Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 68

Thread: Should the international military community relax it's prohibition on JHP ammunition?

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran since9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
    Posts
    6,787

    Should the international military community relax it's prohibition on JHP ammunition?

    A small part of this grew out of an M1911A thread posted herein. This is NOT an M1911 vs anything type of thread. If you proceed in that fashion, I'll proceed in an "I'll report your posts along those lines" fashion, so please don't derail this thread along those lines.

    I trust our mods and admins will be able to sort it through, and prevent thread derailment while still allowing the derailment of individuals who'd like to yank this thread off topic. Given the nature of what I propose, I think they, as well as each and every one of us, have a serious and vested interest in this topic.

    This begins with what I discovered on Wikipedia:

    "Dissatisfaction with the stopping power of the 9mm Parabellum cartridge used in the Beretta M9has actually promoted re-adoption of handguns based on the .45 ACP cartridge such as the M1911 design, along with other handguns, among USSOCOM units in recent years, though the M9 remains predominant both within SOCOM and in the US military in general."
    - Source

    I LIKE the 1911 design. Solid, decent handling, and packs a punch. But for carry, I prefer the 9mm. Part of SOC's and the Marine's decision to go with the .45 is that they're limited by international military-use convention to FMJ rounds. In that type of round, effective stopping power begins with the .45 caliber diameter. However, we can use JHP rounds here at home, which have the same or better stopping power as a .45 ACP FMJ round. This, and the fact that you can carry 16+1 shots in most 9mm vs the 9+1 in most 1911s is why the FBI and the vast majority of civilian law enforcement agencies switched from 1911s to .38s, to 9mms.

    The only reason the military maintains any hold to the 1911 is because as a Geneva-mandated FMJ round, it alone holds the punch that's required.

    I think it's time for a change!

    Here's why:

    1. This ruling originated during a time when battlefield medical practice was ill-equipped to deal with the infection and subsequent mortification rates of soldiers who'd been struck with fragmenting rounds. As a result, such rounds were banned. It was deemed enough for a round of stopping power to simply stop the action of the soldier on the battlefield, without inflicting additional wounds which would either result in his demise or require exorbitant efforts on the part of the enemy in order to prevent his demise.

    One must remember much of these mindsets originated from both the cap and ball days our our own civil war, as well as the "sawbones surgery" options available at the time.

    2. Yesterday's fragmenting rounds literally fragmented, causing serious damage and infection. Today's expanding rounds stay together. Yes, they exert a greater stopping power, but less ancillary damage.

    3. The use of body armor largely attenuates the effect of expanding rounds, while simultaneously increasing stopping power of non-armored counter-forces, while actually reducing the carnage of those forces.

    4. There is a thread that allowing JHP would result in greater injury to our own troops, but I find this ridiculous when the enemy has been using mines, people-bombs, and IEDs since the 1950s.

    My thoughts herein are based on a couple of key goals:

    Goal 1. Maximum effectiveness

    Goal 2: Minimum death

    Goal 3: Minimum collateral damage

    ***

    Goal 1 Maximum effectiveness. This is easy. Employ a fully-fragmenting round which effects maximum damage to the human body is the most preferable in a war-time scenario. One shot, one kill. On to the next target.

    However, it's not most preferable given international law and our rules of engagement, which have long since ruled such results are inhuman. Many JHP rounds, while expanding, and imparting maximum energy to the target (vs mostly passing through), tend to fragment, leaving the recipient in a severely injured state involving many organs, and requiring serious medical attention to fix, with a poor prognosis for long-term recovery.

    Argument 1: The use of FMJ bullets often requires multiple rounds to put down the enemy, usually resulting in the same or worse damage.

    Solution: An expanding round, but cohesive round which imparts maximum energy on the target while minimizing the enemy soldier's wounds overall. This would drastically reduce medical requirements, recovery times, etc.

    Counter-arguement: Why would you want to stop the enemy, but allow him to get back into the fray as soon as possible?

    Goal 2: Minimum death: Employ rubber bullets, semi-penetrating non-lethal narcotics, sticky foam, or other means to subdue the enemy and sort things out later.

