Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

[editec]

Anyway, back to the thread.
Since American's armed forces have not fired a single round in defence of the United states since 1945, I suggest:
All of America's armed forces be disarmed unless:

They're training
Someone starts a war against you.

American military history shows a terrible misuse of power.

No, it doesn't.

We're not some banana-republic where our military takes over at the drop of a hat.

Our military follows orders.

It's our civilian government that misuses its power, mate.

 

[Indofred]

Anyway, back to the thread.
Since American's armed forces have not fired a single round in defence of the United states since 1945, I suggest:
All of America's armed forces be disarmed unless:

They're training
Someone starts a war against you.

American military history shows a terrible misuse of power.

No, it doesn't.

We're not some banana-republic where our military takes over at the drop of a hat.

Our military follows orders.

It's our civilian government that misuses its power, mate.

Did I say it wasn't?
No, I just suggested the U.S. military should not be armed, not who orders the monkeys to pull their triggers.
As for the banana republic, no, your military just takes over other countries.

 

[Indofred]

Mushroom is a very interesting username.
Like a mushroom, he's in the dark and fed on shit.

To be fair, unlike a mushroom, he spits it back out on threads such as this.

 

[Mushroom]

Mushroom is a very interesting username.
Like a mushroom, he's in the dark and fed on shit.

To be fair, unlike a mushroom, he spits it back out on threads such as this.

Yet you still refuse to back up your claims, and simply throw around more garbage and insults.

Come on buddy, put up or shut up. Why don't you stop throwing around crap and back up your claim for earlier? Is it so very hard to do?

Or do you just not want to admit you made everything up and look like a liar?

 

[chikenwing]

Should U.S. Military members be armed?

If they're in a war zone? You bet, because the enemy can come at you from any direction at any time.

If they're here in the U.S.? Only if they are authorized to have weapons (i.e. the gate guard, the security patrols, and the base police).

I mean............face it..............the military is a cross section of the US population as a whole, and reflect that.

And..................other than being attacked by one of their own (i.e. the Ft. Hood shooting 5 years ago, as well as the one that just occurred), there are very few examples of a shooting on a CONUS military base.

One could say the same for Cops,they are after all just us with a gun right?

 

[Indofred]

Mushroom is a very interesting username.
Like a mushroom, he's in the dark and fed on shit.

To be fair, unlike a mushroom, he spits it back out on threads such as this.

Yet you still refuse to back up your claims, and simply throw around more garbage and insults.

Come on buddy, put up or shut up. Why don't you stop throwing around crap and back up your claim for earlier? Is it so very hard to do?

Or do you just not want to admit you made everything up and look like a liar?

I like indoctrinated idiots.
They make posts as above, totally ignoring all the links I've posted.

They do this in the hope other posters are as stupid as they are and won't look back a few posts.

Come on, stop being an idiot, look at the links and admit the United states has engaged in terrorist attacks.

 

[Indofred]

Mushroom[/COLOR];8894489]

China and Russia are both trying to influence Indonesia but they do it with trade and neither have ever bombed Indonesia.
America has.

I would love to see the reference to that.

Although I do not even know why I am asking, you have yet to reference anything.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Lawrence_Pope]Allen Lawrence Pope - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/COLOR]

This was finally admitted by the CIA after an American pilot was shot down in an American aircraft whilst carrying out a trerrorist rain against a country you were not, and never have been, at war with.

Reference that!

Just for the idiot, I'll repost the above.

 

[Darkwind]

Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

After all, not one has fired a gun to defend the United states since 1945.

Only if you go by the stupid definition of the enemy climbing on our shores. However, we have interests abroad and anytime those interests are threatened and we defend them, that is a case of a soldier firing arms in defense of America.

It has happened as recently as this year.

So, yes, they should be armed.

 

[Indofred]

Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

After all, not one has fired a gun to defend the United states since 1945.

Only if you go by the stupid definition of the enemy climbing on our shores. However, we have interests abroad and anytime those interests are threatened and we defend them, that is a case of a soldier firing arms in defense of America.

It has happened as recently as this year.

So, yes, they should be armed.

So, what you're saying is, attacking another country for trade reasons is acceptable.
I assume you support the Japanese attack on Pearl harbour.

 

[SFC Ollie]

I spent 22 years on active duty, and every minute of it was spent defending the United States of America.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a damned fool.

And should the military be armed? By all means.

 

[Darkwind]

Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

After all, not one has fired a gun to defend the United states since 1945.

Only if you go by the stupid definition of the enemy climbing on our shores. However, we have interests abroad and anytime those interests are threatened and we defend them, that is a case of a soldier firing arms in defense of America.

It has happened as recently as this year.

So, yes, they should be armed.

So, what you're saying is, attacking another country for trade reasons is acceptable.
I assume you support the Japanese attack on Pearl harbour.

No, that is not what I am saying. That is your filter speaking and preventing you from seeing reality.

Your definition of aggression and terrorism is not valid, nor it seems, is your grasp of the English language.

We do NOT have to wait for the enemy to come to us before we defend ourselves. That is a losers world view, so it fits you perfectly.

have a nice day.

 

[High_Gravity]

Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

After all, not one has fired a gun to defend the United states since 1945.

Yes, but only if they are cleared of PTSD or other medical issues.

 

[Moonglow]

I spent 22 years on active duty, and every minute of it was spent defending the United States of America.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a damned fool.

And should the military be armed? By all means.

Latrine duty does not count...towards retirement points.

 

[High_Gravity]

Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

After all, not one has fired a gun to defend the United states since 1945.

That is not the appropriate question. What you want to ask
Is should they be armed on base. The military says no. And we all know what lefties the joint chiefs are.

Given, not one American soldier has fired a weapon to defend America since 1945 but they have used them to invade and attack foreign countries that have never attacked America, I suggest they should be disarmed whilst outside America.

You are just posting bullshit now.

 

[Indofred]

I spent 22 years on active duty, and every minute of it was spent defending the United States of America.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a damned fool.

And should the military be armed? By all means.

Please detail when the States were attacked, by whom and what you did to defend your country.
Invading countries that didn't attack America doesn't count.

 

[High_Gravity]

I spent 22 years on active duty, and every minute of it was spent defending the United States of America.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a damned fool.

And should the military be armed? By all means.

Please detail when the States were attacked, by whom and what you did to defend your country.
Invading countries that didn't attack America doesn't count.

Attacked by Al Qaeda in 2001 invaded Afghanistan.

 

[Indofred]

We do NOT have to wait for the enemy to come to us before we defend ourselves. That is a losers world view, so it fits you perfectly.

have a nice day.

Excellent stuff.
Please suggest a timeline for Vietnam's attack on the United states and why it was so important to attack them when you did.
Whilst you're on the go, do that for every other United states invasion force and/or terrorist attacks.
Also, please explain why American terrorists bombing in Indonesia prevented an attack on America.

I'm going to love your next post.

 

[Indofred]

I spent 22 years on active duty, and every minute of it was spent defending the United States of America.

Anyone who thinks otherwise is a damned fool.

And should the military be armed? By all means.

Please detail when the States were attacked, by whom and what you did to defend your country.
Invading countries that didn't attack America doesn't count.

Attacked by Al Qaeda in 2001 invaded Afghanistan.

Attacked by a bunch of Saudis but no one from Afghanistan in 2001 - invaded Afghanistan.

Yes, I can see why you did that - not - now explain invading Iraq.

 

[High_Gravity]

Please detail when the States were attacked, by whom and what you did to defend your country.
Invading countries that didn't attack America doesn't count.

Attacked by Al Qaeda in 2001 invaded Afghanistan.

Attacked by a bunch of Saudis but no one from Afghanistan in 2001 - invaded Afghanistan.

Yes, I can see why you did that - not - now explain invading Iraq.

They were trained in Afghanistan and Osama Bin Laden and his group were hiding there, not Saudi Arabia. As far as Iraq I never agreed with that, talk to Dick Cheney or Rumsfeld.

 

[jillian]

Should U.S. soldiers be armed?

After all, not one has fired a gun to defend the United states since 1945.

That is not the appropriate question. What you want to ask
Is should they be armed on base. The military says no. And we all know what lefties the joint chiefs are.

The Joint Chiefs are taking orders from the civilians though. I doubt the toll would be as high were that rule not in place.

or it would have been higher. either is surmise and speculation [MENTION=23239]westwall[/MENTION]

the joint chiefs did not take orders from anyone as far as I know regarding gun policy on base.