mimartin Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 If you want to discuss philosophy take it to the appropriate thread. Otherwise if you want to continue in this thread get back on topic. BTW I have "vengeance is mine" carved into my keyboard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moda Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 Sorry. one thing i do not understand though, is why this simple thing is such an issue to those of the opinion that it is a politically incorrect thing. why does it matter. is this not a war that is being waged. or is it a continued military engagement. If the conflict in the middle east is not a proper war, then J7 i must concede you are right. however if the engagments in afghanistan and iraq are proper wars, then i will argue that the imprinted of bible passages on weapons of war, which ultimately reflect the convictions and beliefs of one of the nations involved in this war are not wrong in any way shape or form, and the criticizing such things is ultimately more harmful overall than any damage such things would cause on their own Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 It is a fairly big deal to me because even if it only inspires 1 person to take up arms against American, Allied troops or against the civilian population then becomes not just a oversight, but a tragic stupid mistake. One that was preventable had someone in charge actually considered the implications before hand. We should be doing everything possible to protect soldiers fighting for our countries, not helping make them targets. Just shows how well planned this entire stupidity was from the very beginning. Can’t get our soldiers proper body armor or armor for their vehicles, but they have scopes with Bible verses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moda Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 but on the same token, wasting all this energy arguing about it, it is a pointles semantic, it is a custom of the company who makes the material, i can see the argument if it was put there by request, but this is a trait and practice of the company who makes the equipment. i also cannot see how something this minor can cause someone to seriously take up arms. if something so small can inspire someone to take up arms it is likely that they would've done it anyway for some other reason. If they are so close to the edge, they will fall over eventually, it doesnt matter what is the trigger, all that matters is that it is dealt with as it happens. if we start looking at from the whatifs we will become paralyzed with indecision, it is in the face of that that i support inflexibility, one must know when to bend, and when to stand firm, bend and never stand and your foe conquers because you will become like them in an effort to adapt, stand resilient and your foe may just adapt to be like you. its a careful balance but it must be done. Adapting for the sake of adapting can be far more detrimental than not adapting at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 Still stupid we bought this for our military fighting in the Middle East. Why not cut out the middle man and just paint bull eyes on their uniforms? Are you suggesting we ignore stupidity? Wouldn’t just allow them to continue to make stupid mistakes that get people killed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moda Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 but i dont see how this will get people killed, oh and for the record i am not american, i am australian, so this really doesnt entirely reflect on me, i just dont see what the big issue with it all is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonathan7 Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 but i dont see how this will get people killed, oh and for the record i am not american, i am australian, so this really doesnt entirely reflect on me, i just dont see what the big issue with it all is Right, you said this to me earlier; the mistake johnson made in vietnam was expecting the enemy to think like they did. But the only person in this thread not getting into either the mindset of the enemy or understanding the cultural aspects of Islam within Afghanistan is you. I really don't see what's hard to understand about the fact Muslims think the Crusades are bad, and the Taliban et al are saying this is another Crusade and Christians are occupying your land. Having Bible verses on bullets does not distil the notion that it is a Christian occupying force; which acts as a recruitment tool for the terrorists. Given its such a small thing, and it could save lives I fail to see why some are so desperate to hanging onto it. I'm telling you that having Bible verses on bullets will cause anger in the Muslim world; the success of failure of the mission in Afghanistan hangs on the ability of the forces their to understand the people. Having Bible verses on bullets, is a massive provocation, and will allow the terrorists to say the Christian invaders are here in a war against Islam. Which I'm sure that this will have seen some people join the Taliban. People in Afghanistan are very religious; I have good friends who worked there under the Taliban pre the invasion, do not underestimate the religious zealous of the people there. Regardless I'm done with this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 20, 2010 Share Posted January 20, 2010 I'd say that given the somewhat provisional manner in which our forces are being engaged in all this (ie not a global fight to the finish like WW2 in many ways), perhaps it's unwise to put that stuff on the scopes for troops in the field, regardless of how long the company has been doing it. While I don't personally care how they (the islamists radicals) feel about it, there is still the possibility that such a seemingly insignificant detail could cause feathers to be ruffled with the other locals, making our mission there unnecessarily complicated. "Thou shalt not kill", whilst lacking in artistry, would have been more brutal in its irony. Quite so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ping Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 I think this is just going to incite more terrorists. Besides, the U.S. is now acting like Christianity is the official religion of the country, which it is not, and judging by what's on the scopes, the nation also seems to assume that everyone in the military is Christian, which is false. Yet another reason why I've pretty much lost faith in the Christian religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommycat Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 "Thou shalt not kill", whilst lacking in artistry, would have been more brutal in its irony. I'd seriously question the accuracy of a scope with that on it... To the thread: Not