RIP Chris Kyle

Well, soldierboy, what about that video of those US troops PLEADING to open fire on innocent civilians, including children? Cowards mate. Absolute cowards.
 
Jason2 said:
Well, soldierboy, what about that video of those US troops PLEADING to open fire on innocent civilians, including children? Cowards mate. Absolute cowards.
Click to expand...
I've said it before, But the Americans have a completely different way in how they go about their business, different ROE etc.
I'm only speaking out as an ex soldier in the British army.
But while that video maybe true, for the most part, all the Americans i've been on joint ops with have been professional and switched on to the ROE.
I'd also like to add i don't think any soldier on the ground cares about what they're going there for to be honest, i went because it was my job to, i did my job and luckily i came back home.
 
Last edited:
Jason2 said:
Robbo, there are numerous other people in this thread with the same view. You may think murder is OK but I don't.
Click to expand...

It's not murder so you have nothing to harp on about. Just give it a rest...we all know what your views are for what they are worth, they don't need repeating ad-infinitum.
 
Last edited:
uksoldierboy - Utmost respect to yourself and anyone else who's been in your position while serving with the forces whether in combat or support roles.

Nice post from someone who's actually been there and by association is qualified to comment. People are of course allowed views on anything in life but until they have actually been in the situations they are expressing strong views on it's all just wind and talk, without the back up of real life experience to give it credence.

This sums it up for me -
"Before you criticize someone, you should walk a mile in their shoes."
 
Agreed, I have a great deal of respect for you uksoldierboy, not only for doing what you are but for providing calm, well thought out responses from personal experiences in the face of such vitriol :)
 
Good post uksoldierboy but in reality given dead people can't talk back who's going to know if you fired on someone holding a grenade and they didn't have their hands above waist height and moving them is a forward direction?

I can quite believe there are a lot of rules that govern this type of thing but can't see how they can be realistically enforced. Afterall the Police have similar rules but I don't doubt for one second the bend them in the heat of an arrest.
 
uksoldierboy said:
I agree, while i can understand a lot of people on here thinking that it's just a case of pulling the trigger if you see someone with a weapon, the reality is so different.
ROE on tours is extremely strict, regardless of what you might have seen on youtube videos or heard in the papers, and while i respect everyone's opinion, as i've mentioned in a previous post, unless your in the forces or have been, you can't really comment on the actions of a soldier engaging the enemy.
I'll give you a few examples of the ROE and it's restrictions,from my own experiences as a Infantry soldier who served in both Iraq and Afghan as a private in a rifle company and a full screw in Recce platoon.

Iraq -Basra- OP TELIC
During this tour we had a lot of riots, some may remember the pictures in the news of Warriors getting petrol bombed and soldiers covered in flames.
ROE at the time was" Anyone seen carrying a weapon, be that your typical 47, petrol bomb or grenade were not to be contacted useless the soldier/section commander of the vehicle is certain that they pose an imminent threat to life, be that soldier or civilian.
What this meant for a soldier is that:
SMALL ARMS
Can't contact unless the weapon is into the shoulder of the user and the user is bringing the weapon to bare onto you.
If the user fires, then drops the weapon and runs off, you can't engage, even if he's just slotted one of your mates.

PETROL BOMBS & GRENADES
Can't contact unless the user is about to throw, has to be raised above waist height and moving in a forward motion.
Can't contact if the device is lit and at users side, can't contact if the device has left the users hands as he is no longer the threat, the device is.
Even if the user meets all the above, a warning MUST be given and proportional force MUST be used.
Any soldier found not sticking to the ROE could face the murder charge if it resulted in a death.
This is the reason why we saw so many burn injuries, due to soldiers sticking to the frankly ridiculous ROE Rules.

Afghan- OP HERRICK.
During my tours of afghan i was a Corporal in Support company, Recce platoon.
Most of the ops i took part in were mainly in the "OVERWATCH" role.
What this meant was that me, my spotter and a rear guard would normally flank a position that has been confirmed as FOB for Taliban insurgents, confirmation was Normally by SF or fast air.
Our task would be to basically provide cover for the attacking force going in.
ROE for us was just as strict when it came to this sort of situation.
For example,
On one op we were in an OP on some high ground overlooking a small compound while a company attack was taking place.
I was relaying info to HQ and the commanders on the ground through my spotter, as the attack went in, i spotted two insurgents.
One with an rpg-7 and the other with an Pkm, both of them had heard the attack start and fled out the back into some dead ground, still facing the compound but a 100 meters away from it.
I told my spotter who passed it through the channels, no option to contact them as at the moment they weren't a threat.
As the attack pushed up to the Limit of exploitation (still within the compound)
I Noticed both insurgents crawl up from the dead ground and as the guy with the Pkm covered the rear of the compound, the other prepped the rpg,
At this point i told my spotter but the order from HQ came back not to engage
I then got onto the net myself at informed HQ that as the guys on the ground were moving towards the back of the compound, they posed an imminent threat. Still i was told not to contact them.
It was at this point that the guys were almost at the back of the compound,
Both insurgents took on a firing position and i decided to contact them.
According to the ROE, i shouldn't have, but i know without a shadow of doubt, if i had let them go for a few seconds more, they WOULD have contact our boys as they came out the back resulting in casualties or death.
Forgive me for the long winded post and i'm sorry if it's a little hard to follow.
I just wanted to try and explain in my own words that killing someone as a soldier isn't as clear cut as some people on here would believe, infact, i'd say it's extremely difficult to kill the enemy, even if they are trying their best to kill you and your friends.
David
Click to expand...

too may rules, do it like us keyboard warriors...

it moved... NUKE FROM ORBIT
 
estebanrey said:
Good post uksoldierboy but in reality given dead people can't talk back who's going to know if you fired on someone holding a grenade and they didn't have their hands above waist height and moving them is a forward direction?

I can quite believe there are a lot of rules that govern this type of thing but can't see how they can be realistically enforced. Afterall the Police have similar rules but I don't doubt for one second the bend them in the heat of an arrest.
Click to expand...

I agree with you, the ROE cant be enforced 100%, mistakes have and will be made.
At the end the ROE states that lethal force can be used as a last resort, only if the soldier feels that the threat to life is too high to allow the person to continue.
The rules are enforced, there is far too much media coverage now days and there's always someone watching your actions.
 
As always with anything military based, I'm just thankful that we have people who are willing to put their lives on the line so that, basically it doesn't ever get to the point where I might have to. I think its all too easy to sit in your nice warm house with your nice central heating and smart TV and judge a person thousands of miles away being shot at.

The above doesn't condone illegal acts but even then Its not for me to judge because I can't comprehend what effect the stress of active combat could have on a person.
 
Last edited:
It is really weird to think that in pretty much any other context a person who kills 150+ people would be considered a monster, and their death celebrated. But this guy was considered a hero. I'm not saying he's not a hero, just that war is really messed up. Both sides think they are the good guys, one mans hero is another mans monster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom