Really?

[HMFIC]

Thank you SMS and Ridge.

Mugsy, you're right... the Officers and NCO's should have taken care of this but it's not a 100% success rate.

SMS said how I feel pretty well: "Punish, reinforce discipline, and move on instead of getting all faint about it. And for the love of god take their damn cameras away..."

That said... it's not the cause for those who do hate us. They hate us for our ideology, not because of a couple of jarheads made a silly move.


OH... and those civilians who want to badmouth my Marine brothers who put their lives on the line every day for our country... go get yourself one of these first so that you've at least earned the right:

[Broken External Image]

 

[MLRyan]

If you want to do the "they hate us because" game, look at US foreign policy in the region for the past 60 years. As far the civilians badmouthing the Marines, you're right, they should go out and experience it.

 

[inactive]

Wrong Paul is delusional about many things:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2829309/posts

I read the article and I've completely changed my stance. Thanks FreeRepublic.

 

[DirtyDawg]

When diplomacy ends, War begins.”
- Adolf Hitler

Blowback

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldgbOxDX6DE&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PLDB2FB100A8611E24

2002 Ron Paul Predictions

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM&feature=player_embedded

Gun America- 2nd Amendment Voters Should Vote RON PAUL

http://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/2nd-amendment-voters-should-vote-ron-paul/

2nd Amendment Voters Should Vote RON PAUL

by Administrator on January 8, 2012
By Paul Helinski

Ron Paul 2012
http://www.ronpaul2012.com/

As the New Hampshire primary approaches nobody should question who the real 2nd Amendment candidate is. It is Ron Paul. The mainstream media is ignoring Ron Paul as a viable candidate, and many of them have come right out and admitted that they will skip over covering Ron Paul no matter how many votes he gets, but you can’t silence the people forever. I don’t expect that Ron Paul will win my former home state of New Hampshire. But if you plan to vote in a primary this election and you vote for anyone other than Ron Paul, be very clear that you are not voting for a Constitutional America, and you are not voting for 2nd Amendment freedom.

That is why I am just going to vote for Ron Paul, come what may.

Mitt Romney was the governor of the most 2nd Amendment abusive state in the US, Massachusetts. The pro-gun stuff he did while governor was ornamental, not substantive. Mitt Romney never even attempted to repeal Mass statute 501-CMR-7.00, one of the most restrictive and ridiculous pieces of firearm law in the United States of America, one that blatantly violates the 2nd Amendment. While campaigning, Mitt repeatedly said he supported the gun laws of Massachusetts, but that he hadn’t supported the legislation when it was introduced, clearly a back and forth, wishy washy position that meant nothing. When asked about his waffling on the 2nd Amendment directly in a debate currently archived on C-SPAN here, he answered:


“Well, I likewise did not support that legislation… I likewise support the right of law abiding citizens to be able to purchase firearms for hunting purposes and target practice and so forth. We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts. I support them. I won’t chip away at them. I believe they help protect us and provide for our safety, but I want our law abiding citizens likewise to have the right to purchase and use a weapon for hunting and other purposes.” (42:25 minutes into debate)

I won’t chip away at them?? What are you thinking Mitt? The 2nd Amendment isn’t about hunting and target practice. This is a politician in the worst example of what we all hate about politicians. So even if you are not a one issue voter and other things mean more to you than your 2nd Amendment freedom, it doesn’t matter. Mitt licks his finger and sticks it in the air no matter what the issue, and he is just playing to your issue at the moment so you’ll vote for him.

Mitt Romney will say whatever it takes to get elected. Are you really going to vote for this guy? New Hampshire? South Carolina? Florida? Nevada? You know you can’t stand him! Just have faith and vote for Ron Paul! Iowa lost their nerve at the last minute and voted for yet another system politician, Rick Santorum, who has admitted that his 2nd Amendment and other conservative credentials are weak. Don’t lose your nerve America! Stand up for what you know you believe in, and vote for Ron Paul!

Newt Gingrich has a deal killer in his past when it comes to guns. When he was Speaker of the House during the latter half of the Clinton years, he never agreed to support legislation to repeal the Clinton “assault weapons ban.” He even called it a “very reasonable position.” Gun Owners of America have a very good, and short, article on the history of Newt Gingrich and 2nd Amendment freedom. It is called “New Gingrich on Guns – A Mixed Record.” It is well footnoted, and I commend them on putting it together, but I disagree with the title. Giving lip service to the 2nd Amendment doesn’t put points in the plus section of your chart. It puts nothing! Why pretend that this guy is anything but a politician trying to win the next election? Newt sounds **great** in debates and in interviews, but his record when it comes to the 2nd Amendment is shoddy at best.

Ron Paul is a whole other story. Not only does he have an A+ rating from the Gun Owners of America, Ron Paul has repeatedly tried to pass legislation rolling back bad gun legislation, expanding shooting and 2nd Amendment rights, and taking the government out of our freedom in every way that he possibly can. Everything that is wrong about our government Ron Paul has fought against for a generation now, and finally America is beginning to listen.

Even a year ago Ron Paul supporters were labeled kooks. The mainstream media is still trying to label them kooks, but all they want is an America based on the US Constitution. The Federal Government is not supposed to give our tax money to banks and car companies. They aren’t supposed to be in the business of telling us how to eat and how to raise our children, and they certainly aren’t supposed to be able to grab us off the street and imprison us with no trial as long as they want, which they now can. This isn’t the America that our founding fathers envisioned, and it is an America that is now in a hopeless decline.

Ron Paul may have some strong opinions, but in Washington, even if he got in as president they will tie his hands more than anything, and little will change. But another four years of anti-2nd Amendment Obama will be little or no different than 4 years of wishy washy 2nd Amendment Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich, or any of the other career politician flunkies besides Ron Paul. If we stand up for what we believe in NOW, Ron Paul will beat these politicians and at least a sliver of truth will send its ripples through Washington DC. We may get some of our rights back!

Don’t lose your nerve America! Vote Ron Paul or don’t vote at all!

As a side note, because I know the comments and questions are going to come in, I’d like to say that I would have loved to include some things from the NRA in this article, but when I went to the NRA website, there is no mention of the primaries or the candidates. The same thing at the NRA-ILA website, and the same thing at the political PAC website. I am an endowment member of the NRA, but this is the first year I have ever gone this early into an election to see what is what, and I can’t believe the eerie silence from the NRA. As 2nd Amendment voters we all try to stand behind the NRA, because they are the hard charger out there, but in a field so littered with weak 2nd Amendment candidates, you have to wonder what is going on, and, as Ron Paul has surged in Iowa, New Hampshire and across the entire USA, why hasn’t the NRA gotten behind Ron Paul?

Please note that this article is just my opinion and does not reflect our advertisers or {elsewhere} members as a whole. At this point more of you come to {elsewhere} every month than subscribe to all of the gun magazines, including the NRA pubs, combined. Our readership on the {elsewhere} Magazine & Blog has reached over 2 million, and new people are finding the great stuff here every day. It would be irresponsible to not mention something about this primary season, but don’t worry, this is not going to turn into a regular commentary on politics for now. We are primarily here to promote guns, shooting sports and excitement in owning fireamrs and shooting, and that is where our energy is going to stay focused. Thanks as always for being a part of {elsewhere}. And VOTE FOR RON PAUL! -ph@ga

 

[HMFIC]

If you want to do the "they hate us because" game, look at US foreign policy in the region for the past 60 years. As far the civilians badmouthing the Marines, you're right, they should go out and experience it.

I'm not a subsciber to the whole "the world hates us" routine anyway. Yes, there are some that do for sure, but I've actually been around the world and found more that love us than don't.

As far as US foreign policy in the region, it seems to have served the Kuwaitis pretty well...
The Kurds think we're rock stars and rightly so.
Anyone who was under a Taliban thumb seems to think we're mostly OK.
Israel doesn't mind our stink.
Many of the Iraqis who lived in fear of Sunni opression under Saddam are happier.
For some reason, the U.A.E. has increased their standing in the world despite us.
Saudi Arabia is a formal ally of ours.
Last I checked we had no beef with Jordan (they're an ally too).
Turkey is part of NATO for goodness sake.
I've done exercises in Oman... they don't mind us.
Those in Quatar like us too... my uncle and his family spent a year there with Philips and it enjoyed it greatly.

I just call it like it is... the people who do actually dislike us also happen to be the ones who are doing very bad things either to their own countrymen or those around them. I'm not particularly concerned if they hate us.

What is it they say... you can't please all of the people all of the time? Nobody's perfect?

I'm pretty happy with the character of the enemies we've chosen. I'd say the company that we are keeping with the good guys of the world defines us pretty well.

 

[RidgeHunter]

The one thing that is more pathetic than the actual act, is the attitude of too many people here and elsewhere. At least the guys guilty of the act can offer up some kind of excuse. The cavalier attitude of everyone else speaks volumes about the character of our people, and our dwindling redeeming qualities.

What cavalier attitudes are you talking about?

I find the disingenuous shock that the young men we send to to kill people for us - after telling them their entire lives it's the most honorable thing they can do - exhibit behavior while under stress that is not at all unusual for any human being in their position, speaks volumes about the cognitive dissonance inherent in the American public and illustrates just how detached they are from reality.

 

[cjjtulsa]

What cavalier attitudes are you talking about?

"F*ck 'em", "they deserved it", "I'd pee on them too", "I'd do more than pee on them". Those are the caliber of comments of a people that blather on about them being a 3rd world, stone-age people? I get young guys doing some ill-advised stuff in a hellishly stressful environment. I don't get guys at home with a superiority complex, with a mindset that isn't much better than the hand-wipers they're disparaging.

 

[ignerntbend]

"F*ck 'em", "they deserved it", "I'd pee on them too", "I'd do more than pee on them". Those are the caliber of comments of a people that blather on about them being a 3rd world, stone-age people? I get young guys doing some ill-advised stuff in a hellishly stressful environment. I don't get guys at home with a superiority complex, with a mindset that isn't much better than the hand-wipers they're disparaging.

Thank you

 

[RidgeHunter]

"F*ck 'em", "they deserved it", "I'd pee on them too", "I'd do more than pee on them". Those are the caliber of comments of a people that blather on about them being a 3rd world, stone-age people? I get young guys doing some ill-advised stuff in a hellishly stressful environment. I don't get guys with a superiority complex, with a mindset that isn't much better than the hand-wipers they're disparaging.

Again, OSA is full of vets and active duty guys. Many folks here are Marines, or have family and friends who are.

You know my stances on our actions in the middle east. But I don't find a damn thing wrong with military guys portraying the enemy any damn well they want. Whatever it takes to keep them doing what they need to do and get out of there alive and somewhat mentally healthy. It's harder to kill a man you respect and value as a human being than it is to kill a sub-human.

We used to encourage our troops and the American public to dehumanize the enemy, now we still want the enemy just as dead, but we want to make sure we don't tarnish the "hearts and minds" image we are trying to portray. Hearts and minds my ass, we (the U.S.) send them there to shoot hearts and minds, not win them. Then we criticize them for not being civilized enough while killing people.

I simply don't understand what people find shocking about the behavior of the marines, or the reactions from people who likely have a first-person experience with the mental state of a person in their shoes.

I give a lot of leeway to the guys on the ground. I give none to the guys sending them there that have conditioned us to pin the ugliness of war on those guys and not themselves. War is ugly. Don't wanna see it? Stop starting wars. But it's just unbelievable to me that we accept that these guys violently kill people for us, then act incredulous when they show signs of disrespecting those people we sent them to kill. Behavior and actions they take to keep from getting killed, and to stave off a mental breakdown.

 

[DirtyDawg]

Again, OSA is full of vets and active duty guys. Many folks here are Marines, or have family and friends who are.

You know my stances on our actions in the middle east. But I don't find a damn thing wrong with military guys portraying the enemy any damn well they want. Whatever it takes to keep them doing what they need to do and get out of there alive and somewhat mentally healthy. It's harder to kill a man you respect and value as a human being than it is to kill a sub-human.

We used to encourage our troops and the American public to dehumanize the enemy, now we still want the enemy just as dead, but we want to make sure we don't tarnish the "hearts and minds" image we are trying to portray. Hearts and minds my ass, we (the U.S.) send them there to shoot hearts and minds, not win them. Then we criticize them for not being civilized enough while killing people.

I simply don't understand what people find shocking about the behavior of the marines, or the reactions from people who likely have a first-person experience with the mental state of a person in their shoes.

I give a lot of leeway to the guys on the ground. I give none to the guys sending them there that have conditioned us to pin the ugliness of war on those guys and not themselves. War is ugly. Don't wanna see it? Stop starting wars. But it's just unbelievable to me that we accept that these guys violently kill people for us, then act incredulous when they show signs of disrespecting those people we sent them to kill. Behavior and actions they take to keep from getting killed, and to stave off a mental breakdown.

Completely agree! +1000. Don't send our youth to fight unconstitutional wars if you can't stand the reality of battle. The congress should be held responsible for all acts of war, not the soldiers. It is our elected officials that put our soldiers into harm's way. Don't hate the player, hate the game.