Bad Apple Defence

[aeon]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

Well your wrong...it is copied word for word.

Oups true , i owe you a thousand of apologies, again,i am really sorry, i read it too fast.

Peace.

 

[Jay]

No problem.

 

[Mogz]

The purpose of armed forces is to terrorize the enemy ,and the enemys civilian population, long ago the targeting of the enemy at home became the norm, in fact it has been the norm since the beginning of warfare.

The bolded portion is what really gets me. You might want to bone up on the Rules of Armed Conflict beaver, especially before you make a post like that. As it so happens I have a copy right here at home:

Section 5, Sub-section 1 of the Laws of Armed Conflict

Targeting Personnel:

The LOAC protects civilian populations. Military attacks against cities, towns, or villages not justified by military necessity are forbidden. Attacking noncombatants (generally referred to as civilians) for the sole purpose of terrorizing them is also prohibited. Although civilians may not be made the object of a direct attack, the LOAC recognizes that a military target need not be spared because its destruction may cause collateral damage that results in the unintended death or injury to civilians or damage to their property. Commanders and their planners must take into consideration the extent of unintended indirect civilian destruction and probable casualties that will result from a direct attack on a military objective and, to the extent consistent with military necessity, seek to avoid or minimize civilian casualties and destruction.

Anticipated civilian losses must be proportionate to the military advantages sought. Judge advocate, intelligence, and operations personnel play a critical role in determining the propriety of a target and the choice of weapon to be used under the particular circumstances known to the commander when planning an attack.

In laymans terms, the military as an entity, whether it be Canadian, American, British, French, Dutch, German or any other nation that adheres to the LOAC, does not go out of it's way to harm civilians. Once again, before you post, ponder if you actually know what you're talking about. Just putting that out there.

P.S. Go ahead and google the Laws of Armed Conflict to verify this. I didn't post a link to piss you off :lol:

 

[FiveParadox]

:?

Um, okay. Is it quite necessary to abstain from posting your sources, for the purpose of attempting to irritate the membership? That seems a tad immature, don't you think? I know that you don't post, Mogz, unless you know what you're talking about (in a majority of cases), so why risk compromising your posts like that?

The only document styled the Law of Armed Conflict that I found in short order was one posted on the Department of National Defense Canada Web site, a manual of some type. It seems that the provisions in relation to non-combatants are similar to those you posted, but not in the same words.

Click here to read the Law of Armed Conflict At the Operational and Tactical Levels in English.
Cliquetez içi pour lire le Droit des conflits armés aux niveaux opérationnel et tactique en français.

 

[Mogz]

Um, okay. Is it quite necessary to abstain from posting your sources, for the purpose of attempting to irritate the membership? That seems a tad immature, don't you think? I know that you don't post, Mogz, unless you know what you're talking about (in a majority of cases), so why risk compromising your posts like that?

You are WAY too uptight for an 18 year old man. You need to loosen up a tad.

P.S. That link you posted is to the fricken bible of the LOAC. Mines drawn from the Canadian Army Field Handbook. Regardless, as you said, similar parlance.

 

[FiveParadox]

Oh, okay; is that a good thing? lol

The LOAC "bible", I mean. Is that the "official" document or something? :?

 

[darkbeaver]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

The purpose of armed forces is to terrorize the enemy ,and the enemys civilian population, long ago the targeting of the enemy at home became the norm, in fact it has been the norm since the beginning of warfare.

The bolded portion is what really gets me. You might want to bone up on the Rules of Armed Conflict beaver, especially before you make a post like that. As it so happens I have a copy right here at home:

Section 5, Sub-section 1 of the Laws of Armed Conflict

Targeting Personnel:

The LOAC protects civilian populations. Military attacks against cities, towns, or villages not justified by military necessity are forbidden. Attacking noncombatants (generally referred to as civilians) for the sole purpose of terrorizing them is also prohibited. Although civilians may not be made the object of a direct attack, the LOAC recognizes that a military target need not be spared because its destruction may cause collateral damage that results in the unintended death or injury to civilians or damage to their property. Commanders and their planners must take into consideration the extent of unintended indirect civilian destruction and probable casualties that will result from a direct attack on a military objective and, to the extent consistent with military necessity, seek to avoid or minimize civilian casualties and destruction.

