM >

(in reply to DaddySatyr)

Profile

Post #: 69

RE: Limbaugh's other screwup - 3/12/2012 5:10:52 PM

SternSkipper

Posts: 7546
Joined: 3/7/2004
Status: offline

quote:

This may be helpful to those who have never been governed by roe.

Actually, yeah... My brother speaks in the terminology sometimes and seeing it in print was actually helpful conceptually, thanks

< Message edited by SternSkipper -- 3/12/2012 5:11:07 PM >

_____________________________

Looking forward to The Dead Singing The National Anthem At The World Series.

Tinfoilers Swallow

(in reply to thompsonx)

Profile

Post #: 70