Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: I fucking hate these rules.
iGrandTheftAuto.com Forums > General > Political & World News
Bain
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/...bandage-repeat/

Tell me to fight a war the way you want it.

Do I really need to stress my opinion on this shit.

It has happened to my friend a few times, now.
PabloHoneyOle
Let Allah sort them out.
Spoiler
those bastards are smart. no wonder US still has not win this war.
trathen93
they should let the fuckers die, even if they are civilians. dont want to get shot? stay in ur house. job done
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE (El-Nino @ Jun 1 2010, 04:40 PM) *
they should let the fuckers die, even if they are civilians. dont want to get shot? stay in ur house. job done
This is a fair and balanced view to which I also ascribe. This attitude will show the world that there is no reason whatsoever to bomb our civilians.
Heartless
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.

It would help more if the Afghans weren't all stupid as shit though.
ViceMan
Wait, they were transported back to a military hopital in an escorted helicopter, and yet they didn't blow themselves up at all? Or do they actually get searched before they're taken back?
NCP
The Afghans are often skinny fuckers, so if he is carrying something, you'll see that, especially when treating the wounded...The Rules of engagement sucks and prevents you getting the succes you'd have wanted from the operation.
TreeFitty
QUOTE (NukaLurk @ Jun 1 2010, 12:20 PM) *
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.


^that^

and i guess that last part too
Spoiler
QUOTE (NukaLurk @ Jun 1 2010, 04:20 PM) *
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.

It would help more if the Afghans weren't all stupid as shit though.


i think if not for today's state of the media, this ideology will be just that, ideology. and afghan would be vietnam all over again with agent yellow and others.
after all US is in it to win it. now their soldiers are paying the price for playing good guys.
Heartless
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Jun 1 2010, 10:06 PM) *
QUOTE (NukaLurk @ Jun 1 2010, 04:20 PM) *
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.

It would help more if the Afghans weren't all stupid as shit though.


i think if not for today's state of the media, this ideology will be just that, ideology. and afghan would be vietnam all over again with agent yellow and others.
after all US is in it to win it. now their soldiers are paying the price for playing good guys.


First, this is more like the Spanish-American war. It's a proxy war fought through the guise of another war. We are facing both an inhospitable landscape and an entrenched, highly determined enemy that is extremely used to getting the shit punched out of it by larger, uglier countries. Agent Orange was a codename, it was really high powered DDT. It has several dozen names, based on operation and barrel color. Lastly, Vietnam was fought to intervene on their civil war, defeat communism and the possible attempted restoration of the French colony. Vietnam and OIF are not the same.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Jun 2 2010, 03:06 AM) *
QUOTE (NukaLurk @ Jun 1 2010, 04:20 PM) *
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.

It would help more if the Afghans weren't all stupid as shit though.


i think if not for today's state of the media, this ideology will be just that, ideology. and afghan would be vietnam all over again with agent yellow and others.
after all US is in it to win it. now their soldiers are paying the price for playing good guys.
Yes, Vietnam, that famous American victory.

Is that really the citadel? Are those the values of "freedom" and "patriotism" that we're all supposed to be fighting for?

Is there no feeling that at the most basic level, we should try and behave morally? Be the best, not just at killing people but at doing things for a reason? Sad, the other side will resort to any level of foul play. I don't begrudge them it: imagine yourself in their position. The thing I dispute is their doing it in the name of a higher power answerable to no one, but again that's something we can't claim the high ground on.
demon
QUOTE (Bain @ Jun 1 2010, 02:29 PM) *
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/...bandage-repeat/

Tell me to fight a war the way you want it.

Do I really need to stress my opinion on this shit.

It has happened to my friend a few times, now.

That geezer had some nerve....

Afghanistan will always be a problem. I want to point out three possible solutions:

1) We, "the West", reject modern life and go back 300 years in time. When we do that, we'll not be too different from the Afghan people. Then they may not want to support terrorism and Al Quaeda will find something else to do. Maybe they'll turn against China but what the fuck.

2) Build a wall around Afghanistand and make the country the world's largest prison. Nothing comes in and nothing comes out.

3) The world has too many nukes. Kill two birds with one stone and use them on Afghanistan. Nothing will live there and all that'll come from the place is radiation and mutated insects.


I don't like any of the options, but I like option #1 less....

Qdeathstar
I think its a good rule. they did forensic analysis on the two afgans and found they were most likely armed combatants. I highly doubt the marines just sent them on their way... they were probable sent to prison some where and most likely tortured for information.


QUOTE
But military officers and law enforcement contractors said the Afghan government often does not accept the results of gunshot residue tests as evidence


But several judges said they the Afgan government does accept the results of gunshot residue tests as evidence!!!.


