Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
10/20/2017 1:01:18 AM
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 9/22/2005 8:02:07 PM EDT
to resist the enemy? Let's say the general of the invading army brought with him his wife and young children to live behind the front lines. Would you resort to kidnapping women and children as leverage? Bombing their shelter knowing that their are women and children in harms way? I know the first Americans held themselves to higher standards during their fight for independence. But it's an intriguing question.

Myself, I'd say now that I couldn't do it. But when push comes to shove and it's your family or theirs, you might think hard about it.

Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:06:03 PM EDT
I'd just kidnap whatever is left of Jack Bauer's family and let him do the work for me.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:07:58 PM EDT
No women, no kids.

Enough force to get the job done.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:08:45 PM EDT
Any means necessary.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:08:56 PM EDT
A la Red Dawn?

Anything. Those that invade my beloved country will find no tactics are too low, or too brutal, as they will likewise think nothing is too brutal for the civilians they are here to enslave/murder/capture.

WOLVERINES!
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:10:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Any means necessary.





....and post pics!!
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:11:47 PM EDT
Ever watch RED DAWN?
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:13:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Any means necessary.



Direct and to the point. Gotta love a guy who doesn't even have to think about it. Then again, I just noticed your screen name.
Link Posted: 9/22/2005 8:14:38 PM EDT


CoC
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 6:01:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
Anything. Those that invade my beloved country will find no tactics are too low, or too brutal, as they will likewise think nothing is too brutal for the civilians they are here to enslave/murder/capture.



Heh. I have a feeling those words were echoed by some
"feedom fighter" haji in Iraq...
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:04:16 AM EDT
Hannah_Reitsch got banned for suggesting that she would hang their intestines from the streetlamps.

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:06:08 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:11:07 AM EDT
Like Malcolm the Tenth said, By any means necessary.

"Because we live here"
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:13:50 AM EDT

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Ever watch RED DAWN?


<--see left. No tactic is to low. If our country ever has a war on its own soil, any non american/non ally will die if presented in my line of fire.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:17:45 AM EDT
Wolverines!!!!
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:19:40 AM EDT
All is fair in war. No questions asked.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:19:55 AM EDT
Just win baby.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:22:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:24:31 AM EDT
If you want a fair fight, take up boxing.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:25:27 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 7:25:50 AM EDT by photoman]

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Any means necessary.



The only fair fight is the one you lose. American's don't like to lose.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:31:17 AM EDT
It's an interesting question. What exactly is the moral status of a person living in comfort off the fat of my land, by force of the arms of others? I think that it would be possible to dissuade occupiers from "colonising" well before one had to consider resorting to things he might regret.

Of course, there are no "off-duty" invaders/occupiers, and no "safe zones" for them.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:33:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Any means necessary.




exactly!
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 7:36:59 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Ever watch RED DAWN?


<--see left. No tactic is to low. If our country ever has a war on its own soil, any non american/non ally will die if presented in my line of fire.



it shoud say "too many times"

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 9:52:47 AM EDT
This will probably get me a through-the-net beating, but I wouldn't resort to some of the actions mentioned in the post. I'm an American and as such I'll hold myself to the same standards our troops are expected to fight under. I'd target combatants, of course, and installed government officers and such if it were beneficial. I'd target rear echelon and support operations but would try to minimize casualties as much as possible. If it's impossible but the target must be destroyed, fine. But I'll do what I can to fight honorably. To my mind, "never fight fair" means take every advantage you can against an enemy- but I don't consider it to mean "target women and children and commit atrocities".

As a christian, I would do whatever I could to try to avoid losing God's blessing and protection.

Plus, I will not fight like a jihaadi.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 11:48:31 AM EDT
[Robert] I'll do it [/Robert]

[Burst of AK fire]
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 11:52:32 AM EDT
i would kidnap his grandmother and his pet poodle if it would help at all...besides id just kill them anyways
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 11:53:16 AM EDT

Originally Posted By 37Victor:
This will probably get me a through-the-net beating, but I wouldn't resort to some of the actions mentioned in the post. I'm an American and as such I'll hold myself to the same standards our troops are expected to fight under. I'd target combatants, of course, and installed government officers and such if it were beneficial. I'd target rear echelon and support operations but would try to minimize casualties as much as possible. If it's impossible but the target must be destroyed, fine. But I'll do what I can to fight honorably. To my mind, "never fight fair" means take every advantage you can against an enemy- but I don't consider it to mean "target women and children and commit atrocities".