    For whatever reason, our governments have chosen to use other means. Dang. We can air-drop a swimming-pool-sized sticky bomb over a known outdoor gathering of insurgents and stop 80% of them without harm to any of them (other than the few on the fringes who might fire upon us and we'd fire back). Not only that, but the sticky stuff tends to stick the evidence to the perp. "Oh, that's not your weapon? Why is your hand wrapped around it's hilt, hmmm???"

    Goal 3: Minimum collateral damage.

    For us civilians, I think this should be of paramount importance. None of us wants to defence ourselves against a perp, even of the most violent and vile kind, if that means robbing anyone else of their right to a happy and healthy life. I've personally known only one such child who was caught in the crossfire, and it was definately avoidable (parapalegic courtesy of a lead .38 that penetrated the perp's body and struck a child's spine).

    Enough.

    I'm tired of collateral damage, and tired of the old world rules which both reduce any troops' effectiveness, while increasing their exposure, complicating enemy injury and increasing the loss of innocent civilian life.

    DAMN! Folks!

    We have the technology to create rounds which will penetrate any armor, all the way through the person, if necessary, then backfire to ensure a kill on the target upon which the soldier pulled the trigger, without resulting in any collateral damage whatsoever.

    Expensive? Oh, heck yes! But it's not even a drop in the bucket compared to what's been spent on the war on terrorism, and maybe not "oh heck yes" at all given the last 50-70 years of development in rounds for both private use and law enforcement.

    BOTTOM LINE:

    1. The prohibition against fragmenting ammo arose from a time when it meant maximum damage and potential death. A LOT of things have changed since then.

    2. It's been unfairly extended to today's expanding ammo, because it lumps today's modern, non-fragmenting designs in with the "dum-dum" designs of old.

    3. By sanctioning today's designs, as exhibited by those embraced by the FBI and the vast majority of both US and overseas law enforcement agencies today, we would achieve a moderate measure of mortality reduction both on the battlefield as well as with civilian casualties, while making inroads into even more effective, but less lethal means of accomplishing nationaly policy.

    Open for thoughts.

    - since9
    Last edited by since9; 11-05-2010 at 07:18 AM. Reason: grammar
    The First protects the Second, and the Second protects the First. Together, they protect the rest of our Bill of Rights and our United States Constitution, and help We the People protect ourselves in the spirit of our Declaration of Independence.

  2. #2
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    The prohibition against hollow point rounds is not Geneva mandated. Nor is it mandated against the enemies we face today.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Hague Convention
    The present Declaration is only binding for the Contracting Powers in the case of a war between two or more of them.

    It shall cease to be binding from the time when, in a war between the Contracting Parties, one of the belligerents is joined by a non-Contracting Power.
    Source


    In short, you get my vote. I find it absolutely ridiculous that people seem to believe that it's better to maim your mortal enemies than kill them.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Gaylord, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    28

    Force Multiplier

    One thing you have to remember is that the military services consider wounding the enemy soldier preferable to killing him IN MOST INSTANCES. It's called a force mutiplier. If you kill an enemy combatant, then you have removed one enemy soldier from the battle. If you wound one, normally at least one will have to help the wounded from the battlefield, sometimes two thereby removing two to three combatants from the battlefield. While that same wounded enemy may be treated and return to fight again later, the American soldier trains to "survive and win on the next battlefield." You win wars one battle at a time and you do that by removing enemy combatants from battle.

  4. #4
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Now see, that actually makes sense. Thanks for explaining it.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Michigander's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mulligan's Valley
    Posts
    4,830
    Far more important than what ammo you use to kill someone with is why you kill them. The issue of why in the hell the US government has for so long got away with imperialistic mass murder is worthy of heavy consideration. The choice of ammo is really quite a side issue, particularly considering just how good tactics and equipment have become. Our nations military is filled with ruthlessly skilled killers, and I frankly don't care much how effectively our soldiers can kill people in the decent chance that there is another war with a standing army, even if it is as ragged and torn up as the Iraqi army. I don't think we need more wars, certainly we don't need to dismantle any other countries, so no, I don't feel a need to make it any easier than it already is.

