Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RealClear)   Pentagon investigating Marines who prevented insurgents from returning as White Walkers   (realclear.com) divider line 189
    More: Sick  
•       •       •

13844 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Jan 2014 at 5:05 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



189 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-15 10:30:23 PM  

ongbok: clyph: budrojr: What should protect the military from rioting locals is the fact that the military can and will freaking shoot you dead.

Throwing gas on a fire is not a good way to put it out.

Somebody doesn't understand the importance of having the locals on your side during a war.


I was told that putting out fire with gasoline is just dandy, if you are a cat person.

/obscure?
 
2014-01-15 10:33:21 PM  

The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.


Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?
 
2014-01-15 10:42:00 PM  

Molavian: LordJiro: Molavian: LordJiro: Molavian: The My Little Pony Killer: Daedalus27: We are better.

Then we should act as such and stop saying "but they do it first/worst/different than us" whenever we're called out on doing wrong.

Doing wrong?  Like breaking the rules?  It's not a game.

If you ever want to actually win a war, excessive brutality is NOT the way to go. Because then you just end up with a perpetual underground resistance, and the rest of the world might just turn on you. And no matter what the tiny-dicked Republican armchair generals might think, even America can't take on the entire world and win.

Crack open some history books and tell me how excessive brutality in war doesn't work.

And how many of those excessively-brutal civilizations/regimes are around today? Oh, they all got their shiat kicked in when the world got sick of them? Funny, that.

You do realize that the United States is one of the oldest governments in existence, right?


Funny, I don't remember America ordering every citizen of an enemy nation killed for shock value. And the few times we DID try anything like that level of brutality-for-the-sake-of-brutality (Vietnam, 'Shock and Awe' in Iraq), we LOST.

Dresden is arguable (although it wasn't a deciding factor in the victory; the Soviets were a far, FAR bigger factor in winning the war), but Hiroshima and Nagasaki were manufacturing centers; destroying them SERIOUSLY farked up the Japanese supply line, and the alternative was a full-scale invasion that undoubtedly would have killed more people, innocent and otherwise. Not to mention that, again, Japan was worried about the USSR turning their sights on them.
 
2014-01-15 11:01:13 PM  
Carol did it. She even confessed to Rick.
 
2014-01-15 11:29:38 PM  

dropdfun: I'd say Japan fit the bill for both those requirements, took firebombing and two nukes for good measure but worked out in the end.


Yeah, and the policy worked out great for Japan in China.
 
2014-01-15 11:29:53 PM  
Definitely need to query John Kerry on this issue of atrocity.
 
2014-01-15 11:31:47 PM  
Double tap.  Best solution to any zombie variation.....
 
2014-01-15 11:41:44 PM  

Dancin_In_Anson: what_now: I am absolutely sure that is accurate.

Take 25 seconds out of your life to try to understand.

Thank  Buddha, Allah, Brahma, Vishnu, Siva, trees, mushrooms, and Isadora Duncan  that I never experienced  through combat and because of this I can never fully understand those emotions....or lack thereof if you will...I did read Eugene Sledge's book though (3 times) and the quote in my Weeners in this thread (take that filter!) comes from the introduction. The book itself details what exactly that quote means.


Bookmark. /thank you
 
2014-01-16 12:04:55 AM  

ongbok: Molavian: LordJiro: Molavian: The My Little Pony Killer: Daedalus27: We are better.

Then we should act as such and stop saying "but they do it first/worst/different than us" whenever we're called out on doing wrong.

Doing wrong?  Like breaking the rules?  It's not a game.

If you ever want to actually win a war, excessive brutality is NOT the way to go. Because then you just end up with a perpetual underground resistance, and the rest of the world might just turn on you. And no matter what the tiny-dicked Republican armchair generals might think, even America can't take on the entire world and win.

Crack open some history books and tell me how excessive brutality in war doesn't work.

Yep. Sure worked for the Japanese and Germans


They weren't playing games either.

