Sam Samson

about following orders: I agree that the ability to obey orders is paramount. if you can't obey you're not worthy to lead in the first place. authority which doesn't get any active respect through submission, ceases to be authority, and then you have anarchy which hinders all progress. but there's definitely a threshold where you have to refuse orders. what I mean is what they called "befehlsnotstand" in germany after ww2. so many soldiers had done things under orders which they said they didn't want to do, that the country faced a giant moral dilemma afterwards. germany changed though. they've been working this out. I personally like their concept of "innere führung", of being led in accordance with your convictions. (I have a friend in the german gsg. an officer, not an active commando. ) there's a time (very seldom, especially in the army of a liberal nation ) when you have to refuse. and then you'll have to be ready to bear the consequences. then you might not be dying for your country, but for your ideals at the hand of your country. (I imagine this is very hard to do for somebody without faith in God. )

the prussians had a saying: a soldier needs to fear his officer more than the enemy. (so much for the origin of german discipline ) in the US they don't like to call them deserters. make that going AWOL (absent without leave ). in a democracy you can't just shoot the nervous critter for hopping into the bushes. this is supposed to be government for the people by the people. can't kill peoples sons just so. however, when it is done it is punishment and deterrent all at the same time. napoleon once said when he observed the people storm the palaces: blast the first 500 avec cartouches. the rest will quietly go home all by themselves.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Nov. 10 2002,19:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Come to think of it, the whole question was too easy and with too many possible options. I'll change the question into this: If you were Saddam, how would you defend Iraq? That's a bit more of an interesting question.<span id='postcolor'> bingo! with all moral bars removed I'd to that: being handicapped by military inferiority and knowing the US will have to rely on a coalition I would immediately start sowing discord among its allies. I's promise lucrative post sanction oil deals to ambitious nations, who would then inauspiciously work for me on the propaganda front. I'd utilize the israeli/palestinian situation to its max. I'd rely on the west's very own pluralism and diversity to make warmaking as difficult as possible for the coalition. I'd act out of nature by doing good in a humanitarian sense. and I'd start to build AT defenses on presumed attack routes miles deep right today.

