Nushif
Member
Sounds like you should be reporting for your SitRep from the Command-in-Chief in the morning, then.
Should Soldiers Today Be Able to Bring Back Weapons?
- Thread starter SharpsDressedMan
- Start date
- Status
Sounds like you should be reporting for your SitRep from the Command-in-Chief in the morning, then.
Vern Humphrey
Member
Maybe you should read your own posts before sending them.
Tell me what is wrong, what problems could be caused by allowing soldiers to take legal weapons as trophies?
Spell it out for us and let us see what your real complaint is.
Vern Humphrey
Member
I've reviewed them.
Post 2 says, "Politically, it can be more problematic today" It's only problematical if we let it be probmatical.
Post 5 discusses a grenade found in a garage. We're not talking about allowing troops to bring live explosives home.
Post 7 says, "Allowing individual soldiers to take trophies of war is questionable when a force is trying, from the very beginning, to win the hearts and minds of the locals" which would include not allowing troops to take pictures, buy things in the local bazzar, and so on.
Post 12 says, "The traditional rights of an individual warrior over the vanquished in single combat have little to do with functioning as a soldier in a modern military," which has nothing to do with the issue -- it doesn't say what's bad about trophnies.
Post 16 says, "Our behavior as professional soldiers, not "warriors," must be beyond reproach. Beyond. It's not only against the NCO creed, the vow Officers take, but also a blemish on our rofession as a whole." What is this "Vow" officers take, and how does allowing troops to take home trophy weapons go against it?
Post 2 says, "Politically, it can be more problematic today" It's only problematical if we let it be probmatical.
Post 5 discusses a grenade found in a garage. We're not talking about allowing troops to bring live explosives home.
Post 7 says, "Allowing individual soldiers to take trophies of war is questionable when a force is trying, from the very beginning, to win the hearts and minds of the locals" which would include not allowing troops to take pictures, buy things in the local bazzar, and so on.
Post 12 says, "The traditional rights of an individual warrior over the vanquished in single combat have little to do with functioning as a soldier in a modern military," which has nothing to do with the issue -- it doesn't say what's bad about trophnies.
Post 16 says, "Our behavior as professional soldiers, not "warriors," must be beyond reproach. Beyond. It's not only against the NCO creed, the vow Officers take, but also a blemish on our rofession as a whole." What is this "Vow" officers take, and how does allowing troops to take home trophy weapons go against it?
Good to see you reviewed those posts Vern. Dont forget Sams too. You know, when you completely dismissed a WW2 Combat Marine because he saw less combat that a Vietnam marine and was 'anectodle'(which you are too)
I will have to say, after re-reading post 16 it could be written better.
By the way, you never answered that part about clarifying what you meant when you asked what my real complaint was.
And this time Vern I am serious. Go argue in circles with someone else. I am done with this thread. Now please smile in internet satisfaction and post that you beat me. Or come up with a real argument other than the 'been there' one.
Have a nice day.
JohnBiltz
Member
You are absolutely correct in this. Tell me this who do you think is going to get those weapons, the guys in the rear with the gear or the guys who actually collected them? My experience is that things don't get issued to the guys out front until every REMF behind them already has one and this begins with the generals and their staff, being part of the problem makes hard for them to have the moral authority to make it stop. Do you think this might cause a bit of resentment?
Ok let's stick a fork in this one.
- Status