RE: Unnamed sources are useless.

But even if you assume that they just let them go then at least it shows Afgans that Americans/westerners will help wounded and may sway a few of the fighters (or their families) to work with the Americans/westerners. Maybe.

Of the above options Demon, i enjoy option 2 the most... mainly so i can see this happen:

http://death-race--trailer.blogspot.com/
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE (demon @ Jun 4 2010, 07:37 PM) *
QUOTE (Bain @ Jun 1 2010, 02:29 PM) *
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/...bandage-repeat/

Tell me to fight a war the way you want it.

Do I really need to stress my opinion on this shit.

It has happened to my friend a few times, now.

That geezer had some nerve....

Afghanistan will always be a problem. I want to point out three possible solutions:

1) We, "the West", reject modern life and go back 300 years in time. When we do that, we'll not be too different from the Afghan people. Then they may not want to support terrorism and Al Quaeda will find something else to do. Maybe they'll turn against China but what the fuck.

2) Build a wall around Afghanistand and make the country the world's largest prison. Nothing comes in and nothing comes out.

3) The world has too many nukes. Kill two birds with one stone and use them on Afghanistan. Nothing will live there and all that'll come from the place is radiation and mutated insects.


I don't like any of the options, but I like option #1 less....
I would like to suggest that almost literally any other solution would be better than these.
demon
QUOTE (Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester @ Jun 5 2010, 01:02 AM) *
QUOTE (demon @ Jun 4 2010, 07:37 PM) *
QUOTE (Bain @ Jun 1 2010, 02:29 PM) *
http://atwar.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/...bandage-repeat/

Tell me to fight a war the way you want it.

Do I really need to stress my opinion on this shit.

It has happened to my friend a few times, now.

That geezer had some nerve....

Afghanistan will always be a problem. I want to point out three possible solutions:

1) We, "the West", reject modern life and go back 300 years in time. When we do that, we'll not be too different from the Afghan people. Then they may not want to support terrorism and Al Quaeda will find something else to do. Maybe they'll turn against China but what the fuck.

2) Build a wall around Afghanistand and make the country the world's largest prison. Nothing comes in and nothing comes out.

3) The world has too many nukes. Kill two birds with one stone and use them on Afghanistan. Nothing will live there and all that'll come from the place is radiation and mutated insects.


I don't like any of the options, but I like option #1 less....

I would like to suggest that almost literally any other solution would be better than these.

I do not disagree with you. But what are the realistic options? 20-60 more years with occupation and guerilla war?
No solution is also a possible outcome. That's were we are heading.
Bain
QUOTE (Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester @ Jun 3 2010, 08:53 PM) *
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Jun 2 2010, 03:06 AM) *
QUOTE (NukaLurk @ Jun 1 2010, 04:20 PM) *
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.

It would help more if the Afghans weren't all stupid as shit though.


i think if not for today's state of the media, this ideology will be just that, ideology. and afghan would be vietnam all over again with agent yellow and others.
after all US is in it to win it. now their soldiers are paying the price for playing good guys.
Yes, Vietnam, that famous American victory.

Is that really the citadel? Are those the values of "freedom" and "patriotism" that we're all supposed to be fighting for?

Is there no feeling that at the most basic level, we should try and behave morally? Be the best, not just at killing people but at doing things for a reason? Sad, the other side will resort to any level of foul play. I don't begrudge them it: imagine yourself in their position. The thing I dispute is their doing it in the name of a higher power answerable to no one, but again that's something we can't claim the high ground on.



Um yeah, we are there to help the good people like my Afghan teacher currently, who hates islam because the Talibs or Taliban came to the capital and killed between 60-80 thousands people in Kabul. Yeah there in an interesting part of history left out in most texts.

Anyway, doing the right thing, like you so cinematically wanted.
So, when you are on a patrol, where you stop at locals houses, ask for there medical needs, food needs, village needs in general (*This happens) and then you get ambushed or just random shots get fired at you by taliban, islamists, or others (*This happens) then you return fire to protect your life, and all the other squad members lives, oh, and if this sympathizer is down, he also cannot be the local bully to the Afghans who want peace. (*All that happens, people do want peace, others dont).


So, then, even though he is the enemy of innocence more importantly, and even on a lesser note, the American military life, because the innocent Afghan is clearly more important reason to protect, killing him, still wrong. Giving help to the man who knew he could try to continue homicide and terrorism, and totalitarianism among people who live in his country, is the right thing to do, because he knows we're trying to be good.......and uses our failed defense as his attack. Wow. You............nevermind.