    We've always been an imperialistic, murderous country, which I reserve the right to say as a descendant of native Americans who were nearly completely exterminated. I'd rather focus on how to help curb this than how to enhance it.
    Answer every question about open carry in Michigan you ever had with one convenient and free book- http://libertyisforeveryone.com/open-carry-resources/

    The complete and utter truth can be challenged from every direction and it will always hold up. Accordingly there are few greater displays of illegitimacy than to attempt to impede free thought and communication.

  6. #6
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    "karlmc10" is spot on with his comment. The near-iniversal use of FMJ rounds in the military has NOTHING to do with cost, safety, or reliability. it has EVERYTHING to do with the fact that "enemies" shot with FMJ rounds tend to survive shots that don't hit vital organs, and it is WOUNDED soldiers that break the backs of an opposing force through the force multiplication of strain on supply, personnel and logistics required for dealing with wounded soldiers.

    The fact of the matter is, most world military bodies are still working under the strategic and logistic models of WWII, which assume that both sides of a conflict are monolithic organized militaries that actually CARE about medical treatment, casualties, and not abandoning wounded fighters.

    The truth of the matter is that most of the "enemies" we are fighting now are "all or nothing" forces, with no organized supply chains, no medical backup to speak of, and no problem leaving wounded fighters to die in the field. Of course, the fact that these "enemies" have all been funded, trained, supplied, and equipped by the CIA, Pentagon, MI6, and te big international banks for the last 4 decades doesn't ever seem to enter into the discussion...

    Thank you, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Jimmy Carter, Stansfield Turner and Henry Kissinger. The Mujahadin turned out to be such a GREAT idea....
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Urban Skeet City, Alabama
    Posts
    897
    I strongly disagree. The subject of FMJ rounds in today's battlefield shouldn't even be considered when modern armies still fight against those who refuse to agree with the organized rules of warfare. With *our* medical system and capabilities, I see no problem. But we can put anyone we shoot back together. Do you really want to see what happens when some hack country makes a halfway attempt at removing shrapnel which HAS fragmented with or without the benefit of an X-ray machine?

    Meatball surgery is still going on, years after M*A*S*H.
    It takes a village to raise an idiot.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    I think its best left up to the military to determine that kind of detail of how to conduct a war.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Gaylord, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Far more important than what ammo you use to kill someone with is why you kill them. The issue of why in the hell the US government has for so long got away with imperialistic mass murder is worthy of heavy consideration. The choice of ammo is really quite a side issue, particularly considering just how good tactics and equipment have become. Our nations military is filled with ruthlessly skilled killers, and I frankly don't care much how effectively our soldiers can kill people in the decent chance that there is another war with a standing army, even if it is as ragged and torn up as the Iraqi army. I don't think we need more wars, certainly we don't need to dismantle any other countries, so no, I don't feel a need to make it any easier than it already is.

    We've always been an imperialistic, murderous country, which I reserve the right to say as a descendant of native Americans who were nearly completely exterminated. I'd rather focus on how to help curb this than how to enhance it.
    First of all sir, I am one of the "skilled killers" that served a career on our nations Army. What you have said in the above post is an affront to every one who has and is serving in the service of this great country and I take offense to both your tone and your words. I have and would again, however, stand in your defense to say them. You have that right, and many others thanks to those "Ruthlessly skilled killers" serving this "imerialistic, murderous country".

    I also have those same rights to say the following- I would love to see what you standing at the base of the Kuwait City hospital looking at the incubators with the dead babies in them that the Iraqi soldier threw from the upper floor windows where the maternity ward was, and hear you say the same thing. How about standing in the court yard of a house where the burned bodies of parents are who were first forced to watch the rape and torture of thier children before they were burned alive. How about the thousands that were killed in Kosovo? How about the thousands of Kurds that were gassed ? In your view, it's better that we just let that happen. How about the battleships we sent to aid the tsunami victims? Yeah those sailors really got some killing done there feeding and treating all those people.
    Until you have actually walked in the boots of a soldier instead of running your mouth while sitting in the comfort of your or your mommies home playing keyboard commando, like you know what you are talking about, maybe you should learn a thing or two about the real world.
    And as far as that " I reserve the right as a decendant of native Americans". No you didn't, us "ruthlessly skilled killers" did. I reserve the right to say what I did because I and many others actually did.