Anticipated civilian losses must be proportionate to the military advantages sought. Judge advocate, intelligence, and operations personnel play a critical role in determining the propriety of a target and the choice of weapon to be used under the particular circumstances known to the commander when planning an attack.

In laymans terms, the military as an entity, whether it be Canadian, American, British, French, Dutch, German or any other nation that adheres to the LOAC, does not go out of it's way to harm civilians. Once again, before you post, ponder if you actually know what you're talking about. Just putting that out there.

P.S. Go ahead and google the Laws of Armed Conflict to verify this. I didn't post a link to piss you off :lol:

The Rules of Armed Conflict, christ you're funny. That's as funny as the rules of religion or corporate ethics. You might want to bone up on reality and history, nobody follows the phucking rules Mugz.
The American armed forces in particular have a history of targeting civilians, it gets results faster than chaseing vagabonds through jungles. The Rules of Armed Conflict hahahahahahahaha how did you get so innocent. :lol:

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

Oh, okay; is that a good thing? lol

Do you think he would mention it if it was?

 

[FiveParadox]

I was referring to the LOAC document I found, Jay.

Thank you for your intervention, though.

 

[Jay]

Any time!

 

[MagnoliaApples]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

The Rules of Armed Conflict, christ you're funny. That's as funny as the rules of religion or corporate ethics. You might want to bone up on reality and history, nobody follows the phucking rules Mugz.
The American armed forces in particular have a history of targeting civilians, it gets results faster than chaseing vagabonds through jungles. The Rules of Armed Conflict hahahahahahahaha how did you get so innocent. :lol:

Just because they have ' a history ' of doing this doesn't make it right. There are Rules of Engagement. And depending on the task there are slight variations on these rules.

Armed forces are NOT supposed to shoot at innocent civilians. Especially not women and children. For the Canadian Armed Forces many times they cannot shoot a gun unless they have been shot at first. I'm pretty sure in this situation they probably are allowed to shoot but as far as the rules go they can only do so if they know that they themsleves or their fellow army men are in jeopardy, or if the target is armed.

So by you making the comment that you made is basically saying that you condone the execution of innocent people simply because they've always done this.

The truth is they should never have done it in the first place. Because of that they think they can get away with and commit all kinds of atrocities and war crimes that other countries are held accountable and pay for.

In a nut shell the 'Bad Apples' in my opinion are the ones who don't have the capacity to understand what it means to carry a gun and comprehend the point of why they are posted into other countries to protect those same civilians that they murder for sake of democracy. And according to what you DarkBeaver have written, that would be generation upon generation of U.S military.


I don't think that all U.S soldiers and higher ups are to blame but there certainly is a problem that needs to be investigated and the real ' Bad Apples ' need to be rooted out and held accountable. The people that are commiting these crimes are hardly what i would concider Noble and Honorable and are not deserving of the medals they brandish as a sign of their courage and service.

 

[darkbeaver]

The real bad apples run the Country Magnolia, and I don't condone murder in any form. It would be a strange thing if the rules of engagement were followed, it would be impossible to conduct war in the modern sense, what would become of the proscribed weapons now in use by the coalition forces in Iraq and Iran and elsewhere? What would become of the specially trained murderers conducting covert ops all over the world? What would the weapons merchants do if the rules were followed? The business of modern conflict would grind to a halt if the rules were followed. You have some very dangerous and expensive ideas Magnolia. I never said it was all right, I never would say it was all right, I just said that's the way it's been and that's the way it is, generation after generation.

 

[MagnoliaApples]

If you join the military I would expect you to carry out what is legal under the terms of engagement. I believe that those rules were set in place by those who were of legal and sound of mind. How can a member of the military sleep at night if they are following illegalities commanded by they're higher ups? I support those people in the military who go awol for not wanting to contribute to illegal practices. Those are the smart ones! The ones who recognize that this is an unjust war and do not wish to commit crimes on humanity. They are smart to back out and not want to participate in crime.

