Never happen here .. this is NZ

**Delerium** · 11th July 2007, 19:12

Originally Posted by SARGE

we used to call them " Security Rounds",,,,,Its a safety issue pure and simple. After assaulting through a target, put a security round in everybody's head..

you don't know who or what is in the next room, and you're already speaking english to each other and its loud because your hearing is poor from shooting people for several days. So you know that there are many other rooms to enter, and that if anyone is still alive in those rooms, they know that Americans are in the building..

bang bang Tango

Have you ever lived in NOW for a week? It is not easy, and if you have never lived in NOW for longer than it takes to finish the roller coaster at Rainbows End, then shut your hole about putting Soldiers and Marines in jail for war crimes.

Steady on mate, I AM in the military. Im just paraphrasing what I was told in my LOAC lesson (after being shown a certain scene from saving private ryan as part of the lesson, ie dont shoot let em burn)

I am in no way, and am not prepared to comment on actions of soldiers any conflict that is currently occuring.

Its easy to be all idealistic when being an armchair general.. its a bit different when your out there doing the job.

I was also referring to a previous post stating that if the enemy is on fire should I put him out of his misery, ie being roasted by a flamethrower. I also stated that I couldnt recall the exact details off the top of my head, and that it was what I was told in the lesson.

Its obvious that the iraq situation (im assuming this is what your referring too with american troops if you mean marines) is not popluar, but this in no means justifies people taking out their opinions on the people over their doing the job. I see anybody that is prepared to sign on the dotted line to do their duty for their country the silent minority that deserves a little respect. These people over their doing the job are living a very harsh existence while there.

Its easy for misinformed (or worse slightly informed, ignorant and beleiving they know the whole story) to become abusive towards these troops. and its completely uncalled for. I bet not many of the people protesting have been there. Its the same as the piss poor behaviour by protestors towards vietnam vets, bloody disgraceful.

I was in no way trying to belittle or condemn troops from any nation.

What I was trying to say is, that if I recall correctly, no you shouldnt shoot. Just like your not meant to give your horrifically injured mate a shot to put him out of his misery.

**scumdog** · 11th July 2007, 22:22

Originally Posted by SARGE

we used to call them " Security Rounds",,,,,Its a safety issue pure and simple. After assaulting through a target, put a security round in everybody's head..

The old man trained his platoon to do that in Malaya.
Reckoned once it was hard to tell what one of the commies was - everybody pumped two rounds in on the way past - after 15 guys did that the corpse was a tad 'untidy'.
But he never got up and threw a grenade or fired at the back of the other side.

**Timber020** · 11th July 2007, 23:27

Originally Posted by Sanx

Nazi Germany followed, for the most part, the Geneva Conventions. With relatively few exceptions, they treated POWs reasonably well.

I was taught to shoot by a dutch guy whose civilian father and sister (who was about 10) were shot by the germans. Another dutch guy who used to be a customer had his 12 year old best friend shot by them. Whats relatively few?
There were plenty of cases of the germans executing pows. Often they were just very careful not to be caught doing it. They murdered unarmed men women and children by the millions. They lost the war because they failed, not on the battle field but because they couldnt back up good soldiering with sound occupation policies. Heck the russian people would have sided with the germans against stalin if they had acted more like men than barbarians. Which is curious as the same is with the US in vietnam and to a lesser extent Iraq.

**sAsLEX** · 12th July 2007, 02:51

Originally Posted by Delerium

Steady on mate, I AM in the military. Im just paraphrasing what I was told in my LOAC lesson (after being shown a certain scene from saving private ryan as part of the lesson, ie dont shoot let em burn)

Thats what I was referring to, the SRP bit.

**woodybee** · 13th July 2007, 21:58

Originally Posted by Sanx

Screw-up? No, a Police screw-up is where some procedure's not followed properly and the case collapses, or a genuine mistake is made leading to an unfair conviction. They were are as guilty as hell that lot just like the Bridgewater gang who killed that paper boy in England, its was over zealous cops who investigated the matters, which lead to the squashing of convitions, its a shame alright.

The Like the majority of terrorist organisations, the IRA were a criminal organisation who tried to legitimise their existence and actions by attaching them to some glorious political aim. And like most similar actions, they were simplyt hugs who wanted an excuse to go and blow things up or kill people.

Having had 1 male army mate blown up in the Iran War, and a Cop Mate, shot dead in Ireland by the I.R.A (which incidentally stands for Idiotic Right Arseholes, and as a cop myself, watched lorry loads of Iraq young men arrive in Englandwith no money.......seeing them being given 50 punds by social services with a promise that they should return to the nick in the morning for further follow up, these horrible, vicious and dangerous looking men never returned and blended into the community, which has now loead to the Nueorsurgeon doctor being one of the those arrested in the lates Attempt Bomb Shocker.......the whole world is in danger from these people, and it scares me to death.......one day perhaps if there is a big guy with a beard (which in all the pictures looks like it needs a trim), perhaps he will find a way to exterminate those who look to prey on the innocent to make the pathetic cause heard.