    By the way, every time I have seen or heard anybody play that "I'm a native American decendant" card they were as lilly white as I am so give that crap a rest too, junior.
    Last edited by karlmc10; 11-07-2010 at 07:32 AM. Reason: grammer

  10. #10
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Far more important than what ammo you use to kill someone with is why you kill them. The issue of why in the hell the US government has for so long got away with imperialistic mass murder is worthy of heavy consideration. The choice of ammo is really quite a side issue, particularly considering just how good tactics and equipment have become. Our nations military is filled with ruthlessly skilled killers, and I frankly don't care much how effectively our soldiers can kill people in the decent chance that there is another war with a standing army, even if it is as ragged and torn up as the Iraqi army. I don't think we need more wars, certainly we don't need to dismantle any other countries, so no, I don't feel a need to make it any easier than it already is.

    We've always been an imperialistic, murderous country, which I reserve the right to say as a descendant of native Americans who were nearly completely exterminated. I'd rather focus on how to help curb this than how to enhance it.
    Another "skilled killer" here who is highly offended by your comments. My career was U.S. Army and I can't begin to tell you the number of times we went out to help, not kill, those who could not help themselves.

    Yeah, you've got a right to say what you did. Please keep in mind how that right was bought and paid for. Your comments were especially offensive considering what this next Thursday is. At 11:00 am on that day, 92 years ago, my Dad was in France witnessing the end of a war. Have you ever seen the graves in France from that war? I have.

    Have you ever visited Arlington? You should, if for no other reason than to see the price that was paid for your rights and freedoms.

    For the record: I fully associate myself with karlmc10's comments. He put it even better than I can.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    @ karlmc10 & SFCretired
    I hope you guys have realised that Michigander is probably a ringer, and has spent most of his posts derailing threads as he has done here with offensive leftist rhetoric.

  12. #12
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    @ karlmc10 & SFCretired
    I hope you guys have realised that Michigander is probably a ringer, and has spent most of his posts derailing threads as he has done here with offensive leftist rhetoric.
    Thank you. I suspected that after I had posted and I thank you for confirming what I suspected.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Gaylord, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    28
    Thank you sir, I also suspected it after I replied but I hadn't read any of his priot rambling. That and that fact that I've become quite the old crumudgen with my portable soapbox so I couldn't resist.

  14. #14
    Regular Member thx997303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lehi, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,716
    More of this.

    How exactly does the military of the United States fight for the rights of the citizenry?

    It doesn't. The fact is the MIlitary of the United States fights to protect the independence of the nation, which while our independence allows us autonomy and the ability to govern based on our constitution, it is not "fighting for your right to say that."

    You and you alone can fight for your rights. Soldiers do not.

    Please stop this. I find it personally insulting.

    I know many people who feel that they don't have to fight for their rights, because "the military does that."

    Just some words from a disabled vet.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Stafford, VA, , Afghanistan
    Posts
    349
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Far more important than what ammo you use to kill someone with is why you kill them. The issue of why in the hell the US government has for so long got away with imperialistic mass murder is worthy of heavy consideration. The choice of ammo is really quite a side issue, particularly considering just how good tactics and equipment have become. Our nations military is filled with ruthlessly skilled killers, and I frankly don't care much how effectively our soldiers can kill people in the decent chance that there is another war with a standing army, even if it is as ragged and torn up as the Iraqi army. I don't think we need more wars, certainly we don't need to dismantle any other countries, so no, I don't feel a need to make it any easier than it already is.

    We've always been an imperialistic, murderous country, which I reserve the right to say as a descendant of native Americans who were nearly completely exterminated. I'd rather focus on how to help curb this than how to enhance it.
    Hey fuckstick...you're welcome. I'm glad you still have the freedom to stay stupid crap that is off-topic. Feel free to live somewhere else, say, Rwanda...Libya...Iran...hell, go to Mexico.