This isn't freaking Call of Duty. This is real life. The real world. Other people exist in it.
 
2014-01-16 12:33:10 AM  

ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?


Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....
 
2014-01-16 12:43:05 AM  
But did it smell like pork?
 
m00
2014-01-16 12:50:08 AM  
War is cruelty...
 
2014-01-16 01:37:11 AM  
white walkers?  the reference escapes me.
 
2014-01-16 02:10:09 AM  
IF the photos are authentic...(so they might not be)
IF the Marines can be identified...(which they might not be)
IF they are still in the service...(which they likely aren't)
IF there was no valid reason for cremating the bodies... (which there very well could have been)

...the pictures are over ten years old, the chances of anyone even in Afghanistan knowing or caring who the dead men are is remote. The odds are that since the bodies are dead, there was a good reason for burning them (probably because they'd been laying around for 48 hours and were starting to rot). So we're left with an old picture of some Marines cremating some bodies and we know nothing beyond that.

Is there ANY reason TMZ was dredging this up except to piss a lot of people off? Any thing? Bueller?
 
2014-01-16 02:54:26 AM  

Ex-Texan: But did it smell like pork?


I went as a volunteer firefighter when I was 17 and someone died/burned up in the house. It was one of the attending firefighter's daughters; she was going to college and the house where she rented a bedroom went up like a torch shortly after midnight.

That was 35 years ago and if I close my eyes and think about it, the memory/smell is right there. I'd prefer not to do that again; not enough money in the world to work at a job that lets me re-experience that night over and over.

I'm not belittling the corpse burning, but you realize: this is Fallujah right? Where forces surrounded the city for weeks waiting for the go call that somehow was delayed until after US elections? The same Fallujah where Italian TV videotaped footage after the battle of several bodies of civilians/women/children - and yes, civilians were 'encouraged' to leave before the attack but, kind of like Katrina, if you're poor and have no place to go... you don't go.

The disturbing thing about the video images weren't the dead civilians (war sucks), it was the fact that their clothes had tiny pinholes everywhere and their bodies melted like candles.

You see the US signed the Geneva Agreements on chemical weapons, but it doesn't include 'Willy Pete' - white phosphorus. Canisters for 'illumination' were launched over the city...

Fallujah sucked. Talk to anyone who was freaking there.

And for those above talking about WWII, talk to someone who walked into one of the concentration camps in Germany. (My father-in-law was one). They were so outraged, they went to the local town - people there knew - Freaking KNEW - what was going on but were either afraid/indifferent to do anything about it. So the US Army marched them at gunpoint to the camp, made them dig the graves and care for the poor bastards still alive. They were the ones that didn't look the US soldiers in the eye - mostly for fear the soldier would put a bullet in their brain.

I remember my Father-in-law said that it appeared some felt shame, but a large number were really really angry - not by what had happened - but because they made them look at it.

/The Roman/Mongol/Sherman way 'works' for a while; but you create a hate that lasts generations. For a more recent example take a look at Yugoslavia/Tito. That bastard made everyone live together and like it. Soon as he died however - Atrocities. Genocides. Horrors... it was awful - the full meaning of that word.
//No more Rwandas...  Figure the odds.
 
2014-01-16 03:05:30 AM  

cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....


And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.
 
2014-01-16 03:10:34 AM  

The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.


If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.
 
2014-01-16 03:21:31 AM  

LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.

If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.


The really aren't that many swing voters in a combat zone to make a difference.
 
2014-01-16 03:41:56 AM  

The Southern Dandy: LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.

If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.

The really aren't that many swing voters in a combat zone to make a difference.


The point is, fighting an insurgency is not like fighting a military. There's no real leader to order a surrender. You just have anyone who feels threatened enough to pick up a gun or make a nailbomb. The more brutal and callous you are, the more people feel that threatened, and even the most oppressive, brutal dictators had resistances. And the more you crack down on resistance, the more YOU start to look like the bad (or worse) guy to outside viewers.
 