*Denotes things a normal adult any place in the modern world should know but you refuse to accept.
Heartless
Bain, don't be a dick. You don't know what the fuck happens. Post again in a year, then we'll talk.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
QUOTE (Bain @ Jun 5 2010, 05:55 AM) *
QUOTE (Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester @ Jun 3 2010, 08:53 PM) *
QUOTE (Spoiler @ Jun 2 2010, 03:06 AM) *
QUOTE (NukaLurk @ Jun 1 2010, 04:20 PM) *
The US is not party to any rules of war. Being said, we conduct warfare in this manner to eventually reinforce the ideology that American forces are there to help. Eventually, the guerilla fighter should come to realize that he has received better treatment and care under the invasionary force then his own.

It would help more if the Afghans weren't all stupid as shit though.


i think if not for today's state of the media, this ideology will be just that, ideology. and afghan would be vietnam all over again with agent yellow and others.
after all US is in it to win it. now their soldiers are paying the price for playing good guys.
Yes, Vietnam, that famous American victory.

Is that really the citadel? Are those the values of "freedom" and "patriotism" that we're all supposed to be fighting for?

Is there no feeling that at the most basic level, we should try and behave morally? Be the best, not just at killing people but at doing things for a reason? Sad, the other side will resort to any level of foul play. I don't begrudge them it: imagine yourself in their position. The thing I dispute is their doing it in the name of a higher power answerable to no one, but again that's something we can't claim the high ground on.



Um yeah, we are there to help the good people like my Afghan teacher currently, who hates islam because the Talibs or Taliban came to the capital and killed between 60-80 thousands people in Kabul. Yeah there in an interesting part of history left out in most texts.

Anyway, doing the right thing, like you so cinematically wanted.
So, when you are on a patrol, where you stop at locals houses, ask for there medical needs, food needs, village needs in general (*This happens) and then you get ambushed or just random shots get fired at you by taliban, islamists, or others (*This happens) then you return fire to protect your life, and all the other squad members lives, oh, and if this sympathizer is down, he also cannot be the local bully to the Afghans who want peace. (*All that happens, people do want peace, others dont).


So, then, even though he is the enemy of innocence more importantly, and even on a lesser note, the American military life, because the innocent Afghan is clearly more important reason to protect, killing him, still wrong. Giving help to the man who knew he could try to continue homicide and terrorism, and totalitarianism among people who live in his country, is the right thing to do, because he knows we're trying to be good.......and uses our failed defense as his attack. Wow. You............nevermind.


*Denotes things a normal adult any place in the modern world should know but you refuse to accept.
I'm not disputing that the rules are stupid and tend towards over-protection of the Taliban. I actually wasn't disagreeing with the premise of the topic, rather the following posts which are an extreme reaction to the rules. The fact that I disagree with someone who agrees with your broad premise does not mean I am your enemy, the enemy of freedom that I love terrorists*.

I don't think the Taliban are good guys, or their ideology deserves any respect as you seem to suggest*. I did mention in a previous post on this page that, while asymmetric warfare is not in itself deplorable, the exact tactics (bombing innocents, taking advantage of compassion in bad faith) and the ideology behind it (religion-fuelled violence) are unacceptable. Again: the Taliban are reprehensible beyond anything almost any US soldier or organisation has been accused of, rightly or wrongly.

However, having invaded the country under the aegis of a coalition of legitimate states, there is a duty to behave well, and to be the best - again not just at killing. I don't agree that should necessarily be enforced by a bunch of directives. We certainly shouldn't, on discovering our enemies don't like us, resort to fighting an insurgency by calling off all bets and being not quite as bad as them.

If you'd rather just be rude or try and prove you're smarter or more right than me, then you could at least wait until I disagree with you. Not every attack on a right wing view is an attack on the entire right that I'm indulging in because I'm ignorant liberal scum who hates America*.

*Indicating general right-wing straw men.
Bain
QUOTE (Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester @ Jun 5 2010, 08:46 AM) *
However, having invaded the country under the aegis of a coalition of legitimate states, there is a duty to behave well, and to be the best - again not just at killing. I don't agree that should necessarily be enforced by a bunch of directives. We certainly shouldn't, on discovering our enemies don't like us, resort to fighting an insurgency by calling off all bets and being not quite as bad as them.

If you'd rather just be rude or try and prove you're smarter or more right than me, then you could at least wait until I disagree with you. Not every attack on a right wing view is an attack on the entire right that I'm indulging in because I'm ignorant liberal scum who hates America*.

*Indicating general right-wing straw men.



Considering the situations of my friends speaking with the Afghan people face to face, and my personal contact with such people.......... considering the Afghan people see the war as a military situation taking place with the realm of where they live, not within their country.....

