To whatever troops are in that area, the hostile intent is what they perceive. If they see armed personnel, and the theater EOF SOPs (escalation of force) and ROEs (rules of engagement) count this as PID (positive ID), then the soldier attacks and kills. It's much easier for us, in enlarged video players, not in vibrating helicopters, not worrying about getting shot down, to second guess them.
Those weren't AP round, they were HEDP (high explosive, dual purpose). They are the prescribed armament for troop targets. Shooting innocent people is bad, you crying about the caliber and type is just hyperbolic rhetoric on your part.
PID when I was in Ramadi included military-aged males (MAM's) carying weapons. If 2 MAM's are carrying weapons, they are hostile. If 13 people choose to accompany them, as spotters, cheerleaders, human-shields, they are hostile too. You do realize that a firearm is not necessary to qualify as hostile, right? A MAM with a shovel on the side of a road is PID in some theaters. Observing a FOB with binos, a commo device, OR a camera is PID in some theaters.
A van, coming to transport hostiles, is a hostile. If the hostile or transport wanted to proclaim himself "hors de combat", (white flag, red crescent, etc.) then they should have. Being injured does NOT render a combatant "hors de combat".
Between 2.5 wars, a few major natural disasters, an economic mess, a heaping helping of social programs and agriculture subsidies, and the US's loss of the world tech leadership position....we just couldn't seem to find the time.
A vehicle comes to the aid of an enemy force, that vehicle is not afforded protections by the laws of land warfare, the vehicle is now part of the enemy force and should be engaged.
The pilots probably didn't see the kids in the van, and it's really sad they were hit. But who takes their kids into such position?
And you don't have to be armed to be a combatant. You just have to exhibit hostile intent or hostile action. Troop transports are legit, just like a mini-van.
You know once in Ramadi, I was about to fire my 7th 5.56MM round at a group of men (825 meters away) digging on the side of a road when the road became flooded with children. I had never before nor since witnessed any mass of children on this particular road....but there they were, blocking my shots. The diggers left (with their casualty)...and the kids were gone. Weird coincidence. But we can't NOT shoot because there might be kids there....just stop shooting if you see them.
You can still find old Nike sites around Oahu. They are overgrown with vegetation and you hardly know you are in one until you notice a bunker door or a series of berms.
I've used Composition C4 many of times in my Army career. I know first hand that you can drop, bump, hammer, shoot, and light on fire an M112 block of C4 without detonation.
To set off C4, you need a supersonic shockwave and a lot of heat at the same time. About the explosive power in a double overhand knot of 30-grain det cord, or an m6 or m7 blasting cap.
the post-modern friends-not-parents coddling their cry-ass kid, videoing the back seat while driving, misguided hippie attempts to fight gender roles.... the 3 kids look like a diversity poster from a Puget Sound-area charter school.
that's the kind of communism the US should be turning it's back on. next: access to affordable, high-quality popcorn for all people will be a "human right".
Whoa.... 9/11 happened after 8 years of Clinton glad-handing the world and we were all nice.
WTC1 USS Cole Kenyan Embassy Tanzanian Embassy Involvement in Somalia vs. UN forces Yemen attempt
All done during the "peace dividend" and happy years of Clinton. These guys wanted a fight before "me" or "people like me" were in the picture. Besides the fact they want to establish a global Islamic caliphate....this has nothing to do with resource security. They weren't defending their resources from greedy American hands....but i'm sure that version gets a lot of play with "you" and "people like you".
And unrelated to 9/11: I sincerely doubt you'd enjoy life much in a US without oil. There'd be no slashdot. Or internets.
If nations A and B are locked in a balance-of-power struggle, and nation B has all the oil, what will happen to nation A?
Don't fool yourself. Energy security is an existential concern. Even countries like Germany with advanced wind and solar industries need oil: tanks don't run on green energy. You don't build APCs and Jets with renewable resources.
If you are advocating being the little sweetheart and abstaining from resource-securing activities, remember that Russia and China will not.
Oil, whether you like it or not, is currently as necessary to a modern nation as oxygen is. The side without it will die.
ahh, the ng pipeline angle. i recognized your fowl stench when i logged in.
We invaded Afghanistan for 9/11. No crazy undercover story, no hidden agenda. If we got Afghanistan to be an ally state (strategically located), then great.
We invaded Iraq for the balance-of-power game. We don't get oil revenue, and never asked for it. Besides oil is priced as a commodity and supply-controlled by organizations like OPEC....we don't any say in that.