appreciate your comments. found especially interesting what ran and denoir had to say and laud othin's and the pilot's (and everybody elses's, gosh) principled patriotism. the thread title is semeiotically correct. I meant what I wrote. I used "die" not just "fight" on purpose. I mean, going into some battles you run the serious risk of not coming back. so you better know why you go in the first place. I read that during a particular landing operation of the Marines in the gulf war, the cinc's staff had figured that about 15% would make it to go on and establish their beachhead. thank God that did't happen and they in fact lost nobody. about the romance factor: figure it's like marriage. first you see something exciting in her (an army or a woman), then you join her with an oath (the army or the woman), then you start seeing her without makeup and start to obey orders but you only joined her (unless you were drafted, of course) because you saw something in her in the first place. (mmmahumbdyhumm in a woman. ideals, adventure, action, money (chchch) or whatever in an army) here's what I mean: I've been to the alamo in san antonio, where davy crockett, jim bowie and a bunch of other fabled west-men made their last stand in 1836 against santa ana's huge army. (texas against mexico for independence) they were 183 volunteers holing up in the mission's church. when they were surrounded and realized they were about to get smoked they sent young john bonham to goliad to get backup. there was no backup reserve anywhere near the post. now for bonham: instead of staying in goliad in safety he broke back through the enemy ranks into the alamo (! to inform and to fight with them. he knew full well it was hopeless. he still went back. on march 6, 1836, they all died fighting santa ana, taking 600 enemy soldiers with them. two months later texas achieved independence and freedom. what makes guys like bonham tick?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Nov. 08 2002,22:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Nov. 07 2002,23:55)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I gave and raised more money for causes that help people than you probably ever will.<span id='postcolor'>Hey Sam, you seem to know a lot of stuff. Would you know how many of those people benefitting from your causes where non-Christians?  Were any of them refugees? What would you estimate the world's Christian/Muslim ratio is? What do you suppose the world's Christian/Muslim refugee ratio is?<span id='postcolor'> first let me say that I'm happy too that today a unanimous resolution in the UN was reached. obviously france and russia got their oil deals secured even in the event of a US led crus... oops against saddam. (sorry. I just  had to put that in ) bernadotte, I'm not giving you fund figures, but they are roughly in the low seven digits. by far the most of the people benefitting from what I'm doing are christians. others, hard to say, about 40.000 were hindus. it is very hard to work in moslem countries or communities. can't go into a lot of them on pains of death, being an active christian. btw: did you know the tower of the biggest mosque in the world, in syria, is called the Jesus minaret? you know why? because, they say, Jesus will come back one day to set the christians straight. and then he will go kill all jews. anyway. april of this year I was in a place while in the neighboring district people were burning, moslem women at the hand of hindutva men, who had gotten inspired on by moslems setting a train with hindu pilgrims ablaze. it was awful. but that has  nothing to do with the subject. however, I dream of walking the streets of a free and open baghdad one day...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Balschoiw @ Nov. 08 2002,00:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Problem is that current developement in abroad policies and the whole "War on terror " thing reaches into most of the topics that are currently discussed as they happen. You can´t striclty separate all the issues, cause they belong to a major change in nowadays society and moral change. Some go conform with it others dont. Posts like Sam´s don´t contribute to the thread. He states something, that noone asked for. and this </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> ... ---awful, awful post by Sam --- ... <span id='postcolor'> is not part of the topic ! Why dont you just continue with the discussion and keep all that unrelated stuff out ? We know that you love your country. We know that you are damn proud. Nothing new. Keep with the discussion in a contributing way. Not just accusing someone, but contributing !<span id='postcolor'> so it's alright to bite the US in the behind in every second post on the board, but when europe is confronted they suddenly become delicate and thin-skinned? aah, the irony. balschoiw, you're one of those. sorry to aggravate you. but rest assured, even in the future I won't wait until somebody asks me to post. the matter is all interwoven. and that other guy..., what's his name?... dimbulb..., darklight! : don't bother. ... brother!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (brgnorway @ Nov. 08 2002,00:27)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">3. no. I have arab (palestinian! friends, believe it or not. <span id='postcolor'> .....or not - but if you say so! ... I have great respect for the israeli people as well as the palestinian people. My solution is to use diplomacy not guns! I have stated my opinions many timeson this board. Go see for yourself. I don't specifically wish for any people to jump into the sea - including you!<span id='postcolor'> I used to live together with a Palestinian for about a year before I got married. We lived in a heavily black neighborhood and our neighbor across the street was an egyptian immigrant, mechanic, who continually fixed my car. the guy is married himself now. we haven't met in a while. I don't have any moslem friends who are active in mosques or so. just to clarify. respect for other people is the first step. good to have a nod from you on that. otherwise I suggest you go take your diplomacy into the highlands of western pakistan. talk to osama, not me about cultural peace and understanding. (you might want to take a ranger or a marine with you.) actually, I think some attitudes set forth by some here are like spitting in the face of the victims of this murderer.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ Nov. 08 2002,17:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Oh and here is something for you to argue about in a civvilised manner of course! Officially the first fundamentalist groups were Evangelical American Protestants. "Fundamentalist" is a word that was used to justify the American missile attacks on the Sudanese chemical plant (pharmacy) and if you are a fundamentalist nowadays you are the target of America's war on terrorism (as fundametalists are now terrorists according to GWB). So isn't it ironic that the first official terrorists were Americans?<span id='postcolor'> delicious. We get the picture: Sure, Muslim fundamentalists can be pretty extreme, but what about all our Christian fundamentalists? Unfortunately, for the old moral equivalence to hold up, the Christians really need to get off their fundamentalist behinds and start killing more people. At the moment, the brilliantly versatile Muslim fundamentalists are gunning down Maryland schoolkids and bus drivers, hijacking Moscow musicals, self-detonating in Israeli pizza parlors, blowing up French oil tankers in Yemen, and slaughtering nightclubbers in Bali, while Christian fundamentalists are, er, sounding extremely strident in their calls for the return of prayer in school.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Nov. 07 2002,23:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Nov. 07 2002,23:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> you posted that pic once or twice before and you're still wrong on two counts with it: 1. arabs from east jerusalem are free to move within israel. 2. why is the sign in front of that palestinian lady so big? is it hiding her suicide belt? <span id='postcolor'> The Palestinian woman was expelled from Israel in 1948 along with over 700,000 other Palestinian Arabs. Â The pic was shot years ago in the US and has been posted by a number of Jewish peace organisations. So why don't ya stop being so susceptible, Sam, and entertain us with more tales from the Crusades. <span id='postcolor'> no, man! no. she left because the gazillion man army from arabia told them to. they were supposed to come back and take possession of what "rightfully belongs to them" after the arabs squashed the jews. didn't work out that way. but still makes good propaganda for folks like you. it's all in the spin...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (brgnorway @ Nov. 07 2002,23:37)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I just have to ask you Sam: why do you allways insult other people by making personal judgements? Is it impossible for you to discuss in a polite and critical manner? Do you hate arabs? Do you like anyone at all? Do you have any friends at all? Was your boyhood rather traumatic - is that the reason for you despizing all peoples and cultures except for the wasp-north american culture and the jewish as well? Do you have the abillity of showing compassion?<span id='postcolor'> 1. I wasn't talking to you. bernadotte is man enough to answer for himself. 2. polite and critical like you? 3. no. I have arab (palestinian! friends, believe it or not. 4. yes, all men. 5. perhaps more than you, being member of a brotherhood. 6. no. I'm just a realist. 7. I gave and raised more money for causes that help people than you probably ever will. your solution to the mid east dilemma? (other than making all jews jump into the sea.) I'm still waiting.

