[DonNikmare]

Link to video is in the article...

Article: http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-976420.php



Those words' misuse are begining to make them offensive to me :fire:

Thank God his armor withstood the blow!

[Hawkmoon]

What words? "Army" or "Times"?

[Rebar]

Two words spring to mind:
Summary execution.

[DonNikmare]

The words in the video

[RevDisk]

PFC Schiderer is an Army medic. I'm trying to think of how one could bring more honor to one's profession in the medical field. I'm at a loss. Such acts were the initial intention of the "Good Conduct" medal, which has been boiled down to a hand-out for not getting in trouble, in some units.

[AK-74me]

He is a better man than me I guess because I think I would of just finished him off, while chanting those two words back to him.

[bjbarron]

...the nest was lined with numerous bed mattresses to muffle the sound of a Dragonoff sniper rifle fired through a hole just big enough for the shooter to engage his target of choice...

He gets shot in the chest at 75 yards with a 7.62x59, jumps up, catches his own sniper, and treats the guy's wounds.

These guys are the freakin' best ever!

Video (mms://wm.gannett.speedera.net/wm.gannett/atpco/071505sniper.wmv)

Story (http://www.armytimes.com/content/editorial/pdf/at_sniper071505.pdf)

...and the terrorists filming this seem to sound a little confused by the end of it. What's Arabic for "...I shot him, he fell down, why's he getting up again?"

[boofus]

I find it ironic that the method the enemy sniper was using was EXACTLY the same as the DC Beltway snipers (shooting from a parked vehicle through a small hole). Still think terrorism had nothing to do with the beltway murders?

[P95Carry]

Art's Grammaw censors what I might like to say!

[Taurus 66]

Now the media has new material to feed the American people:

"If this soldier is capable of such a brave and selfless act, why then all of them can fight the war like this. You see? ... cuffs and compassion works if only our boys just give it a chance."

..... or something of a similar tune.

[boofus]

The tactics used by the enemy sniper are eerily reminescent of what Malvo and Muhammed did in the DC sniping murders.

[beerslurpy]

7.62x54 yo.

How did they make that video? By smacking rocks together? Worst slideshow ever.

Except that is how all snipers are supposed to work. You dont poke your gun out the window except in movies. You hide in the back where people can only shoot you by coming directly into your line of sight. And you have a way out the back for when people finally figure out where you are.

[P95Carry]

Dupe thread - I'll try and track down the original.

Got it - OK folks have done a merge to keep this all together. :)

[50 Freak]

That soldier is a better man than me. I would have killed the sniper and buried him wrapped in pig's skin. :fire: :fire: :fire:

[Khaotic]

There's not as much altruism in it as assumed.

Making em dead's easy - dragging them back so that command can interrogate them, raid/boobytrap their weapon caches, and take out the rest of their team, that's a bit harder.

The 'compassion' given to the sniper also helps on a psychological aspect when battalion intel folks try to crack him and score some humint off the guy.

So yes, it's being nice.. but it's also being SMART - dead guys tell you nothing.

-K

[Taurus 66]

So yes, it's being nice.. but it's also being SMART - dead guys tell you nothing.

But if you shoot all of them, what needs to be said?

The war would be over.

[Sergeant Sabre]

The words in the video

For those of you who may not know, the words being repeated in the video are "Allahu Akhbar". These words mean "God is great" in Arabic.

[Dr.Rob]

Shooting through a sniper's loophole is nothing 'new.' Most Bosnian and Serbian snipers used similar tactics... fire through a small shell hole in a wall, set 3-4 feet back from the opening. It narrows the field of view but totally hides the muzzle flash and confuses the sound of the shot.

The 'sniper' vehicle of choice then was an ambulance hiding a 66mm mortar.

[Khaotic]

But if you shoot all of them, what needs to be said?

The trick ain't shootin all of em, it's FINDING em to be shot, and finding, above all, the right ones.

For that you need live BG's to grill.. and good recon.

"Recon is like sex, even when it's bad, it's still nice to get a little.."
My platoon sarge used to say that, and I guess it applies to intel, too.

-K

[Standing Wolf]

Still think terrorism had nothing to do with the beltway murders?

The beltway murders were an exercise in home-grown Islamic terrorist savagry. We treated it like a common crime spree, of course: heaven forbid government should ever give the commoners cause for concern.

[czhen]

Dear forum
I cannot see the video, is there someone with the same trouble?

CZhen

[Edmond]

For those of you who may not know, the words being repeated in the video are "Allahu Akhbar". These words mean "God is great" in Arabic.

I didn't know what he said until I read this but it just didn't sound like it was anything good. :(

[Taurus 66]

For that you need live BG's to grill.. and good recon.

I won't tell anyone if you don't. Nevertheless, peepings will leak back to "Turban" Durban, Hillary "Dillary", "Shroomer" Schumer and alike sicko anti-American, anti-American victory in war politicians ... so your grillin' tactics may be on the backburner for a wee bit longer.