    Here's a hint...bad guys get a vote on war....and as long as there are people, there will be war. So pull your head out of the clouds (or your ass)....

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098
    Quote Originally Posted by karlmc10 View Post
    I also have those same rights to say the following- I would love to see what you standing at the base of the Kuwait City hospital looking at


    the incubators with the dead babies in them that the Iraqi soldier threw from the upper floor windows where the maternity ward was, and hear you say the same thing. How about standing in the court yard of a house where the burned bodies of parents are who were first forced to watch the rape and torture of thier children before they were burned alive. How about the thousands that were killed in Kosovo? How about the thousands of Kurds that were gassed ?


    In your view, it's better that we just let that happen. How about the battleships we sent to aid the tsunami victims? Yeah those sailors really got some killing done there feeding and treating all those people.

    The irony, of course, being that if his claim of being American Indian is true, events like those I seperated out above, happened all to frequently to his people, often by the U.S. military. It should not have to be said, however, that the military of today is far different from the military of the 1800's.

    Both sides of this conversation would do well to be somewhat more diplomatic.
    Last edited by PavePusher; 11-07-2010 at 04:18 PM.

  17. #17
    Regular Member oak1971's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,937
    "Should the international military community relax it's prohibition on JHP ammunition?"

    Yes.
    In God I trust. Everyone else needs to keep your hands where I can see them.

  18. #18
    Regular Member oak1971's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    1,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Far more important than what ammo you use to kill someone with is why you kill them. The issue of why in the hell the US government has for so long got away with imperialistic mass murder is worthy of heavy consideration. The choice of ammo is really quite a side issue, particularly considering just how good tactics and equipment have become. Our nations military is filled with ruthlessly skilled killers, and I frankly don't care much how effectively our soldiers can kill people in the decent chance that there is another war with a standing army, even if it is as ragged and torn up as the Iraqi army. I don't think we need more wars, certainly we don't need to dismantle any other countries, so no, I don't feel a need to make it any easier than it already is.

    We've always been an imperialistic, murderous country, which I reserve the right to say as a descendant of native Americans who were nearly completely exterminated. I'd rather focus on how to help curb this than how to enhance it.
    Dude, put down the doobie.
    In God I trust. Everyone else needs to keep your hands where I can see them.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Gaylord, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    28
    When you take the oath you swear to protect and defend the Constitution. Just by being part of the greatest military in the world helps to do that. When you deploy to help others you are also showing the world the might of the United States military and that deters most from direct aggression against our country thereby protecting our Constituion. Our Constitution is what protects our rights. If you fight for our country, your fighting for the Constitution that protects those rights. Don't try to minimize what our fine soldiers do every day. I find this personally insulting. Just a few words from another disabled vet. Yeah, there's a bunch of us so throwing that card out might shut others up but not me, because I did fight for my rights. What you fought for only you can say but don't assign your misguided thoughts to me. Moving on as this has really gone astray (partly with my help).

  20. #20
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Michigander View Post
    Far more important than what ammo you use to kill someone with is why you kill them. The issue of why in the hell the US government has for so long got away with imperialistic mass murder is worthy of heavy consideration. The choice of ammo is really quite a side issue, particularly considering just how good tactics and equipment have become. Our nations military is filled with ruthlessly skilled killers, and I frankly don't care much how effectively our soldiers can kill people in the decent chance that there is another war with a standing army, even if it is as ragged and torn up as the Iraqi army. I don't think we need more wars, certainly we don't need to dismantle any other countries, so no, I don't feel a need to make it any easier than it already is.

    We've always been an imperialistic, murderous country, which I reserve the right to say as a descendant of native Americans who were nearly completely exterminated. I'd rather focus on how to help curb this than how to enhance it.
    I just wanted to personally say #^*% YOU. If you hate this country that much, I cordially invite you to GET THE #^*% OUT. I serve this country with pride, and when I go out in public in uniform, I am regularly thanked at least. I can't count how many times I've been bought lunch or beers by our people. Whenever someone thanks me for my service, I tell them it's people like them who make it all worthwhile.