2014-01-16 03:55:55 AM  

LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.

If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.

The really aren't that many swing voters in a combat zone to make a difference.

The point is, fighting an insurgency is not like fighting a military. There's no real leader to order a surrender. You just have anyone who feels threatened enough to pick up a gun or make a nailbomb. The more brutal and callous you are, the more people feel that threatened, and even the most oppressive, brutal dictators had resistances. And the more you crack down on resistance, the more YOU start to look like the bad (or worse) guy to outside viewers.


The point is, fighting is not diplomacy.  A military, whether fighting a conventional military, or an insurgency, is there to fight, not to make friends. There to fight against the enemy, and to fight for friends. No worse enemy, no better friend. The US Marines are not the State Department, and they're not the Peace Corps.
 
2014-01-16 04:12:07 AM  

The Southern Dandy: LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.

If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.

The really aren't that many swing voters in a combat zone to make a difference.

The point is, fighting an insurgency is not like fighting a military. There's no real leader to order a surrender. You just have anyone who feels threatened enough to pick up a gun or make a nailbomb. The more brutal and callous you are, the more people feel that threatened, and even the most oppressive, brutal dictators had resistances. And the more you crack down on resistance, the more YOU start to look like the bad (or worse) guy to outside viewers.

The point is, fighting is not diplomacy.  A military, whether fighting a conventional military, or an insurgency, is there to fight, not to make friends. There to fight against the enemy, ...


And if they're excessively brutal and disrespectful, they'll be fighting forever.
 
2014-01-16 05:01:40 AM  

LordJiro: And if they're excessively brutal and disrespectful, they'll be fighting forever.


No they won't.  Luckily for us, the people of the US still have some say about when and where our military fights, and even though those controls are sluggish, Americans won't tolerate futility for too long.
 
2014-01-16 06:42:12 AM  

Omahawg: friggin' saints
[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x510]


See, we're obviously the good guys.

If we were bad guys, we'd use guard boars instead of guard dogs in dealing with our mooselem enemies.
 
2014-01-16 07:19:05 AM  

Radioactive Ass: Omahawg: friggin' saints
[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x510]

Did you notice where I was comparing desecration of bodies? The people behind Abu Ghraib were prosecuted and punished for what they did. But if you want to go there then remember the name of Ron Pearlman and how his head was sawed off with a dull knife as he pled for mercy and how the video of it was released. Compare that to Abu Ghraib then yes, still saints. Especially seeing as we condemned the actions in that image above  and the terrorists celebrated the action in Pearlmans video.



content8.flixster.com
 
2014-01-16 07:26:37 AM  

Radioactive Ass: Omahawg: friggin' saints
[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x510]

Did you notice where I was comparing desecration of bodies? The people behind Abu Ghraib were prosecuted and punished for what they did. But if you want to go there then remember the name of Ron Pearlman and how his head was sawed off with a dull knife as he pled for mercy and how the video of it was released. Compare that to Abu Ghraib then yes, still saints. Especially seeing as we condemned the actions in that image above  and the terrorists celebrated the action in Pearlmans video.


Daniel Pearl you dolt.
 
2014-01-16 07:29:10 AM  
Yeah. I guess I shouldn't have binge watched season 6 last weekend. Daniel Pearl is who I meant. I blame coffee or something.
 
2014-01-16 07:30:10 AM  

thamike: Fox News is sourcing TMZ to dredge up unconfirmed dirt on the U.S. Armed Forces?  And the TMZ's unconfirmed source photos are supposedly from 2004?

Let's take a look!


Gah!  Preposterous photos with watermarks!

Color me f*cking surprised.

No really, I am actually surprised.  I'm even surprised at my own surprisedness.


You know nothing Jon Snow.
 
2014-01-16 07:59:00 AM  
News flash: Young men brutalizing each other in something they call "War".
 
