Printable View
[url]http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,576646,00.html[/url]
These guys did their JOB........and now we put them on trial.
I say BULL.
The liberal mongrels that are running our country would have us lay down our weapons, bow our heads, and TAKE the SWORD.
WOW.
350 days until the mid terms,
1080 until we TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY.
Later,
Geo
I wonder if I'll be brought up for charges from when I served 1970-1972.:mad:
:eek: I am stunned and shocked at how ridiculous this is to charge the Seals for capturing a terrorist. Of course, he is not going to be taken willingly so they will have to restrain him so to speak.
Did you see that picture? Just horrid. What is this world coming to when the good guys are charged for capturing the bad guys?:confused: It doesnt make any sense to me.
I am at a loss for words, or at least words I can post on here.
I am truely sickened by this....
It really is outrageous. My gut feeling is the charges will eventually be dropped, but that doesn't excuse them having been brought in the first place.
If the terrorist was hurt, maimed, killed, etc. during capture, I agree, the SEALS were doing their job and there is no reason to bring them up on trial. They were doing what their country asked of them, and doing it well as usual. However, something doesn't smell right and I don't think we have all the info. For example, this part of the story:
"The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.
"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."
Suggests that the terrorist was in good health and that the assault happened long after he was captured. That would be a problem. In addition, it was the SEAL leader (not some mongrel liberal) that reported the charge. I want to see more info before I make a comment on it.
Andrew
Liberals have created the political climate that fosters such idiotic events.
The guy had a bloody lip for crying out loud. So what? He masterminded an attack where 4 Americans were killed, burned, then hung from a bridge. The seals should've hung him by his cajones from the same bridge where the charred bodies were found.
A courts martial instead of a commendation. Infuriating.
Totally disgusting how will you get any one to serve our country.
Wars fought with PC will never work.
[QUOTE=apb;390842]If the terrorist was hurt, maimed, killed, etc. during capture, I agree, the SEALS were doing their job and there is no reason to bring them up on trial. They were doing what their country asked of them, and doing it well as usual. However, something doesn't smell right and I don't think we have all the info. For example, this part of the story:
"The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.
"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."
Suggests that the terrorist was in good health and that the assault happened long after he was captured. That would be a problem. In addition, it was the SEAL leader (not some mongrel liberal) that reported the charge. I want to see more info before I make a comment on it.
Andrew[/QUOTE]
At the risk of being outcast by the other board members I have to agree... Should we expect less civility from our armed forces than we do from our law enforcement.... If these individuals were abused after being secured and through no fault of their own then the charges should be brought up... we would not tolerate prison guards beating child molesters just because they wanted to (maybe we should) but we don't...
[QUOTE=apb;390842]If the terrorist was hurt, maimed, killed, etc. during capture, I agree, the SEALS were doing their job and there is no reason to bring them up on trial. They were doing what their country asked of them, and doing it well as usual. However, something doesn't smell right and I don't think we have all the info. For example, this part of the story:
"The SEAL told investigators he had showered after the mission, gone to the kitchen and then decided to look in on the detainee.
"I gave the detainee a glance over and then left," the SEAL wrote. "I did not notice anything wrong with the detainee and he appeared in good health."
Suggests that the terrorist was in good health and that the assault happened long after he was captured. That would be a problem. In addition, it was the SEAL leader (not some mongrel liberal) that reported the charge. I want to see more info before I make a comment on it.
Andrew[/QUOTE]
This gives the individual soldier the incentive to not take prisoners. The intelligence gathered fro this individual was valuable to our military leaders but not the individual soldier. If this continues soldiers will likely try to do the easy thing and kill the target and not capture it.