I for one am glad it is the US fighting the war on terror. given european history, I'd be truly concerned if they'd handle it. the US is still a benign, benevolent nation, mostly living (foreign affairs wise) by the great maxim put forth by teddy roosevelt: walk softly and carry a big stick. the US helps nations, extends a hand (marshal-plan, euros... remember that one?). if somebody refuses and messes with the US, the big stick goes into action. after your ability to hurt america is significantly diminished, the helping hand comes back. I like it. consider europe on the other hand: the brutish, sorry british, the dutch boers in SA. the treatment of russia against its own people and ukraine, remember how they treated germany after ww1. how germany treated them in ww2. the turks the armenians and greeks, the greeks the turks, germany the jews, the poles the jews, the czechs the germans, the balkans now. the unwarranted hatred against the US and israel now... no. I'm glad the US is doing this war on terror thing, not europe.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Nov. 07 2002,11:35)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">All the education in the world will not help Palestinian Arabs understand or tolerate why they are living in refugee camps unable to return to their homeland. <span id='postcolor'> you're going in circles, bernadotte. this is why I don't bother to respond anymore. you're an ideologue, complete with double standard and blindness in the right eye. talking to you is like arguing with a jehova's witness about endtimes. you posted that pic once or twice before and you're still wrong on two counts with it: 1. arabs from east jerusalem are free to move within israel. 2. why is the sign in front of that palestinian lady so big? is it hiding her suicide belt? also: why is the palestinian leadership so despised in the arab world? I mean, positively nobody called arafat to sympathize with him last time the israelis house-arrested him. after a few days king abdullah finally said hi. you didn't listen the first time around, like on page 173 or so: the plight of the palestinians is perpetuated by rich arabs, who could help if they wanted to, but don't for political, antijewish reasons. why do palestinian maps have two crossed swords where israel is? and why doesn't israel exist on their maps, just an arabian "palestine"? once israel is down they'll move on your country. don't you get it? this is the nature of their wahabi-islam. osama is not just another slightly misguided anti-imperialist. he is the enemy of all things west, jewish or christian, including you. even though your're something of an apologist for him and his likes! I have to ask you again: why do you hate the jews so much? is it that you mimic the typical posture of the left?: the last righteous in the middle of a world of US-corruption around you? morally superior but politically a failure? ...never met a "liberator" I didn't like? get a grip man. you're fighting a palestinian propaganda war in your yearnings for the destruction of jewish settlements. I'm starting to get concerned about you...

I wonder what took them so long. the army has been experimenting with x-ray laser cannons ever since president reagan's days.

it only happened 3x in the last 150 years that the party of a president gained in the mid-term elections. how ever you feel about the presidential election that put W into power: he's vindicated. voters approve of him, since we all know that this election was about W more than about anything else. jeb won too by a surprisingly clear margin. go boys!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Nov. 06 2002,21:02)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Jinef @ Nov. 06 2002,20:46)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But you go to Afghanistan! All you want there is oil. <span id='postcolor'> Indeed. How fortuitous that the terrorists who attacked us were trained and based there. It makes things so wonderfully convenient for us. Needless to say, if they had been based in Cuba we'd just be after sugarcane and cigars. If they had been based in Sweden we'd just be after blonde chicks with big boobs. If they had been based in Somalia, we'd just be after flies. Semper Fi<span id='postcolor'> go get'em, tiger

denoir's pc front is on the move again. 1. I see. 2. apparently you're speculating 3. president ford had heads of state in mind, not illegal combatants bent on the destruction of the US. hello, light is on, anybody home? *knocks on denoir's forehead* we're at war.