As a christian, I would do whatever I could to try to avoid losing God's blessing and protection.

Plus, I will not fight like a jihaadi.



Protecting your country from it's invaders and those who come with them to live off your efforts and nation is "fighting like a jihaadi?"



What's the fucking point of fighting if you're not fighting to win?
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:02:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Dino:

Originally Posted By Dusty_C:

Originally Posted By fight4yourrights:
Ever watch RED DAWN?


<--see left. No tactic is to low. If our country ever has a war on its own soil, any non american/non ally will die if presented in my line of fire.



it shoud say "too many times"




Your line should say "should". If you are going to be a spelling Nazi, don't fuck up.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:02:30 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 12:03:54 PM EDT by p331083]

Originally Posted By TheCynic:

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
Anything. Those that invade my beloved country will find no tactics are too low, or too brutal, as they will likewise think nothing is too brutal for the civilians they are here to enslave/murder/capture.



Heh. I have a feeling those words were echoed by some
"feedom fighter" haji in Iraq...


Those hajis blatantly target Iraqi civilians. Big difference between being a suicide bomber and taking out military targets, and massacring innocent people.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:06:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By p331083:

Originally Posted By TheCynic:

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
Anything. Those that invade my beloved country will find no tactics are too low, or too brutal, as they will likewise think nothing is too brutal for the civilians they are here to enslave/murder/capture.



Heh. I have a feeling those words were echoed by some
"feedom fighter" haji in Iraq...


Those hajis blatantly target Iraqi civilians. Big difference between being a suicide bomber and taking out military targets, and massacring innocent people.



To play the devil's advocate-

By that logic, then an insurgent shooting an American soldier is justified?
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:25:12 PM EDT
As long as no physical harm comes to them from "us".

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:27:43 PM EDT
Here's a question: would you target civillian (including women and children) collaborators?
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:29:47 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheFreepster:
Here's a question: would you target civillian (including women and children) collaborators?



That one is a little more difficult to answer. If their actions are a direct threat to me or mine, then yes. I would prefer not to if it was not necessary though. They can be dealt with properly after the invasion is repelled.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:30:52 PM EDT
In a real fight, if you think that we would be more noble or honorable than Chechyan rebels, you got another think coming....
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:42:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Stottman:

Originally Posted By p331083:

Originally Posted By TheCynic:

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
Anything. Those that invade my beloved country will find no tactics are too low, or too brutal, as they will likewise think nothing is too brutal for the civilians they are here to enslave/murder/capture.



Heh. I have a feeling those words were echoed by some
"feedom fighter" haji in Iraq...


Those hajis blatantly target Iraqi civilians. Big difference between being a suicide bomber and taking out military targets, and massacring innocent people.



To play the devil's advocate-

By that logic, then an insurgent shooting an American soldier is justified?


No, war is never justified.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:43:07 PM EDT
Go to every gun store I bought from and burn the FORM 4473.

Defeat the Red Dawn tactic before it can be used against us.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:43:18 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 12:46:23 PM EDT by vanilla_gorilla]
Nevermind.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:45:42 PM EDT
Those tactics are for us to discuss at the next local SHTF Group meeting
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 12:59:38 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TheFreepster:
Here's a question: would you target civillian (including women and children) collaborators?



Translation is necessary:

In times of war we call them collaborators, in times of peace we call them liberals
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 1:02:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Any means necessary.



Bully !

I did not sign the Geneva Convention.

If the General of an invading army is silly enough to place his family in harms way, he is silly enough to lose them.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 1:11:29 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SgtWhiting:

Originally Posted By killingmachine123:
Any means necessary.



Bully !

I did not sign the Geneva Convention.

If the General of an invading army is silly enough to place his family in harms way, he is silly enough to lose them.



+1
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 1:13:55 PM EDT

Originally Posted By vanilla_gorilla:
A la Red Dawn?

Anything. Those that invade my beloved country will find no tactics are too low, or too brutal, as they will likewise think nothing is too brutal for the civilians they are here to enslave/murder/capture.



+1

Anything would go at that point.

HH

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 1:22:27 PM EDT
It would depend on their tactics. If the enemy is targeting civilians and non-combatants, it would be on like Donkey Kong. If they are only targeting those fighting against them directly, I would be less likely to attack their civilians.

All that aside, if they have any sort of uniform, they are fair game to me.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 2:46:04 PM EDT
If their family is on our soil, they ARE invaders. If they are stupid enough to bring their family, ALL of um will get what's coming to um! So I'll just send my daughters to take care of um.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 4:24:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By operatorerror:
In a real fight, if you think that we would be more noble or honorable than Chechyan rebels, you got another think coming....



+1

I hate the expression 'War Crimes'. It is a myth. The only crime in war is not winning.

Now if treating prisoners in a humane fashion destroys their will to fight then that is what you do. That makes it easier for you to win with fewer casualties. When they realized the war was lost, how hard did German soldiers on the Western Front fight? Three squares a day and a place to sleep. They could do the math.

In the Battle for Berlin, the Germans sustained as many as 450,000 killed, wounded or missing, civilians included. Why did they fight so hard? What kind of treatment could they expect and did actually receive from the Soviet invaders? The Soviets sustained 20-25,000 dead in the city and 81,000 for the entire operation. Another 280,000 were reported wounded or sick during the operational period. They had to fight hard on both sides (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Berlin).





Link Posted: 9/23/2005 4:41:40 PM EDT
If all means are justified towards the end of winning a conflict, do you all consider the beheadings in Iraq evil acts in themselves?

If the means are always justified by the end, then you would have to consider the beheadings morally good acts; or at the very least morally neutral.

They are subjectively bad, because the victims were Americans, but if you feel that all means are justified towards the end of winning a conflict, then you are not making sense if you morally condemn the beheadings as objectively evil acts.

I too agree that if an end is good, all means are justified in any struggle.

Link Posted: 9/23/2005 5:21:40 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Zarathustra1:
If all means are justified towards the end of winning a conflict, do you all consider the beheadings in Iraq evil acts in themselves?

If the means are always justified by the end, then you would have to consider the beheadings morally good acts; or at the very least morally neutral.

They are subjectively bad, because the victims were Americans, but if you feel that all means are justified towards the end of winning a conflict, then you are not making sense if you morally condemn the beheadings as objectively evil acts.

I too agree that if an end is good, all means are justified in any struggle.



The beheadings haven't furthered their cause. If anything, it has only hardened the U.S. soldier's resolve. Would you let yourself get caught by the Islamo-fascists? The only thing wrong with the beheadings is that it accomplished nothing.

I certainly don't consider it a 'War Crime'. As I've posted, that term is a myth. If it isn't, then fire-bombing Japanese cities, incinerating men, women and children would be considered a 'War Crime'. Or throwing NVA POW's out of a helicopter to make his Comrades talk would be considered a 'War Crime'. You do what you need to do to get the job done.
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 5:24:43 PM EDT
"Kill all that they send and they won't send any more"
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 5:25:32 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 5:26:43 PM EDT by double_wielder]
Anything so this does not happen to my family.(Beslan)
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 5:27:21 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 5:28:04 PM EDT by N1Rampage]
I'd give the invaders a big hug... with some extra 'love' packed on me...
Link Posted: 9/23/2005 5:37:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/23/2005 5:40:38 PM EDT by drjarhead]
Whatever it takes. Kill 'em all.
The day of the gentlemanly war are long since passed.

When Reagan bombed Kaddafi's palace and killed some of his family the only whining was the fucking socialists. Piss on 'em.

You might consider this guy's thoughts on the matter:

members.cox.net/freestuff/DevilsGuard/

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Top Top