**I talked with my commanding officer after the incident. He came up to me and says: "Are you OK?" I said: "No, today is not a good day. We killed a bunch of civilians." He goes: "No, today was a good day." And when he said that, I said "Oh, my goodness, what the hell am I into?"**
BAR: Answer - Government Sponsored Genocide
BAR: Answer - Government Sponsored Genocide
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>: Cluster bombs are also controversial. U.N. commissions have called for a ban. Were you acquainted with cluster bombs?
A: I had one of my Marines in my battalion who lost his leg from an ICBM.
Q: What's an ICBM?
A: A multi-purpose cluster bomb. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I figured an ICBM was an (I)nter(C)ontinental (B)allistic (M)issile. Losing a leg is the least of your worries as a lot are armed with atomic or biological warheads. I think they're confusing those with anti-personnel mines. Very nasty, very dangerous stuff.
A: I had one of my Marines in my battalion who lost his leg from an ICBM.
Q: What's an ICBM?
A: A multi-purpose cluster bomb. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
I figured an ICBM was an (I)nter(C)ontinental (B)allistic (M)issile. Losing a leg is the least of your worries as a lot are armed with atomic or biological warheads. I think they're confusing those with anti-personnel mines. Very nasty, very dangerous stuff.
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Q: Who gave the order to wipe the demonstrators out?
A: Higher command. We were told to be on the lookout for the civilians because a lot of the Fedayeen and the Republican Guards had tossed away uniforms and put on civilian clothes and were mounting terrorist attacks on American soldiers. The intelligence reports that were given to us were basically known by every member of the chain of command. The rank structure that was implemented in Iraq by the chain of command was evident to every Marine in Iraq. The order to shoot the demonstrators, I believe, came from senior government officials, including intelligence communities within the military and the U.S. government.
Q: What kind of firepower was employed?
A: M-16s, 50-cal. machine guns.
Q: You fired into six or ten kids? Were they all taken out?
A: Oh, yeah. Well, I had a "mercy" on one guy. When we rolled up, he was hiding behind a concrete pillar. I saw him and raised my weapon up, and he put up his hands. He ran off. I told everybody, "Don't shoot." Half of his foot was trailing behind him. So he was running with half of his foot cut off.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The entire Bush administration should be tried in Iraq by the Iraqis for their war crimes.
A: Higher command. We were told to be on the lookout for the civilians because a lot of the Fedayeen and the Republican Guards had tossed away uniforms and put on civilian clothes and were mounting terrorist attacks on American soldiers. The intelligence reports that were given to us were basically known by every member of the chain of command. The rank structure that was implemented in Iraq by the chain of command was evident to every Marine in Iraq. The order to shoot the demonstrators, I believe, came from senior government officials, including intelligence communities within the military and the U.S. government.
Q: What kind of firepower was employed?
A: M-16s, 50-cal. machine guns.
Q: You fired into six or ten kids? Were they all taken out?
A: Oh, yeah. Well, I had a "mercy" on one guy. When we rolled up, he was hiding behind a concrete pillar. I saw him and raised my weapon up, and he put up his hands. He ran off. I told everybody, "Don't shoot." Half of his foot was trailing behind him. So he was running with half of his foot cut off.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
The entire Bush administration should be tried in Iraq by the Iraqis for their war crimes.
and in another demonstration of how we have no life whatsofukkingever:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.cdiss.org/98july2.htm
(excerpt)
up to and including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) range (greater than 5,500 km),
That's about 8800 miles.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://www.cdiss.org/98july2.htm
(excerpt)
up to and including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) range (greater than 5,500 km),
That's about 8800 miles.
Good point, Alex, I bet most all of the negatives we've seen in past 14 months took place in eerily similar ways in Vietnam.
And yes, it's the information flow that has been the most astonishing difference between the two campaigns.
Doing damage to others is always best done with as little objective observation as possible, whether it be individuals or groups (governments, corporations) of any kind.
Does this mean that the Internet ends war and violence? Oh no, I doubt it. But it does put more into the light. And telling lies in the light is more difficult for anyone.
Clinton found it out, Gore found it out. Now the current Wash DC leaders are finding it out.
Is their mission 'wrong'? A lot of debate about that for sure. But one thing seems clear to me is that they, like Clinton and Gore before them have underestimated the impact of how fast the world can communicate information in 2004.
And maybe to an exxagerated extent because whether you agree with them or not, it's clear that the current leadership, save the actual Prez, is the same crew that ran the joint in the 1980s. And due simply to that, they were likely slower to understand the paradigm shift that all government leaders will have to contend with.
With each passing day, it's harder and harder for politicians to lie to the people. And I'm talking federal, state, local.
One of the most interesting aspects of our drug policy news site is watching the past few years when a small town in AnyState USA has a situation of illegal discrimination, a school treating a student in a certain way, a mayor or councilperson committing a crime....whatever.
In just hours, the news is all over the ENTIRE PLANET for anyone that wants to look at it.
The reactions from the principals in such cases is sadly amusing in some ways.
"Why are reporters from New York City calling us?? Why this is none of their Yankee business!!"
"Why are all of our city hall email accounts being bombarded with messages about our mayor being busted for fill in the blank?"
To return to your point, sentiment in other countries against the Vietnam War was not a lot different than what you've seen from a lot of Europe in past year. But other than a few Americans who lived in a big city and could go to a big library that took overseas newspapers, the majority just took whatever Wash DC told them.
Not to mention the overall coverage direct from Vietnam, as you likely know, was heavily censored, and there was no one there to offer counterpoints.
That's why it took almost a full decade of bodies to force Washington's hand.
And yes, it's the information flow that has been the most astonishing difference between the two campaigns.
Doing damage to others is always best done with as little objective observation as possible, whether it be individuals or groups (governments, corporations) of any kind.
Does this mean that the Internet ends war and violence? Oh no, I doubt it. But it does put more into the light. And telling lies in the light is more difficult for anyone.
Clinton found it out, Gore found it out. Now the current Wash DC leaders are finding it out.
Is their mission 'wrong'? A lot of debate about that for sure. But one thing seems clear to me is that they, like Clinton and Gore before them have underestimated the impact of how fast the world can communicate information in 2004.
And maybe to an exxagerated extent because whether you agree with them or not, it's clear that the current leadership, save the actual Prez, is the same crew that ran the joint in the 1980s. And due simply to that, they were likely slower to understand the paradigm shift that all government leaders will have to contend with.
With each passing day, it's harder and harder for politicians to lie to the people. And I'm talking federal, state, local.
One of the most interesting aspects of our drug policy news site is watching the past few years when a small town in AnyState USA has a situation of illegal discrimination, a school treating a student in a certain way, a mayor or councilperson committing a crime....whatever.
In just hours, the news is all over the ENTIRE PLANET for anyone that wants to look at it.
The reactions from the principals in such cases is sadly amusing in some ways.
"Why are reporters from New York City calling us?? Why this is none of their Yankee business!!"
"Why are all of our city hall email accounts being bombarded with messages about our mayor being busted for fill in the blank?"
To return to your point, sentiment in other countries against the Vietnam War was not a lot different than what you've seen from a lot of Europe in past year. But other than a few Americans who lived in a big city and could go to a big library that took overseas newspapers, the majority just took whatever Wash DC told them.
Not to mention the overall coverage direct from Vietnam, as you likely know, was heavily censored, and there was no one there to offer counterpoints.
That's why it took almost a full decade of bodies to force Washington's hand.