One day this is all going to come to a head! Mark my words. All of those idiots who are shooting innocent poeple are going to have to account for it. This war is going to come to a head and at some point people are going to be held accountable for all the shit that they are wreaking in the long run. You can say that it's okay to go ape shit because you've got a gun in your hand but it's going to come down on what the rest of the world believes to be acceptable. I can guarantee you that people aren't going to be happy and in the end make those who were irresponsible for the lives of the innocent pay for their ignorance.

The fact that what has been going on for generations will come to an end. Hopefully it won't come at the cost of world destruction. Because whether you would like to admit it or not, this war could spell the end of our lives and the lives of the entire world, as we know it.

So you can be the one who's naieve in thinking that everything is just going to be peachy. But you will see, if someone doesn't get a hold of this war, we are all going to pay for it!!

Don't mean to sound like a doom sayer but i don't think that the people involved are going to get away with this.
We have come too far and are much wiser than we were in the past. At this point, it's all about accountability! And as we have seen over half of Americans don't believe in this war!

 

[darkbeaver]

You are right, this war could be the beginning of the end because of the WMD's of the empire. The rich and the powerful have gotten away with murder for a long time they care about nothing but profit. Do you really think that we as humans have gotten a lot smarter than we were in the past? If that is so then how do you explain us now being in a position that required huge stupidity?

 

[darkbeaver]

You are right, this war could be the beginning of the end because of the WMD's of the empire. The rich and the powerful have gotten away with murder for a long time they care about nothing but profit. Do you really think that we as humans have gotten a lot smarter than we were in the past? If that is so then how do you explain us now being in a position that required huge stupidity?

 

[Mogz]

The Rules of Armed Conflict, christ you're funny. That's as funny as the rules of religion or corporate ethics. You might want to bone up on reality and history, nobody follows the phucking rules Mugz.
The American armed forces in particular have a history of targeting civilians, it gets results faster than chaseing vagabonds through jungles. The Rules of Armed Conflict hahahahahahahaha how did you get so innocent.

Pretty absolute statement there beaver. NOBODY follows the rules of armed conflict. Two things to highlight:

The Laws of Armed Conflict are relatively new, and didn't exist during World War II, Korea, Vietnam, etc. There was always some semblance of order in chaos, i.e. POW treatment and the like, but the LOAC didn't exist. As for no one following them, well I did, as did every member of my section serving in Afghanistan. The Rules of Engagement in a defined theatre of operations are drawn up in accordance with the LOAC. There are numerous times I could have easily shot Afghans for bringing weapons near out convoy, but the ROE, drawn up under the LOAC, prohibited it. So your theory that no one follows the "phucking rules", as you so succinctly put it, is, like most of what you post, tripe Also don't bother lecturing me on military history beaver, minored in 20th Century Military History in college. Just another field I know way more than you in

So lets see, I covered the LOAC, ROEs, and my stance on my education. Yup I think I managed to point out you're a prat once again. So easy it's losing its appeal.

 

[MagnoliaApples]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

You are right, this war could be the beginning of the end because of the WMD's of the empire. The rich and the powerful have gotten away with murder for a long time they care about nothing but profit. Do you really think that we as humans have gotten a lot smarter than we were in the past? If that is so then how do you explain us now being in a position that required huge stupidity?

Actually, I do think that we are smarter than we were in the past.

What you seem to be forgetting is that the majority did not get the world in this mess. The idiots are the Big Boys that like to throw their weight around while the rest of us are staring in disbelief.

If it were up to me, this whole " War " would be shit canned and the first @$$hole that i would want to get my hands on would be Bush cause he's mess without his puppetmaster and too dumb to keep his mouth shut for too long. Next would be his 'entourage' then his Dad.

I know that if you got that far you would no doubt end up seeing the whole picture and would notice how closely related to all this bull$hit and greed are the Bin Ladden family. Them and their 3 Trillion dollar investment in the American economy brought to you by the letter B - the Bush family.