By the way http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/060605_koran_sop.pdf learn now how to properly handle a koran. It will be very popular book (and trendy) within a few short years. We midas well now get prayer rugs and compasses too so we can pray to Allah while facing true east.

[Delmar]

"We midas well now get prayer rugs and compasses too so we can pray to Allah while facing true east."

Is this where I get to say, "In a pig's eye!" ??

[Khaotic]

You mistake me, Taurus..

I dunno where people get the idea that a proper interrogation involves anything resembling violence or torture - in fact, in a very good interrogation, the perp never even *realizes* he's handed over the crown jewels.

Too much bad TV, I guess.

You can get a LOT more information out of someone by psychologically 'cracking' them (and the medical treatment, for example, factors in here) than by trying to pound it out of them, and as a general rule information obtained in the latter fashion is far less reliable.

I also find it *extremely* offensive to watch you flame people who are doing their jobs as anti-american... let me make this perfectly clear to you, not every american agrees with you or your viewpoints, nor do you agree with theirs - you voted for people who represent YOUR interests and goals, other folks voted for people who represent THEIR interests and goals, and those people are *doing their job*, representing the people who elected them.

That IS Americanism at it's best, and if you wanna change that you go convince the people who elected them, instead of offending them and calling them "anti-american"... they did not just walk into that office and sit down, they were elected by a sufficient margin of people to put them there and have to answer to those people.

If I worked for Coca-Cola to make a living, would that make me "Anti-Pepsi" ?
No, it would make me an employee of Coca-Cola who puts it in the vending machines cause THAT IS MY JOB.

You're flaming the wrong people, and flaming isn't gonna do jack diddly except offend the very people who's minds you need to change - you need to go to the constituents and convince THEM if you have a problem with matters, and it might behoove you to be less offensive in your methods.

That's supposedly why THR exists, but I can't see flamage convincing anyone.

It's also not exactly decent behavior to flame a religion, no matter who you're flaming it to - my ancestors fought for the saracens, buddy, defending their homeland from savage bloodthirsty frankish crusaders :scrutiny:
(Yes, I am saying that *very* tongue in cheek, but it's all a matter of viewpoint, ehe?)

Consider this point carefully.. I feel much the same way about YOUR beliefs, as you do about Islam, but I have enough respect an tolerance to accept that each person practices a belief differently, and to not lay judgement against them till I see their conduct, and even then, not to judge all the rest of that belief by the actions of that individual.

Hate is never pretty, and all it's going to do is convince anyone reading this site that gun control is maybe a good idea... somehow I don't think that's why we're here, are we ?

-K

[Taurus 66]

I also find it *extremely* offensive to watch you flame people who are doing their jobs as anti-american.

So?

I'm behind the soldiers 100%, and if they want to interrogate the enemy in the way you speak of, and it's the military's decision to do so, then I support it. They know what's what. I just don't want politicians, especially senators like Durbin (D-IL) (who knows nothing about combat) playing "arm chair general", influencing key military objectives, and placing hundreds (or perhaps thousands) of American troops in harm's way.

they did not just walk into that office and sit down, they were elected by a sufficient margin of people to put them there and have to answer to those people.

Hmmm ...

they were elected by a sufficient margin of people to put them there and have to answer to those people.

:scrutiny:

I feel much the same way about YOUR beliefs, as you do about Islam, but I have enough respect an tolerance to accept that each person practices a belief differently

Is this religious tolerance you refer to? Just how much religious tolerance do you suppose Osama Bin Laden, Muhammad Atta, Abdurahman M. Alamoudi, Ahmad Fadeel al-Nazal al-Khalayleh or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi have for christianity or catholicism? I don't need to be 'forced' into 'respecting' head scarfs, the koran, mosques, or Rama Domma Ding Dong, like this is some diversity lecture you may have fallen for once upon a time. I won't fall for it! If you want to show tolerance, be my guest, but don't force that stuff about tolerance upon me.

I'm now going to drop this issue. It causes too much drifting.

[Khaotic]

If you want to show tolerance, be my guest, but don't force that stuff about tolerance upon me.

I'm now going to drop this issue. It causes too much drifting.

I'll drop it too, with one caveat - if you do not want your belief system ridiculed or mocked, don't go mocking those of others, you cannot demand respect if you do not offer it.

-K

[GunGoBoom]

I'm just confused about which words' use is offensive to Don? :confused:

Also curious as to what kind of body armor stopped a 762x54 - must have been trauma plates.

[AK-74me]

I'm just confused about which words' use is offensive to Don?

I don't know maybe them saying "god is great" after just shooting one of our guys.

[RevDisk]

But if you shoot all of them, what needs to be said?

The war would be over.

Genocide, murder and violating ROE's are all crimes under US Law. If the US Army was committing genocide, the war would only be started.

