It's sort of a worst case training manual. Actually, it's not even a training manual. It's an online correspondence course that soldiers take when
they need promotion points!
I've held back in commenting on this thread because I know anything I say will mostly fall on deaf, or angry ears.
Thanks partly to Alex Jones for that.
One needs only to read on in this course to see what sort of care would be taken in these scenarios. I know some of you see "Warning shots will
not be fired"
and turn a blind eye to the rest of it, but read on.
A few people have tried to point out that this outlines escalation of force procedures (warning shots typically are one of five or six different steps
in de-escalating a situation) that can be compared to current law enforcement standards. It's essentially the same as you see now around the country.
There will be so many other warnings that the risk which comes with warning shots
isn't worth it.
So what could you expect to see?
Armed soldiers (that's a given, right?), vehicles, warning signs, cones, concertina wire, bullhorns, LRAD, leaflets, pen flares, hand-held flares,
tear gas, shouting, honking, shoving, and then finally after dozens of nonlethal tools are expended and soldiers are still presented with immediate
deadly threat... See where I'm going with this?
So why are warning shots excluded when they are used overseas? The answer is simple: A civil disturbance implies there are many people around. Warning
shots may lead to innocent bystanders being hit. That's all there is to it. The Army has many tools at it's disposal to provide plenty of
I am baffled by the reaction and outrage shown by some members to this thread, truly speechless. The Civilian vs Military talk is downright childish
and both sides should be ashamed of themselves for stooping to such levels.
!@#$... If anyone has any questions, feel free to ask.