You see, they know there are arbitrary borders and thats how they consider them. They dont acknowledge them. So, to them, this is how this situation is....this is how they see the middle east, this is the area of the Poshtuan man:

http://img143.imageshack.us/i/warasitis.jpg/


The US military action in their eyes, happens to be taking place in Helmand. Only that. They realize that actions are happening against the Taliban. From village to village is an undeniable difference in world that most people in educated countries dont realize or wont contemplate.

So, the premise you present of us invading and the idea of being a better man, while it may be true for mainstream USA, and maybe UK, its not to an Afghan at all.

They have very few things they value in life. Honor, respect, and the rules and principles they set throughout their history. I currently spend days learning about Afghanistan from these people, most days or the week.

The idea you presented is true, but its only to be sufficient in front of the American publica, and Europe, icluding Britain.

As for you saying the view is right wing, well, Im glad you classify views according to a political system without thinking that they may be on a case by case basis. According to you, I dont have thoughts, No, Im agreeing with the right wing because my opinion is being forced through a tunnel that leads to that idea. Congratulations on classfication without allowing possibility of free choice backed by fact, and the opinion based on it.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
I'm sorry about the right-wing jibe, but it is a common right-wing straw man to attack what I say based on it being broadly against the extreme right and therefore against the moderate right. My only hostile reaction, and damn right it's a hostile one, is to the "bomb them all, only good Paki's a dead Paki" middle-Englanders tend to resort to when confronted with the difficulties of the front lines. That way lies damnation and Rush Limbaugh.

I'm not sure what exactly your point is, is it that most reasonable Afghans don't mind harder tactics against the Taliban, and it's only to keep up appearances that we must conform to best practice?

If so, then that may be. But it is still important that the military is not seen torturing and knocking down innocent people's doors at 5am. Sometimes that tumbles over into erring too far to the side of caution, and that's the legacy of an imperfectly planned invasion. We the west should be seen, by potential enemies and by friends, to be morally better, and if it's too much to do then our politicians shouldn't be sending our young men to do a job that, with the best will in the world, is impossible to do in a way that improves the situation rather than makes it worse. We risk radicalising potential enemies and alienating potential allies.

Of course, that's a whole other issue and one that is already spilt milk. But maybe lessons can be learned: at the moment, it's all just point-scoring as each side accuses the other of hating America and not caring about families...straw men left and right.

[Edit] This post is unreadable, I might fix it when it's not 4am.
Bain
My point was that the tactics that put our troops in danger for terrible reasons and make them care for the crafty enemy is only for the first world countries.....America, Europe, etc.


The average Afghan does not care though also. The more taliban an Afghan national army soldier has killed the higher honor, and for lack of a better word, badassery he has. Straight from the Afghans mouth.


So my problem with this situation is I dont want to appease America between 5-8 Am and 7-10 pm when they watch the news and decide to care about it while Afghans and Marines and Soldiers are living this shit 24 hours a day.
Passionate Homo Sapiens Ingester
While I appreciate that the opinion of Afghans is important, there is a danger of separating people into two camps: Afghans who are instinctively pro-western and those who are instinctively anti-western. The danger is that by taking the second group and writing them off wholesale, we lose a lot of support.

Maybe Billy sees an invading force and his first instinct is to think they're bad. He'll see them building a bridge and trying to keep open a school, but still his instinct is telling him that they're just doing some stuff grudgingly with an ulterior motive -- and you've got to admit that there's a large minority of western thought that thinks that all this is "too good for them" and so on. It's only by ignoring these ideas and being the best, being so much better than the other side that all instinct, peurile aggression and reactionary tribalism has no chance of reeling in the moderate anti-western types.

Anything can be used by the 5% of anti-western people who are just bastards to influence the naive, the stupid and the vulnerable. It's these people that need to be considered in policy, not the pro-western ones who essentially trust good soldiers anyway.

I also think opinion in the west isn't completely irrelevant: in combatant countries, efforts are being made in protection of the people and paid for by the taxpayer. Their support is in the end important, as it is after all a government enterprise to undertake an offensive war. In non-combatants, it is important to maintain allies, even if some will never be happy and will continue to complain over things that have already been done (France). Even the last superpower (and its little brother!!) can't do everything on their own forever.

That's why we can't just bomb them all and hope for the best. I appreciate that the rules are silly, but they're well-intentioned. It's not my place to say exactly where the line ought to be drawn, but I do think allowances must be made because this war is about the bigger picture: hearts and minds and all that bollocks.
Bain
I can more or less say so-so to what you said so I wont elaborately, elaborate.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2014 Invision Power Services, Inc.