I know this whole thing is a lot bigger than just some ' war'. The 'war' was designed to distract us all from the real crime.

I think the first step would be impeaching Bush and maybe that won't happen before his term is up but when it is, he's royally screwed. He won't have his Presidency card to bail him out.
And when his shit hits the fan, it's going to start unfolding with all the crap they've been doing over in Iraq and Afganistan.

 

[darkbeaver]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

The Rules of Armed Conflict, christ you're funny. That's as funny as the rules of religion or corporate ethics. You might want to bone up on reality and history, nobody follows the phucking rules Mugz.
The American armed forces in particular have a history of targeting civilians, it gets results faster than chaseing vagabonds through jungles. The Rules of Armed Conflict hahahahahahahaha how did you get so innocent.

Pretty absolute statement there beaver. NOBODY follows the rules of armed conflict. Two things to highlight:

The Laws of Armed Conflict are relatively new, and didn't exist during World War II, Korea, Vietnam, etc. There was always some semblance of order in chaos, i.e. POW treatment and the like, but the LOAC didn't exist. As for no one following them, well I did, as did every member of my section serving in Afghanistan. The Rules of Engagement in a defined theatre of operations are drawn up in accordance with the LOAC. There are numerous times I could have easily shot Afghans for bringing weapons near out convoy, but the ROE, drawn up under the LOAC, prohibited it. So your theory that no one follows the "phucking rules", as you so succinctly put it, is, like most of what you post, tripe Also don't bother lecturing me on military history beaver, minored in 20th Century Military History in college. Just another field I know way more than you in

So lets see, I covered the LOAC, ROEs, and my stance on my education. Yup I think I managed to point out you're a prat once again. So easy it's losing its appeal.

Mogz I will never loose my appeal to you, you have been conditioned to respond to the enemy, that's me. I can tell you will be an officer some day. You minored in 20th century military history and yet you still don't understand what the prize is in Afghanistan. Hey, you feel good about working in and for Afghanistan that's fine, you have a right to defend that feeling.
Rules were meant to be broken Mogz that's how the rich and powerful write them. What's a prat brat.

 

[darkbeaver]

Re: RE: Bad Apple Defence

You are right, this war could be the beginning of the end because of the WMD's of the empire. The rich and the powerful have gotten away with murder for a long time they care about nothing but profit. Do you really think that we as humans have gotten a lot smarter than we were in the past? If that is so then how do you explain us now being in a position that required huge stupidity?

Actually, I do think that we are smarter than we were in the past.

What you seem to be forgetting is that the majority did not get the world in this mess. The idiots are the Big Boys that like to throw their weight around while the rest of us are staring in disbelief.

If it were up to me, this whole " War " would be shit canned and the first @$$hole that i would want to get my hands on would be Bush cause he's mess without his puppetmaster and too dumb to keep his mouth shut for too long. Next would be his 'entourage' then his Dad.

I know that if you got that far you would no doubt end up seeing the whole picture and would notice how closely related to all this bull$hit and greed are the Bin Ladden family. Them and their 3 Trillion dollar investment in the American economy brought to you by the letter B - the Bush family.

I know this whole thing is a lot bigger than just some ' war'. The 'war' was designed to distract us all from the real crime.

I think the first step would be impeaching Bush and maybe that won't happen before his term is up but when it is, he's royally screwed. He won't have his Presidency card to bail him out.
And when his shit hits the fan, it's going to start unfolding with all the crap they've been doing over in Iraq and Afganistan.

I hope you're right about us being smarter then we have been in the past. The majority of us did get us into this shit because we are to stupid to have prevented it, no one is to blame but us, we elevated the idiot bigboys to thier positions of power we keep them there because we are stupid slaves to the system, the shit could not exist without us. If you are right about us then we must be waiting for the last moment before we turn away from the abyss, or maybe we think god's coming back in the nick of time.
While Bush should be dealt with like you suggest that one dirtbag hung won't change the system which allowed him power, without structural change we will elevate an endless chain of Bush and Blair like leaders. anyway I think we're on the same side :lol: