Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/22/2002 12:03:55 PM EDT
In the scene where the young boy tries to shoot the Ranger and accidently kills his father/brother/friend, would you have shot him?
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 12:05:13 PM EDT
I think one would have to be there to answer that.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 12:06:49 PM EDT
would have at least disarmed him and maybe scared the hell out of him but shooting him probably not. Keving67
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 12:59:10 PM EDT
Very good point Major-Murphy.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 1:28:40 PM EDT
Well, he WAS an active combative...
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 1:34:13 PM EDT
Nope. Would have taken his and the dead guy's AR though. Even though the kid was crying, he could have picked up either weapon and continued to shoot at U.S. troops. Then again, the Ranger was in a bit of a hurry.....
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 1:40:58 PM EDT
You hold a weapon, you are a combatant, in much of the world, boys his age are soldiers, is Annon doing anything about it? THe Ranger would have shot him, then realized it was a boy....., he wouyld have been the one crying. But as the Warlord's man said...killing is negociating
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 1:44:09 PM EDT
W/O having seen the movie, my answer would be: "Gun in hand is a gun in use. Deal with the threat accordingly."
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 2:13:50 PM EDT
My first inclination is yes he would be shot. However the Major is correct in that you would have to be there. I would like to think not but that would not be an entirely truthful statement.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 2:26:50 PM EDT
I would have wasted him.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 2:39:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/22/2002 2:40:44 PM EDT by gijohnny223]
Originally Posted By JIMBEAM: In the scene where the young boy tries to shoot the Ranger and accidently kills his father/brother/friend, would you have shot him?
View Quote
[thinking]Ask your self this. Was he going to shoot you? If I am there under those conditions. If it moves and it is not ours it goes down. PERIOD!!!![kill] Ask yourself this if a 16 year old breaks into your house and threatens you. What do you do. Easy youprotect yourself up to and including shooting him.[soapbox]
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 2:57:12 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Coz_45-age-caliber: Nope. Would have taken his and the dead guy's AR though. Even though the kid was crying, he could have picked up either weapon and continued to shoot at U.S. troops. Then again, the Ranger was in a bit of a hurry.....
View Quote
I am sure you mean AK..
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 8:53:50 PM EDT
I wouldn't be proud of it but I think I might have had to. logic says that this individual has a weapon and has just attmepted to kill me with it. consequentally he killed a loved one instead but he did try. however as with much else in life this is easier said than done. horrid as it is you do what you have to do to survive. even if it means killing wemon and children. sounds cold I know but war is a cold affair.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 9:34:09 PM EDT
I would not knowingly shoot him in the back while he is weeping over the other person and would continue on, keeping one eye on him in case he tries something as I'm moving away. Francisco
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 11:14:59 PM EDT
If it were me I would have shot the kid no hesitation period. First off the kid had picked up arms and became a combatint in the first place so just because he had someone he oviously cared about was shot dont mean shit.War is hell and that is the consiquences of war. Would it have been a sad thing to shoot that kid? Of course it would if you were looking at the war situation with american culture belief systems. But in war who's rules are you going to play buy, Just like Hoot said before they went out on the mission in the first place "Once that first bullet goes past your head politics and all that shit goe right out the window". that kid would have shot the ranger without hesitation. Just because at that time of engagement the kid was unarmed does not mean that in a little bit of time that one kid could not pick up his weapon and either reingage in the battle or go out and try to kill rangers for the revenge of the loss of a loved one. So all that said I would have shot that kid on the spot and let him lie right next to his loved one and die right there. War is War and it sucks but that is the way that it is. We will always have wars on the face of this earth it is human nature,age and your gender dont make a bit of difference in war.
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 11:27:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 11:33:06 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/22/2002 11:34:38 PM EDT by jtw2]
It wouldn't even enter my mind to NOT shoot the little bastard! You hunt me and I WILL kill you! How old you are means nothing to me. NEVER leave a flank unprotected!
Link Posted: 1/22/2002 11:47:31 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Francisco_dAnconia: I would not knowingly shoot him in the back while he is weeping over the other person and would continue on, keeping one eye on him in case he tries something as I'm moving away. Francisco
View Quote
That sounds as good as communism in theory, but in reality, especially in the reality those rangers were living with at the time, it's unrealistic. The guy was alone in a hostile city with thousands of native men, women and children crawling out of every orifice looking to ventilate him if he screwed up even the slightest bit. He lucked out by slipping in the doorway, which saved his ass, but that kid would just as happily blasted him if he hadn't. Once that kid got over his initial grief, you can bet he'd get back to his rifle, only now he's pissed that the Ranger 'made' him shoot his Pop. And he know's where you are, and which way you were going. I can't say what I'd have done in that situation, but if the guy'd shot the kid, I'd have understood. Hell, maybe he could'a just whopped him over the head with the butt of his rifle and taken him out of the fight for the day... but who's to say? I hate to admit it, but I think I'd have shot him and not worried as much about looking over my shoulder.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 12:20:31 AM EDT
I'm just glad someone finally set the record straight on this mission. I have gotten into fist fights with people over this. After it happened in 93' there were a lot of people walking around saying the Rangers and Delta got their asses kicked by the Somalis. The media at the time was making it sound that way as well. I was very skeptical about this movie when I heard it was coming out, but once I watched the "Behind the scenes" story of the making of the movie I knew it would set the record straight. As far as the boy/shooting goes, I don't think anyone would have blamed the guy for drilling him. I think it is more of a personal/moral decision up to the person who was going to pull the trigger. Personally I would have had a hard time shooting him, I mean that is something that would haunt you 6 month later while you laid in bed at night. If he would have been pointing a weapon at me that is a different story, but he had shouldered his weapon and had his back turned.... I couldn't do that to a grown man. Would the kid get up later and take a shot at you? Damn right he would, but put a bullet in him then, not when his back is turned. [50]
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 8:40:58 AM EDT
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 8:48:31 AM EDT
Try this one. When the Delta trooper got to Durants crash site after Shugart and Gordon were dead he found Sammies looting the wreck. Would you have shot them?
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 9:03:58 AM EDT
Seems this incident may be more Hollywood fabrication. I haven't read the book to see if it was an actually incident reported by one of the Rangers to the author. I know they changed many other true facts such as the guy missing the rope as just arriving the day before or the LtCol leading the convoy.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 9:19:55 AM EDT
Shot him. He shot his father/friend because you slipped coming out the door. Had you not slipped it would have been you in the body bag and not the other guy.
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 9:26:55 AM EDT
If it's wrong to shoot a kid with a gun, then does that mean that all those soldiers who were killed by 'kids with guns' get to live again? Hmm, I thought not! If he has a weapon in [u]that[/u] warzone, he has already made up his mind to use it. If not on you, then on the next US soldier he encounters! Didn't we learn [u]anything[/u] from the stupid release of 'Steamboat Willie' in [i]Saving Private Ryan[/i]? Eric The(DeadSoldiersSeldomKillYourFriends)Hun[>]:)]
Link Posted: 1/23/2002 7:18:06 PM EDT
Top Top