U.S Troops fire at a crowd, 10 killed.

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
well, the situation is real not simulated .. that's quite a huge difference .. think of the difference between car driving theory and practice

Well the reason they go through so many simulations is so they do the exact thing in combat. I don't know how many people you know who've been in combat, but everyone I talk to tells me that they hardly think at all and go completely on the instinct they learned in training. For some its the only thing that they can revert to. And trust me on this one, they are not trained to kill innocent civilians.

agreed, marines arent trained to kill innocent civilians, but they are trained to obey orders, right or wrong .. and why is that so ? because the logic behind an order may not be clear to the basic soldier. According to US military sources, the fire the marines answered came from an opposite building roof. They still shot into the crowd. Now as marines dont shoot at unarmed, but obey orders, and as 10-17 civilians have been killed and around 70-100 injured, there must have been an order... The alternative is one of them got nervous and shot into the crowd, the comrades backed up his fire .. but this is impossible, according to what i hear here about the quality and discipline of US marine infantry training.

US Marines are not trained well enough or for long enough.
Yet again they've been shown to be trigger happy.
They really need to get this situation sorted out.
However,
the whole thing seems a waste of time, why liberate people that are going to spit at you and throw stones at you.
I wish there was no oil on the whole damn earth.

Look, fire against disarmed ppl is just a possibility for animals, what is someone gonna do when u have a MA41 or M16, knifes and your job is to do that???
Against starving, people? Suffering a war and claiming their rightS??

The same happend in Oakland with people that are not agreeing with the american goverment...

Can someone tell me what is the rational difference?

In irak and oakland they were a lot of people that disagrees with massacre brutal force and irrational actions, and they both get shotted, what a way to libertate or respect people ha?

Come on get real, there are thousands of people that are not shown in any picture or video, and no one notes that, those are also paying the animality done from those #ed up elites...

If as an american citizen, you complaint because u aren�t agree with it, they shot at you, can someone tell me if that is the freedom or democracy that they wanna
put in irak?

What happend in oakland days ago...

www.newsfrombabylon.com...


There u have your militars, police and security agenst against their own people just to keep them shut....

What happend in oakland days ago...

www.newsfrombabylon.com...


There u have your militars, police and security agenst against their own people just to keep them shut....

Can someone interpret?

Hey Gaz, do you know if they are going to use that hardening foam?

Mokuhadzushi
as I recall the Corps are some of the first to use non-deadly riot control measures. heres a list of links the next time someone say our Jarheads are out of control, because on the contrary they have exactly whats needed.

search.cometsystems.com...

[Edited on 17-4-2003 by ADVISOR]

Mokuhadzushi
but they are trained to obey orders, right or wrong

No, they're not. They are trained to obey orders and use common sense. If your commander says to shoot at a crowd of unarmed civilians, you don't follow that order. It doesn't do their side any good to kill civilians. It only makes them look worse than they already do.

Marines are trained to react quickly in stressful situations using common sense. They are not trained to kill people,(though that may be what they end up doing) because to train for that, you would have to do it in practice.

Marines are trained well. They are thoroughly inspected physically and mentally before they even swear in for service. (I know, I had to go through the same process, MEPS, it's hell)

Your view on marines is different because you have been taught to dislike America for a long time. Brainwashing...

*edit- so appalled I couldn't type.

[Edited on 17-4-2003 by joehayner]

Here is the key sentence of that article...

"Some 300 anti-war protesters were at the entrance to the American Presidents Line pier, barring the way. "

This is where it crossed the line from protest, to criminal behavior, in barring the way, and THIS is why they were fired upon (with non-lethal weapons), not because they were protesting...but because they were breaking the law, and refused to cease.

I'm not sure why it needs to keep being said, but protesting is fine, it's when it impedes the rights of others, that it then becomes criminal. In this case, they were interfering with operations of war, loading supplies on ships to troops, and thus, legally speaking, committed treason. Maybe they should be thankful they're home nursing a few bruises, instead of sharing a cell right now....and next time, just hold up signs and chant, instead of keeping others from doing their jobs...