(Blimey, thats the most sensible msg I have ever written), but the situation gets me so mad, thats why I came over here, for a 5 year break, so I didnt have to look into the eyes of those who wo0uld one day try their hardest to kill those dear to the folk of England. Bunch of fucking wankers, the lot of them and I dont care what cause they are fighting for.!!!

**jimbo600** · 13th July 2007, 23:04

Originally Posted by Sanx

Like the majority of terrorist organisations, the IRA were a criminal organisation who tried to legitimise their existence and actions by attaching them to some glorious political aim. And like most similar actions, they were simplyt hugs who wanted an excuse to go and blow things up or kill people.

The IRA were not by any stretch a criminal organisation.They were in fact a very well sorted paramilitary group with a doctrine similar to most forces SF units. They also had a successful ceasefire with the UK govt since the 1980's PIRA (provisional IRA) however were a mix of IRA hardliners and criminal groups and were responsible for most atrocities in mainland UK and Europe.

**Sanx** · 14th July 2007, 00:26

Originally Posted by jimbo600

The IRA were not by any stretch a criminal organisation.They were in fact a very well sorted paramilitary group with a doctrine similar to most forces SF units. They also had a successful ceasefire with the UK govt since the 1980's PIRA (provisional IRA) however were a mix of IRA hardliners and criminal groups and were responsible for most atrocities in mainland UK and Europe.

Yes, they were a criminal organisation. They committed crimes, ergo, they are criminals. The Russian Mafia are similarly well-organised, but that doesn't make them a paramilitary force. Calling people like the IRA freedom fighters, terrorists, insurgents, etc. simply legitimises their actions.

In fact, there's a better term for the lot of them: wankers.

**jimbo600** · 14th July 2007, 08:45

Originally Posted by Sanx

Yes, they were a criminal organisation. They committed crimes, ergo, they are criminals. The Russian Mafia are similarly well-organised, but that doesn't make them a paramilitary force. Calling people like the IRA freedom fighters, terrorists, insurgents, etc. simply legitimises their actions.

In fact, there's a better term for the lot of them: wankers.

The IRA are indeed cunts. But merely calling them a criminal group desensitises their potency. As a paramilitary force they committed criminal acts. They were a force with a rank and command structure like any other military. This is what distinguished them from being criminals. And as such it warranted a policing approach that involved MoD as well us RUC.

**scumdog** · 14th July 2007, 13:22

Originally Posted by jimbo600

The IRA are indeed cunts. But merely calling them a criminal group desensitises their potency. As a paramilitary force they committed criminal acts. They were a force with a rank and command structure like any other military. This is what distinguished them from being criminals. And as such it warranted a policing approach that involved MoD as well us RUC.

Hmmm, going by your standards there's one or two groups in New Zealand that are parralel to the IRA - and they're all criminals 'with a rank and command structure' AND patches and have no regard to anybody outside their gang...again like the IRA....

**slowpoke** · 14th July 2007, 14:01

Originally Posted by Dave Lobster

And by letting them sit in parliament in London, wanker Bliar has told terrorists worldwide that bombing your way into power works.

But bombing your way into power has been the way of the world ever since gun powder was invented.
As has killing innocent civilians, just ask the people of Dresden, London, Hiroshima, Nagasaki and/or ANY town that has been laid to seige.

**jimbo600** · 14th July 2007, 17:09

Originally Posted by scumdog

Hmmm, going by your standards there's one or two groups in New Zealand that are parralel to the IRA - and they're all criminals 'with a rank and command structure' AND patches and have no regard to anybody outside their gang...again like the IRA....

There's merit in that alright. But unlike the IRA the OMCGs don't use force to change or influence political will.

But hey let the military gun em em if you like, won't get any complaints from me.

There's obviously some crossover, and they're all fuckheads and criminals in the big scheme of things however, groups like the IRA are often underestimated to ill consequences.

**Timber020** · 14th July 2007, 23:30

The IRA had heavy involvement in drug dealing, protection rackets and everyday criminal activity. The struggle was not always enough to keep them busy it seems.

**Dave Lobster** · 15th July 2007, 10:09

Originally Posted by Timber020

The struggle was not always enough to keep them busy it seems.

They could have got themselves regular paying jobs...

**idb** · 16th July 2007, 08:31

Originally Posted by scumdog

Hmmm, going by your standards there's one or two groups in New Zealand that are parralel to the IRA - and they're all criminals 'with a rank and command structure' AND patches and have no regard to anybody outside their gang...again like the IRA....

You really should have a bit more loyalty to your employer SD...............