You are right about Saudi Arabia though, but for the wrong reason: They fall somewhere geo-politically on our side of the balance-of-power scale.
You have a valid point about "pointless consumption", but resources are resources never the less.
Parts of everyone's families have died in someones "pointless" war.
If making sure my country has resources makes me a dick, that's fine. If making sure my country stays above the above the mean in the balance-of-power game, that's great by me. There's only 3 kinds of people....
So you are think about Afghans coming the America and grabbing a hand full of dicks, huh? To each there own.
omg, stfu. the vast energy resources of Afghanistan?
this is the most ridiculous and unsubstantiated claim I've heard on the topic. if you are going to suggest that some natural gas pipeline is the reason then you are doubly retarded.
Even Iraq was never about oil, but at least that would make sense.
Iraq was about spreading western influence, creating a semi-moderate, western-aligned country on Irans border with access to the Arabian Gulf. It was part of the balance-of-power-2.0 game. Was it a bad idea? Yeah, I'll go for that. In principle though, if we were playing Risk, it would be fine.
While we are on the topic, what exactly is wrong with a war for oil? I know your going to cry-ass in your usual leftist fashion about big corporations and stuff....but is energy not A NECESSITY for a modern nation? If the US had NO resources, and the Soviets had them all, what would become of the US, for example? Resources like this are as important as oxygen to a nation. Would you find a "war for oxygen" to be so distasteful?
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, it's called jQuerify.
To whatever troops are in that area, the hostile intent is what they perceive. If they see armed personnel, and the theater EOF SOPs (escalation of force) and ROEs (rules of engagement) count this as PID (positive ID), then the soldier attacks and kills. It's much easier for us, in enlarged video players, not in vibrating helicopters, not worrying about getting shot down, to second guess them.
Those weren't AP round, they were HEDP (high explosive, dual purpose). They are the prescribed armament for troop targets. Shooting innocent people is bad, you crying about the caliber and type is just hyperbolic rhetoric on your part.
PID when I was in Ramadi included military-aged males (MAM's) carying weapons. If 2 MAM's are carrying weapons, they are hostile. If 13 people choose to accompany them, as spotters, cheerleaders, human-shields, they are hostile too. You do realize that a firearm is not necessary to qualify as hostile, right? A MAM with a shovel on the side of a road is PID in some theaters. Observing a FOB with binos, a commo device, OR a camera is PID in some theaters.
A van, coming to transport hostiles, is a hostile. If the hostile or transport wanted to proclaim himself "hors de combat", (white flag, red crescent, etc.) then they should have. Being injured does NOT render a combatant "hors de combat".
Between 2.5 wars, a few major natural disasters, an economic mess, a heaping helping of social programs and agriculture subsidies, and the US's loss of the world tech leadership position....we just couldn't seem to find the time.
Busy and Lazy can have the same effect.
A vehicle comes to the aid of an enemy force, that vehicle is not afforded protections by the laws of land warfare, the vehicle is now part of the enemy force and should be engaged.
The pilots probably didn't see the kids in the van, and it's really sad they were hit. But who takes their kids into such position?
And you don't have to be armed to be a combatant. You just have to exhibit hostile intent or hostile action. Troop transports are legit, just like a mini-van.
You know once in Ramadi, I was about to fire my 7th 5.56MM round at a group of men (825 meters away) digging on the side of a road when the road became flooded with children. I had never before nor since witnessed any mass of children on this particular road....but there they were, blocking my shots. The diggers left (with their casualty)...and the kids were gone. Weird coincidence. But we can't NOT shoot because there might be kids there....just stop shooting if you see them.
there were armed insurgents... sorry if hanging out with them got you killed.
sad fucking face.
and some of you people really don't know how war is done...all aghast that an apache can engage personnel.
Perhaps it should be pointed out: not all at the same time.
But there's a reason Comp B and C4 are used in place of Commercial Dynamite in military settings.
You can still find old Nike sites around Oahu. They are overgrown with vegetation and you hardly know you are in one until you notice a bunker door or a series of berms.
I've used Composition C4 many of times in my Army career. I know first hand that you can drop, bump, hammer, shoot, and light on fire an M112 block of C4 without detonation.
To set off C4, you need a supersonic shockwave and a lot of heat at the same time. About the explosive power in a double overhand knot of 30-grain det cord, or an m6 or m7 blasting cap.
if the laser was intense enough to be visible on the ground in the day, how intense would it be at 40,000 feet? would we be frying pilots eyeballs?
disregarding the impossibility of generating that much energy in space. and the lack of Pink Floyd to go with the laser light show.