2014-01-16 09:00:49 AM  

StoPPeRmobile: thamike: Fox News is sourcing TMZ to dredge up unconfirmed dirt on the U.S. Armed Forces?  And the TMZ's unconfirmed source photos are supposedly from 2004?

Let's take a look!


Gah!  Preposterous photos with watermarks!

Color me f*cking surprised.

No really, I am actually surprised.  I'm even surprised at my own surprisedness.

You know nothing Jon Snow.


Except that thing I do with me tongue.  Where's the look?

media.tumblr.com

There it is.  I'll be in me bunk.
 
2014-01-16 10:08:38 AM  

TheBigJerk: Yeah, that's why the horrors inflicted by the Soviets was so effective at ending the insurgency in Afghanistan.

Short of full-out genocide, there is nothing America can do that is scarier than what has been done (in living memory!) to the locals in that part of the world.

Anyways, corpse disposal might not matter to most of us, but for a lotta religious folks (including American Christians) dead body disposition is religiously important.  And let's be honest, it's a lot cheaper to let the survivors claim their dead than fight (in a very literal sense) for your right to waste time and fuel halfway burning them.

I mean I looked at the photos they had up, a proper clean&char it was definitely not.


The Russians didn't go far enough.  We aren't even remotely close to going far enough with what we should be doing to effectively shut down the Taliban and their supporters.  I don't think we're trying to be scarier than what they are used to.  You're right in that we could never do that.  We just need to be consistent in what we do.  You don't have to commit a genocide to have an effective outcome.  Disarm the populace and kill all opposition.  It's war time, so no guns for anyone who is not on our side.  Anyone riots?  Dead.  Anyone caught doing something pro-resistance?  Dead.  If you're not gonna do that, you're not gonna win the war.  When you withdraw, do so with an eye to kill the people who come out and riot and protest after the withdrawal.  All that crap with the Taliban dancing in Fallujah?  Looks like they should just be really easy targets to me.  Let them know that even if we are not right there in their midst we are still watching and can still kill them where they stand.  Then we should send them a message thanking them for being stupid enough to go out in public acting like that.  Eventually they'll run out of people with the will to fight.

As far as dead body disposition goes, I don't care about their religious customs or whatever.  In fact, I think barbecuing their remains and feeding them to pigs is a pretty good idea.  If they can't be concerned with the lives of women and children, or random innocent civilians and will indiscriminately bomb people, behead people, force women and kids to wear bombs, throw acid in their faces or whatever, I'm not going to care what our soldiers do to their corpses after they've been killed.  You can't play by rules with people who don't give a shiat about your rules.
 
2014-01-16 10:47:28 AM  
It's nice to see all the farkers I have flagged as "Sad little bigot" making their predictable showing.  Bunch of armchair dictators, talking about how big and bad they think we are and how brutal we should be overseas.  Theoretically to prevent war from breaking onto our shores.

It comforts me to know that if any of these little twits were in a position of power to actually do these things, they wouldn't be here spewing their bile.
 
2014-01-16 11:08:34 AM  

rattchett: Intentionally targeting non-combatants is not moral and it is not efficient


And is not the point.
 
2014-01-16 11:59:28 AM  
War is diplomacy.

Waging a war, via a government is inherently an action with goals on the world stage.

No war exists in a vacuum. We don't just decide to exterminate people for the hell of it.

To everyone here thinking we should have simply dug mass graves and murdered any Iraqi who dared step out of line, that only works if our ONLY goal was "kill every Iraqi who can fight"

Which is a stupid goal because when push comes to shove it really just morphs into "genocide Iraqis"

There are more efficient ways to do something like that. Thankfully that wasn't the goal in Iraq. The goal was to depose saddam.

Then the goal was.... Something. It will come to me.
 
2014-01-16 01:04:01 PM  

LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.

If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.


No, you're not listening. Once people have chosen a side, they're on that side FOREVER, and the actions they take would have been the same actions regardless of what choices you make in dealing with them/the bodies of other people who share their religion if not their values.