I have a friend, lives in kathmandu now, who preached to the trappers, miners and eskimos in alaska, beyond the brooks range. he tells how he couldn't sleep once from the midnight sun, so he took his .22 and went for a walk. he was a good ways from the house when he happened on fresh bear prints. he says he was wide awake at 1 in the morning. another time he had shot a caribou for over the winter. he cut the thing up and carried half of it to the house. when he came back a bear was on his caribou. he got mad and just shot at the thing with his .45 pistol (which really doesn't do much to a bear 100 yards away.) the animal came at him at 30 mph. he got scared witless and to this day doesn't remember how he got up that vertical incline. so: if you happen to meet a bear beyond the brooks range in alaska at midnight some day, don't mess with it unless you have an ample supply of buckshot and the appropriate rifle with you.

didn't read the books and don't want to sound smart, but that asher-version, from what I can gather here, seems probable. especially if he's not a pro-soldier. for an oda to carry a 200lb load on an extended recon, or terminal guidance, mission is not much, considering the inhospitable terrain they operated in. most of the load was water. you don't want to carry that load in unknown terrain over an extended period like all night. and oda's are designed, or at least retain the ability, to split evenly to duplicate their capabilities. and so on.

guys like bernadotte will never get it, tex. their worldview overlays their perception like radio static messes up the transmission. we're at war. if you want to know how the other side really thinks about issues, I suggest you consult: www.alminbar.com/ brought to you straight from mecca. (so don't yak at me that those guys writing there are some kind of radicals. they's not.) blessings of moslem martyrdom http://www.alminbar.com/khutbaheng/1478.htm history from moslem viewpoint http://www.alminbar.com/khutbaheng/hcihl.htm and many other goodies. and don't forget that it was arafat's rejection of barak's offer that brought you your bogieman sharon. but I might as well talk to a wall...

I admit, stranger things have happened. but only a very small handfull of soldiers would have equipment like that with them, among them higher ranking SF personnel. and those would be too professional to give some two-bit hooker the chance to steal from them. case dismissed.

while I agree that the gas solution was a good, creative one, I heard that some news folks now blame the aggressive qualities of the GAS in use for some of the 90 dead. would be awful. I still commend the russian cracks for their swift maneuver though. about chechnya: it's just too bad that the russians don't try the US policy from after ww2. the allies utterly, totally destroyed german and japanese warmaking capabilities. but then they turned right around and helped those nations with lots of goodwill and money. they proved that allied warmaking, or the hatred war brings on, was not done from the heart. those nations are now (fairly) stable allies. maybe even chechnya has ally potential. leaving it to the wahhabi-moslems is not really a choice. or is it? I say: russia, help them back up onto their feet after you annihilated their terrorist guerrilla fighters. don't mess with their civilians. rather endear them to you somehow. how's that for strategy?

the koreans came forward so swiftly because of bush's saber rattling. they had no desire to be the next state with a lying rogue oppressive system being taken down after iraq. the rhetoric works. I hear the US is trying to do something like buy their nukes. about a likely scenario: the north would have to fire first of course. but would they succeed? unlikely. korea has a very challenging terrain. for a tank invasion only a handfull of routes are available. the south might actually be able to do a turkey shoot on them. the US airforce rules the sky. problematic might be the commandos coming in through tunnels or midget submarines. I assume the north would go to seoul and resort to terror tactics. the moneyless rogues of the world are learning about the effectiveness of guerrilla warfare these days...

alpha teams? do they have operational detachments alpha in russia? never mind... right now somebody should be looking hard into the blueprints of the building. theaters always have lots of spaces below the ground. maybe there are tactical strongpoints to be manned. somebody should also immediately get on the roof or high windows of the shop to get visuals down into the crowd without being noticed. or do they have tv-crews in there already? what about a multiple flashbang entry, like from 3 secured sides simultaneously? would probably be uncalculable right now. I'm all tense to see how this ends.

I hear that the german fox is so popular with a lot of US theater commanders that some are using them as mobile hq, even though the US ones are mostly nbc capabable. great stuff. nothing like it.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (advocatexxx @ Oct. 22 2002,17:20)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They have photos of people pumping their gas in the D.C. area and having the reporters write how scared and frightened they all are. Â C'mon. Â Give me a break. Â There's a couple of million people living in the D.C. area and this Sniper seems to shoot one person every 2 days or so. Â You have a better chance of winning the lottery, and clearly nobody is walking around all excited, smiling and making plans on how to spend the millions, so why exaggerate so much ? Â There's a much, much, much higher chance those folks will die in a car accident that day then get shot by a sniper. Â It's just a bad point of view in my opinion. Â I often hate media for doing things like these. Â "People here are terrified, afraid to walk home alone, and their children as well... This is Rob Atkins, back to you John"... John, cram it, 'mam.<span id='postcolor'> you obviously have a real grip on how terror tactics work. you should go talk to those people over in maryland on how silly they are. go solve the world's problems! (while you're still young and know everything.)