I remember my oath rather clearly. Support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Violating Constitionally ok laws would not be in agreement with my oath. In addition, my oath requires me to defend the Constitution against ALL enemies. If the US Army wanted to conduct systematic genocide, murder and other violations of US law, all soldiers would be required by their oath to refuse such orders on the basis that they are illegal.

While not a politically correct thought, all soldiers would be required to not only disobey illegal orders, but stop others from committing such illegal orders.

Oh yea. We're supposed to be 'liberating' Iraq. I think you lost track of that point.


I won't tell anyone if you don't. Nevertheless, peepings will leak back to "Turban" Durban, Hillary "Dillary", "Shroomer" Schumer and alike sicko anti-American, anti-American victory in war politicians ... so your grillin' tactics may be on the backburner for a wee bit longer.

Just a minor thing, but I don't believe subtle advocations of murder are exactly in the spirit of THR. Interestingly, all of those politicians were elected according to American rules regarding elections. If they are supposedly "anti-American" as you so claim, that is solely because the people elected them to be so.

Why not convince their voters not to vote for them? Obviously, if said politicians were elected and re-elected, a significant percentage of the voting population agrees with their views.


I'm behind the soldiers 100%, and if they want to interrogate the enemy in the way you speak of, and it's the military's decision to do so, then I support it. They know what's what. I just don't want politicians, especially senators like Durbin (D-IL) (who knows nothing about combat) playing "arm chair general", influencing key military objectives, and placing hundreds (or perhaps thousands) of American troops in harm's way.

If you wish to support the military, that's fine. If the military wishes to violate various laws passes by Congress, that's not fine. It violates the "military obeys civilian leadership" principle. Any member of the military violating an order by Congress would and should go to prison.

Torture and interrogation are often thought to be the same thing. They are not. Torture is the intentional act of inflicting pain or physical harm. It exists independently of any desire to obtain information. Interrogation is an attempt to extracting information.

Read ANY technical manual from any type of military intelligence, or any book written by anyone versed in interrogation. Torture is much more likely to get you the wrong information than the correct information. Torture makes the tortured say anything that they believe will stop the pain. Read accounts of the Salem witch trials or any other detailed account of the Inquisition. The tortured would agree to ANYTHING in order to stop the pain.

The point of torture is to get the accused to admit to wrongdoing regardless of any question of guilt or innocence. In other words, there is no point of obtaining information, just 'confirmation' of pre-conceived accusations. Torturers themselves usually commit torture for rather obvious reasons. More often than not, they simply enjoy it. They need no information, they merely wish to justify their sick behavior.

So... if politican puts soldiers "in harms way" for reasons you agree with, it's justified. If a politician puts soldiers "in harms way" for reasons you disagree with, it's bad? Obviously accuracy of accusations play no part in your scorn. Bush was either proven incorrect or evidence was inconclusive on the many of the accusations he made. Durbin was also was incorrect or evidence was inconclusive on many of the accusations he made. So... What's the difference?


I don't need to be 'forced' into 'respecting' head scarfs, the koran, mosques, or Rama Domma Ding Dong, like this is some diversity lecture you may have fallen for once upon a time. I won't fall for it! If you want to show tolerance, be my guest, but don't force that stuff about tolerance upon me.

No, you don't need to be forced into respecting anything. Then again, no one can be forced to respect you either. It's a two way street. If you show no respect, why should anyone bother to respect your opinions?

[Double Naught Spy]

I find it ironic that the method the enemy sniper was using was EXACTLY the same as the DC Beltway snipers (shooting from a parked vehicle through a small hole). Still think terrorism had nothing to do with the beltway murders?

Well Boofus, the answer is quite simple. You see, the beltway snipers were not shooting any any sort of political, social, or religious agenda in mind. Terrorism consists of acts of violence or threats of violence, usually against non-combatant civilian populations with the intent of causing mental distress such as terror so that said population will pressure their leaders (social, political, or religious) to make some sort of changes in behavior.

The beltway snipers were simply serial murderers, nothing more. Just because they used the same tactic as the sniper in the video is not relevant. It also happens to be a very similar tactic used by many snipers around the world to do their job. Just becasue they use the same tactic does not mean they are terrorists any more than it means they are professional military snipers or homemakers. It is just a tactic.

FYI, the US has been engaged in terroristic activities for a long period of time, only we don't see it that way. We wholesale bombed major cities in various wars with the hopes of demoralizing local populations, hoping that such acts would eventually result in so much stress and complaints that the political powers would give in to the suffering of their people and surrender. The killing of noncombatants in order to bring about social, political, or religious change is terrorism.

Plus, if you take the time to listen to what those opposed to the US in Iraq feel about the situation, they are not engaged in terrorism. They are engaged in an underground battle against an occupying force much like the French in WWII. It all comes down to perspective.

I am just guessing here, but if we were occupied by a Muslim army or any other army from a foreign power, I would have no doubt we would engage in the very same activities and not one of us call ourselves a terrorist.