    Then I come across smarmy, self absorbed ********** like you, who are doing everything you can to bring this country down from the inside. It would be a great deal of personal satisfaction to meet you in a dark alley somewhere in Miami, and pummel the living hell out of you, before putting you on a makeshift boat so you can float south and enjoy the socialist paradise that is Cuba.

    You can shove that native crap too. When you put on a loin cloth you fashioned from buckskin and start embracing primitive life, you can whine about how much better life would be if eurotrash like my ancestry didn't land on these shores 6000 years after your ancestry walked over, and achieved NOT ONE SINGLE TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT that enhanced the human standard of living. So enjoy your electricity, and your welfare check, provided by the people who should have wiped you filthy scraelings out entirely. Hindsight‘s a real b!tc# huh?

    In regards to the OP. If I were in charge, napalm and fragmenting jacketed bacon bullets would be the order of the day. We’re faced with an enemy (outside our borders, and creeping inside at an alarming rate) that cares little about life, and isn’t extraordinarily concerned with medivac. The geneva convention rules should not apply, but those people in charge, who don’t do any of the fighting have decided otherwise.


    I want to apologise if this post offends natives that are not leftist rejects like Michigander. In the decades since The Battle of Bear Valley, natives have volunteered to serve the nation Michigander abhors. They have done so with great bravery, and little recognition. The native people were brutalized beyond modern belief, and it should not be trivialized. The fact that so many of them have become such great assests to our society is a testament to the character of these people.

    "People" like Michigander do not represent the nobility of a defeated people, who have assimilated into our culture and enriched our society. He represents a body of vicious leftist malcontents who attempt to highlight the darkest events of our nations history, and work to suppress anything positive. Lenin refered to them as "useful idiots". I regret posting such a hateful rant, but I felt the duty to smack that moonbat off his high horse.
    Last edited by PrayingForWar; 11-07-2010 at 09:29 PM.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    America
    Posts
    2,226
    Quote Originally Posted by PrayingForWar View Post
    I just wanted to personally say #^*% YOU. If you hate this country that much, I cordially invite you to GET THE #^*% OUT. I serve this country with pride, and when I go out in public in uniform, I am regularly thanked at least. I can't count how many times I've been bought lunch or beers by our people. Whenever someone thanks me for my service, I tell them it's people like them who make it all worthwhile.

    Then I come across smarmy, self absorbed ********** like you, who are doing everything you can to bring this country down from the inside. It would be a great deal of personal satisfaction to meet you in a dark alley somewhere in Miami, and pummel the living hell out of you, before putting you on a makeshift boat so you can float south and enjoy the socialist paradise that is Cuba.

    You can shove that native crap too. When you put on a loin cloth you fashioned from buckskin and start embracing primitive life, you can whine about how much better life would be if eurotrash like my ancestry didn't land on these shores 6000 years after your ancestry walked over, and achieved NOT ONE SINGLE TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT that enhanced the human standard of living. So enjoy your electricity, and your welfare check, provided by the people who should have wiped you filthy scraelings out entirely. Hindsight‘s a real b!tc# huh?

    In regards to the OP. If I were in charge, napalm and fragmenting jacketed bacon bullets would be the order of the day. We’re faced with an enemy (outside our borders, and creeping inside at an alarming rate) that cares little about life, and isn’t extraordinarily concerned with medivac. The geneva convention rules should not apply, but those people in charge, who don’t do any of the fighting have decided otherwise.
    wow dude. Do you really think it necessary to bring the level of offensive personal attacks up that much?

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Daylen View Post
    wow dude. Do you really think it necessary to bring the level of offensive personal attacks up that much?
    At the moment, yes. It was a knee jerk reaction, and I added an apology.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  23. #23
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358
    First off, I want to thank all the service men and women on this forum for their service to our country. You have undoubtedly seen things than no person should ever see, and the fact that you volunteered to serve honorably is highly commendable.

    You deserve respect, honor, thanks and prayers.