Protesting can become unlawful when other's rights are substantially impeded (the question is when does that happen...), but tear gas and rubber bullets are already a severe form of physical punishment, as is prophylactic detention (remember the mass arrestations in SF f.ex.) The police can be called in to stop violent behaviour, but it is not their job to decide over a form of punishment, if no looting or violence is taking place. This is a consequence of the necessary traditional separation of powers in a democracy. I'd like to point out that it is therefore criminal, to use the word you brought in, for the police to use violence against peaceful protestors. But that's perhaps my european understanding of law that doesnt fit US-conservative mob&lynching type justice beliefs.

Originally posted by Mokuhadzushi
Protesting can become unlawful when other's rights are substantially impeded (the question is when does that happen...), but tear gas and rubber bullets are already a severe form of physical punishment, as is prophylactic detention (remember the mass arrestations in SF f.ex.) The police can be called in to stop violent behaviour, but it is not their job to decide over a form of punishment, if no looting or violence is taking place. This is a consequence of the necessary traditional separation of powers in a democracy. I'd like to point out that it is therefore criminal, to use the word you brought in, for the police to use violence against peaceful protestors. But that's perhaps my european understanding of law that doesnt fit US-conservative mob&lynching type justice beliefs.

You accuse again. "US-conservative mob&lynching type justice beliefs". Not a very justified statment.

Police do not choose a form of punishment. They try to put things back in order. The order that was disrupted by protesors.

It is criminal for violence to be used against 'peaceful' protestors. Once they start breaking the law, no matter now nice they are about it, they have become a threat to the well being of others.

There's nothing wrong with protesting, just follow the rules. That way, nobody gets hurt.

Just go to the end of your thought ... In fact you are saying : since the protestors are breaking the law, every means is justified to restablish law. That is not what is known as "the rule of law" in which even the President, Governement, legistaors, and the police have to abide by laws, and have to maintain proportionality. Tear gas and rubber bullets against kids blocking a crossroads is, in comparison, extreme violence.

Someone who was there at the People's Republic of Oakland protest said that the firing of rubber bullets or bean bags was in response to attacks by protestors with stones, bottles and other projectiles on mounted police when told they were trespassing. At least one hourse required medical attention from an object thrown(probably by someone in PETA). He wasn't sure about the officer who was riding it. No, I don't have a link. This was a SW radio broadcast. Can't say that its true and can't by virtual reality, link you to the actual scene so I guess its as good as the rest of the stuff posted as facts. I believe the person actually interviewed was telling the story he had heard from an officer involved. I think he , himself was a policeman in CA. but not in Oakland. I just didn't want to with hold half the info.

Originally posted by joehayner
You accuse again. "US-conservative mob&lynching type justice beliefs". Not a very justified statment.

Police do not choose a form of punishment. They try to put things back in order. The order that was disrupted by protesors.

It is criminal for violence to be used against 'peaceful' protestors. Once they start breaking the law, no matter now nice they are about it, they have become a threat to the well being of others.

There's nothing wrong with protesting, just follow the rules. That way, nobody gets hurt.

Well i believe then that u agree with what u have in your country, the law, the system, and the elite game so hypocrite and so sad, but if u still think that saying something rational and try to do something instead of being behind a line of the police or the marines...
Means "Shut up if u don't like it, and if u try something prepare to get hurt"
Cant u tell me mr. good citizen what is the protest for?
If doesn't matter that ppl is showing their feelings and opinions ,and those are being not listened...
What then? u want atrocity? u like to be on the side of the goverment that is just doing what is planned? that is not good not even for the 95% of the rest of the world??
I really don't understand u...

WHen you have a massive crowd of people, you cannot just kindly ask them to leave. It just won't happen. And even a crowd of people with the best intent can turn deadly when in great numbers. The police are greatly out numbered and have to be carful to protect themselves as their lives are at great risk when dealing with a large crowd. If they start arresting a couple people, the rest of the crowd can turn on them and they put themselves and others at risk. Now it's unfortunate that things went down the way they did, but it's simply not a black and white issue. It's a very dangerous scenario, not an issue of tree hugging peace hippies against violent cops.