I need a grammar nazi and a punctuation pedant on isle 4.
the post-modern friends-not-parents coddling their cry-ass kid, videoing the back seat while driving, misguided hippie attempts to fight gender roles.... the 3 kids look like a diversity poster from a Puget Sound-area charter school.
Topeka Wave Wave.
I'm sure it will be just like The Wave .
that's the kind of communism the US should be turning it's back on. next: access to affordable, high-quality popcorn for all people will be a "human right".
Whoa.... 9/11 happened after 8 years of Clinton glad-handing the world and we were all nice.
WTC1
USS Cole
Kenyan Embassy
Tanzanian Embassy
Involvement in Somalia vs. UN forces
Yemen attempt
All done during the "peace dividend" and happy years of Clinton. These guys wanted a fight before "me" or "people like me" were in the picture. Besides the fact they want to establish a global Islamic caliphate....this has nothing to do with resource security. They weren't defending their resources from greedy American hands....but i'm sure that version gets a lot of play with "you" and "people like you".
And unrelated to 9/11: I sincerely doubt you'd enjoy life much in a US without oil. There'd be no slashdot. Or internets.
If nations A and B are locked in a balance-of-power struggle, and nation B has all the oil, what will happen to nation A?
Don't fool yourself. Energy security is an existential concern. Even countries like Germany with advanced wind and solar industries need oil: tanks don't run on green energy. You don't build APCs and Jets with renewable resources.
If you are advocating being the little sweetheart and abstaining from resource-securing activities, remember that Russia and China will not.
Oil, whether you like it or not, is currently as necessary to a modern nation as oxygen is. The side without it will die.
You can watch "Passion of The Christ" and the vest supposedly simulates stigmata.
And what about a war for oxygen?
ahh, the ng pipeline angle. i recognized your fowl stench when i logged in.
We invaded Afghanistan for 9/11. No crazy undercover story, no hidden agenda. If we got Afghanistan to be an ally state (strategically located), then great.
We invaded Iraq for the balance-of-power game. We don't get oil revenue, and never asked for it. Besides oil is priced as a commodity and supply-controlled by organizations like OPEC....we don't any say in that.
You are right about Saudi Arabia though, but for the wrong reason: They fall somewhere geo-politically on our side of the balance-of-power scale.
You have a valid point about "pointless consumption", but resources are resources never the less.
Parts of everyone's families have died in someones "pointless" war.
If making sure my country has resources makes me a dick, that's fine. If making sure my country stays above the above the mean in the balance-of-power game, that's great by me. There's only 3 kinds of people....
So you are think about Afghans coming the America and grabbing a hand full of dicks, huh? To each there own.
omg, stfu. the vast energy resources of Afghanistan?
this is the most ridiculous and unsubstantiated claim I've heard on the topic. if you are going to suggest that some natural gas pipeline is the reason then you are doubly retarded.
Even Iraq was never about oil, but at least that would make sense.
Iraq was about spreading western influence, creating a semi-moderate, western-aligned country on Irans border with access to the Arabian Gulf. It was part of the balance-of-power-2.0 game. Was it a bad idea? Yeah, I'll go for that. In principle though, if we were playing Risk, it would be fine.
While we are on the topic, what exactly is wrong with a war for oil? I know your going to cry-ass in your usual leftist fashion about big corporations and stuff....but is energy not A NECESSITY for a modern nation? If the US had NO resources, and the Soviets had them all, what would become of the US, for example? Resources like this are as important as oxygen to a nation. Would you find a "war for oxygen" to be so distasteful?
First they came for the sexually-active, but I didn't speak up because I'm a nerd.
You should have explained that "Jiu-Do" is the "Gentle Way" and Kano would have been very displeased with his actions.
Then you could have pulled a saeio-nagi throw, follow up with a sit into straight arm bar to break his elbow. But nice job breaking his nose.
upgrading to the 12-core Opteron chip from his current quad-core chips will allow him to cut the number of servers — and his software licensing fees.
Really? You mean, as computers get faster you *might* need fewer of them?
With the advent of the T1, you didn't need 24 DS0 lines, which saved me money on my telecom fees!
I would have thought the real-estate market downturn saved him a bundle on licensing.
Or buy one of the many solutions already available....for about the cost of 1 developer for 1 year.