    All that said, I have just two more words for those of you who think you've served to keep the citizens of America free:

    Smedley Butler...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

    The US military has been a private mercenary force for international banksters for over a century. Sorry to break the news to you, but it's not really a secret anymore. It hasn't been a secret since 1934.

    That doesn't mean you are bad people--you've just been told a raft of lies for your entire career, and in your patriotic fervor, you refused to discover the truth.

    We don't hate you--we pray for you, and hope that someday you too will see through the facade that stands in front of our "government". Hopefully you will someday realize who the real enemies of America are, and put your hubris aside, before its too late.

    I'll close with the prescient words of Thomas Jefferson:

    "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."
    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member PrayingForWar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    The Real World.
    Posts
    1,705
    Quote Originally Posted by Dreamer View Post
    First off, I want to thank all the service men and women on this forum for their service to our country. You have undoubtedly seen things than no person should ever see, and the fact that you volunteered to serve honorably is highly commendable.

    You deserve respect, honor, thanks and prayers.

    All that said, I have just two more words for those of you who think you've served to keep the citizens of America free:

    Smedley Butler...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smedley_Butler

    The US military has been a private mercenary force for international banksters for over a century. Sorry to break the news to you, but it's not really a secret anymore. It hasn't been a secret since 1934.

    That doesn't mean you are bad people--you've just been told a raft of lies for your entire career, and in your patriotic fervor, you refused to discover the truth.

    We don't hate you--we pray for you, and hope that someday you too will see through the facade that stands in front of our "government". Hopefully you will someday realize who the real enemies of America are, and put your hubris aside, before its too late.

    I'll close with the prescient words of Thomas Jefferson:
    By the Greatest of our founding fathers Thomas Jefferson "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their money, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them (around the banks), will deprive the people of their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

    Thanks Dreamer, but if you're going to try and convince me I've been fooled by the empire into some sort of jingoistic bloodlust, you'll have to do better than a wiki post. I don't believe for one second that the federal reserve banks are a benevolent institution, or that they exist to promote anything that could be considered as good. The people that own and control our money certainly do not care if we all starve to death.

    What I do reject is that they are planning for us to do so (or any other massive extermination plot alex jones can imagine), and I laugh at the idea that they have the means to make it happen. Apparently they can't even pull off the most intricate false flag operation ever imagined, without snuffing out the geniuses who put out an internet video that after 3 revisions "exposed" the plot. This is one instance where the government only had one story, and it was actually plausible.

    Further, I find it repulsive that someone can thank service members for their sacrifices, and then in the same post trivialize our endeavors by calling us mercenaries. I hope that one day YOU can see through the propaganda that is sold to people who know something is wrong, but are led to believe there is no difference between Left/Right, or for that matter Right/Wrong. Your energy and passion is being used by the enemy of the nation you are home to, and I believe you do sincerely love, to demoralize and marginalize an effective libertarian grassroots effort to sustain our constitutional foundation.
    If you ladies leave my island, if you survive recruit training. You will become a minister of death, PRAYING FOR WAR...

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Granite State of Mind
    Posts
    4,509
    As for the original question: yes. And the prohibition isn't on JHP, hollowpoints, or "dum-dums", it is a prohibition of weapons that cause "unnecessary suffering".

    As for the rest, I'll probably regret this, but... *sigh* ...here goes.

    I am a veteran. I'm the father of an active duty soldier, currently serving in Iraq with his wife. I'm the son of a veteran. I'm the descendant of a long line of veterans who have fought in every military conflict America has known, starting with the French & Indian Wars, through the American Revolution, through the current overseas conflicts.

    Michigander, while perhaps abrasive and less than diplomatic in his approach, is right: no military personnel currently serving are doing anything to protect Americans' right to free speech. The Iraqis aren't threatening my free speech. Neither are the Taliban or Afghanis. Same for the Germans, Japanese, and South Koreans. If the Army wanted to protect my right to free speech, why didn't the Old Guard take McCain and Feingold's offices at bayonet point?

    "Against all enemies foreign and domestic", as I recall. No foreign power has ever threatened Americans' right to free speech, but the domestic enemies of the Constitution certainly have, on a regular basis.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •