It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: American Citizen Tortured on American Soil by Navy Police

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Intrepid
Yes and yes. Those men in Iraq aren't defending me, they're defending what others in this society preach. I don't want them there. I don't need them there. You may want them there, and you may need them there, and if you pay for it, and support it, and accept whatever consequences may arise from that decision, you're certainly entitled to do so.


Dude, I'm Canadian. I have NO ownership of this matter. My opinion though, is that they shouldn't be there. Different reasons from yours I would think though.


The vast majority of modern war-fighters aren't warriors. They're soldiers. They receive half a years worth of training, are issued a weapon and a uniform, and are released on the enemy. Warriors spend their whole lives training for battle. These children dying now, in Iraq and elsewhere, are for the most part just mobile weapons platforms with a low survival instinct/duty ratio.


Do you know anything about the millitary? There training is ongoing from enlistment to retirement.


The age of the warrior is long dead. There are a few survivors, but by and large they are extinct.


Again, I believe you know nothing about the millitary. Put them aside and see what happens. I mean in reality, not what you would hope would happen.


Those you call warriors, do they write literature? Play the flute? Pursue excellence in diplomacy, linguistics, and art? Do these men you call warriors devote equal time to honing their martial and social prowess? No. They don't.


No, I call them artist. They are NOT warriors, they have as much value none the less.



You insult warriors by confusing them with glorified, gun-toting ashigaru.


No, it was you that called them such.




posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 02:21 PM
link   
Ooops, never mind. Missed a paragraph.

[edit on 4/30/2005 by eaglewingz]



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 02:32 PM
link   


Don't be one of those keyboard "warriors" that think they can do just fine without the real warriors.


This sounded like you were calling these modern soldiers warriors. If that wasn't what you meant, I missed it.

And since you brought it up (tagging along with the assumption we differ) why don't you want soldiers there?



No, I call them artist. They are NOT warriors, they have as much value none the less.


Then I would say we're working off different definitions. I believe warriors must master the social disciplines as well as the martial. If you're interested in how I perceive warriors, indeed how taoists perceive warriors, I could start a thread to that effect.

As far as ongoing training, that's fine and good but it doesn't compare to a life spent in the pursuit of perfection, it's more like school or homework. Many members of the armed forces train quite a bit, no doubt. Some advance into Special forces and become much more reliable and professional in their skills. And since the retirement age was pushed back, more and more soldiers in service are veterans, so I concede your overall point. However, my point was that soldiers are given six months of training before being sent into combat, after that, there is surely much to learn, if they survive long enough to learn it.

These men have a place in combat, they always have. But they must be led by warriors, otherwise they are little more than a savage tide released on the enemy. That's fine and all, except when the tide comes home to roost.

As far as getting rid of the soldiers, I said nothing to that effect. If they can't behave, they should be kept somewhere safe, so their fellow citizens don't have to suffer under them. Like an island. Hence that comment. When we need their services, we'll pick them up, give them a shave, and ship them to the war zone. Of course, if they act like responsible citizens, they deserve all our trust and acceptance, indeed they deserve more because they risked their lives in defense of society. It's just the ones who don't that shouldn't be allowed to run rampant.

And I'll tell anyone who asks, I've never served in the military. If you think that precludes me from passing judgement on what makes a warrior, I disagree. I've met a few warriors, and they contrasted quite starkly to the soldiers I've known. My family has a long tradition of service, in both the UK and the US. I've dined with soldiers and warriors both. I know the difference.

I'm not one of these people who screams "baby killer", but neither am I a man who stands up for the armed forces no matter what they've done. I judge individuals on their merits, their actions, and their words. I give everyone I meet the same respect initially. My experiences with American servicemen leave much to be desired.

I also think spirtuality is a huge component of what makes warriors special. And I'm not talking about pre-packaged control mechanisms shipped out as faith. I'm talking about real, honest dedication to self understanding and spiritual fulfillment.

And do you have any thoughts on the incident? Was the headline innapropriate as was said earlier? Do you buy the man's story? Other comments?


[edit on 30-4-2005 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   
Let's review the facts from the Navy's side. A car without base stickers approaches the gate at a high rate of speed. Instead of allowing the Navy to do their work relative to his highly threatening vehicular behavior, he becomes combative and verbally abusive. The Navy then restrains the individual.

Poor guy. Abducted and tortured by those mean old sailors. I think this submission is a textbook case of why we have a bias button.



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:20 PM
link   
Sorry for the late reply, I'm working.


Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Then I would say we're working off different definitions. I believe warriors must master the social disciplines as well as the martial. If you're interested in how I perceive warriors, indeed how taoists perceive warriors, I could start a thread to that effect.


Well, I'll take the dictionary's definition rather some esotaric definition.

Main Entry: war·rior
Pronunciation: 'wor-y&r, 'wor-E-&r, 'wär-E- also 'wär-y&r
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English werriour, from Old North French werreieur, from werreier to make war, from werre war -- more at WAR
: a man engaged or experienced in warfare; broadly

Engaged or experienced in warfare. So I guess that applies then.



And do you have any thoughts on the incident? Was the headline innapropriate as was said earlier? Do you buy the man's story? Other comments?


No, I was debating your attitude towards the millitary. Which I won't any longer as your opinion of them is so low that I don't think you capable of giving them the respect they deserve.


And since you brought it up (tagging along with the assumption we differ) why don't you want soldiers there?


If you really want to know this I will u2u the answer to you. I don't want to derail this thread further.



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 04:42 PM
link   
Grady
You, like so many before you have completely misread the story to fit your own agenda. He did not become verbally abusive until he was detained and ushered into the holding cell without explanation. This story has not been disputed by either the officers, or their lawyer(s).

People, we're working with the little information we have available. If the information changes in the future, then our opinions will necessarily change. Until then, please don't rewrite the facts just because you don't like them.

Intrepid
Please do U2U me on that subject.

And FYI, like I stated in my other post, I give people respect without hesitation, and I'll continue to do so until an individual proves incapable of reciprocating that respect. There is no other viable way to go about the process of social interaction. If you go around demanding respect but not giving it in return, you're a tyrant. If you give respect and don't demand it in return, you're a slave. This has been the law of nature since the days of the cavemen.

If we ever meet, you'll be able to discern my character for yourself. Till then, take my word on it or don't, as you will.



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:27 PM
link   
I read the story. I still maintain that given the circumstances his cause would have been better served if he had conducted himself in a more creditable fashion. He brought it on himself. There's an Air Force Base here and I guarantee you if I, or anyone else, did what he did, we would be detained. If we became combative and verbally abusive, we would be restrained, and rightfully so.

In my own experience, when dealing with law enforcement, courtesy and restraint are always the keys to a favorable outcome.

[edit on 05/4/30 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Grady, I think what Wyrde is saying is that, at first, he was detained. After being detained, he started becoming upset.



posted on Apr, 30 2005 @ 05:38 PM
link   
Grady
I agree with you in terms of getting results, it's always best to be polite, respectful, and pleasant in dealings with ANYONE, not just authority figures. More flies with honey...

Anyway, the story is not that long, but it does appear to indicate that he stopped before the gate and tried to tell the officers there what had happened. Whether or not that's the way it happened, I don't know.

Hopefully the minute-by-minute will come out at trial.

I also agree that if I were stationed at the base gate, and some guy came speeding up and started screaming at me, he'd experience the worst elements of my personality. If that's what happened, he did indeed get what was coming to him.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join