If I keep repeating this over and over, it will magically become true and I'll no longer be an ignoramus. Then maybe my parents will love me!
 
2014-01-16 01:06:04 PM  

The Southern Dandy: LordJiro: And if they're excessively brutal and disrespectful, they'll be fighting forever.

No they won't.  Luckily for us, the people of the US still have some say about when and where our military fights, and even though those controls are sluggish, Americans won't tolerate futility for too long.


You think armies can be moved around like pieces on a Risk board. Your way of thinking would be hilarious to me if it weren't actually so damn dangerous to our men and women overseas.
 
2014-01-16 01:19:56 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: The Southern Dandy: LordJiro: And if they're excessively brutal and disrespectful, they'll be fighting forever.

No they won't.  Luckily for us, the people of the US still have some say about when and where our military fights, and even though those controls are sluggish, Americans won't tolerate futility for too long.

You think armies can be moved around like pieces on a Risk board. Your way of thinking would be hilarious to me if it weren't actually so damn dangerous to our men and women overseas.


Christmas on a stick, the American Public can't/won't even move their politicians around.
Past 60 years of the War For War and you even mention "futility for too long"?
 
2014-01-16 01:22:27 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: LordJiro: The Southern Dandy: cryinoutloud: ciberido: The Southern Dandy: First of all, burning a body is not desecrating it.
Is Dandy being disingenuous here or is he an idiot?  Any theories?

Desecrating? People pay good money for that. They probably pay too much for the urns, but still....

And they've spread the ashes on the beaches of Southern California, from La Jolla to Leo Carrillo and... up to... Pismo.

Yes, I was serious. Burning a body is only desecration in certain belief systems. Not mine. But the point is...the locals that you're so worried about offending would not be offended if the body was that of their enemy, and if it was not their enemy, then they are our enemy, so who gives a shiat if they're offended? If they're already working to kill you, or supporting those trying to kill you, desecrating their buddies body isn't going to make things any more difficult for you, and treating their buddies body with respect isn't going to make anything easier for you.

If they haven't chosen a side, it might very well push them. On the other hand, if those that are undecided see that we treat even our enemies with some degree of respect, they might support us against al Qaeda, insurgents, or any other opposition.

No, you're not listening. Once people have chosen a side, they're on that side FOREVER, and the actions they take would have been the same actions regardless of what choices you make in dealing with them/the bodies of other people who share their religion if not their values.

If I keep repeating this over and over, it will magically become true and I'll no longer be an ignoramus. Then maybe my parents will love me!


Well, actually, in most of the world, all you do is swear allegiance to the New Boss and yer good.
It's all about networking new believers.
 
2014-01-16 05:34:34 PM  

HeWhoHasNoName: If they were enlisted or NCOs and have left the IRR, I'm not sure that's even possible. I'm not a UCMJ expert, though. If your contract is up and your IRR obligation is up, it's a civilian matter.


That's how I understand it.
 
2014-01-16 05:49:00 PM  

The Southern Dandy: The point is, fighting is not diplomacy. A military, whether fighting a conventional military, or an insurgency, is there to fight, not to make friends. There to fight against the enemy, and to fight for friends. No worse enemy, no better friend. The US Marines are not the State Department, and they're not the Peace Corps.


Actually, that's completely wrong.

"War is the continuation of politics by other means".  Diplomacy is the carrot and war is the stick.   They are both means by which nations achieve their political goals, two sides of the same coin.

A military fights to support the decisions of the nation's leadership and accomplish the mission they're assigned.   Individual soldiers fight for a variety of reasons - for their friends, for their beliefs, because they're following orders, or whatever.

The Marines, like the State Department, are instruments of foreign policy.   They have different missions and use different tools to achieve that mission, but their ultimate end goal is the same: to influence the behavior of other countries in a way that benefits our national interests, as directed by the elected leadership.

Either you never served or you slept through leadership school.
 
Displayed 39 of 189 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report