the brightest move. But also an innocent mistake. The company has been doing this for far longer than it has been a supplier for the US Military. It seems more like an oversight. I'm sure future purchases will be without the quote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jae Onasi Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 No offence, but it's this attitude that gets the US in trouble abroad, it doesn't matter at home it does matter ALOT in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Crusades were not a good think, people were massacred; yet Bush conjured up images of the Crusades, and Bin Laden et al, tell Muslims that this is another Crusade against Islam. Things like this don't dispel the notion that this is a religious war (which it's not), and that is why this is a big, massive and stupid move. Would we Americans/UN troops/whoever else is there care if Iraqi scopes had 'Allahu ackbar' inscribed on them? No. I don't give a flying hoo-hah about the scope or inscription, I care about whether the bullet that just got fired out of that gun is going to hit me or not. I suspect if some of these scopes end up in enemy hands, they're not going to get tossed aside because they have a Christian verse on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moda Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 the only danger is thinking you understand the enemy. when the enemy has such a violently different mental prerogative you cannot understand them. you also cannot afford to believe they will play by your rules. in such a case all you can really do is use pure and overwhelming military force. Isnt the Islamic faith intrinsically pacifistic in nature, or so they keep claiming, if they are so willing to claim something which is minor, and has been the case for 20 years, as religious provocation, well that surely would imply they themselves are simply intolerant and militaristic in nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mur'phon Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Originally Posted by Jae Would we Americans/UN troops/whoever else is there care if Iraqi scopes had 'Allahu ackbar' inscribed on them? No. I don't give a flying hoo-hah about the scope or inscription, I care about whether the bullet that just got fired out of that gun is going to hit me or not. And so would I, unfourtantely this isn't about wether we would care or not had the situation been reversed. I find shaking hands to be a meaningless gesture, I still do it to make avoid uneccesary problems. I suspect if some of these scopes end up in enemy hands, they're not going to get tossed aside because they have a Christian verse on it. Of course, they might file the inscription away, but even if they don't, it will be weapons taken from the crusading enemy. Unlike US troops, no Afghani would believe you if you claimed that taliban fighters are christians because they use weapons with christian verses. Originally Posted by Moda the only danger is thinking you understand the enemy. when the enemy has such a violently different mental prerogative you cannot understand them. While I wouldn't claim to "understand" "them" in the sence that I can be certain how a group of diverse individuals will react, I can understand enough to make an educated guess. Since just about every action we make is based on us making predictions for what will happen, I don't see how chosing to keep/remove bible verses from scopes are any different. you also cannot afford to believe they will play by your rules. And what rules would they be in this instance? in such a case all you can really do is use pure and overwhelming military force. In Afghanistan this aproach has been tried twice allready, I fail to see how this time it would be any different. Isnt the Islamic faith intrinsically pacifistic in nature, or so they keep claiming, if they are so willing to claim something which is minor, and has been the case for 20 years, as religious provocation, well that surely would imply they themselves are simply intolerant and militaristic in nature. Who are those "they" you refer to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 Would we Americans/UN troops/whoever else is there care if Iraqi scopes had 'Allahu ackbar' inscribed on them?I would say for the most part the answer would be NO. I also don't see most of us getting upset over a political cartoon or a book that is critical of our beliefs. However, I do remember something about Muslims calling for the death of the artist/author that published material critical of their beliefs. I don’t believe we should suppress our culture/beliefs to attempt to appraise another culture, but when we are foreigners on their soil, we should do everything possible to keep from making them more upset at the so-called invaders. Personally, I would not buy a scope with Bible verses on it I find the practice sacrilegious. That does not mean I would judge anyone that had the scope as being sacrilegious. I’m not responsible for their actions to make that judgment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 But when you hijack 4 of our planes and use them to kill thousands of people, I do care... Patriotic jingoism FTW! what ever the troops want on the scope of their rifles is their business... as long as they are hitting the enemy centermass thats all that matters to me.. Huuuaaahh!! It's not the troops putting those inscriptions on the scopes. And while I respect the company's right to religious expression, I just think they should perhaps understand that some of their customers might not want a quote from the Bible on their scope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moda Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 have the troops complained though.... worrying about the enemy is weakness. if the troops complain, then thats a different story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Astor Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 have the troops complained though.... According to the BBC's article on this, the MRFF has recieved several e-mails from American Muslim soldiers who raised concerns about the inscriptions. Anyways, it seems that Trijicon have agreed to remove the quotes from scopes destined for military use. Story. Earlier today, Gen. David Petraeus, who commands CentCom, which oversees U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, told a D.C. thinktank that the company's practice was "disturbing …and a serious concern for me" and field commanders. He said there had been considerable discussions within the Department of Defense about how to deal with Trijicon's practice. "Trijicon has proudly served the U.S. military for more than two decades, and our decision to offer to voluntarily remove these references is both prudent and appropriate," said Stephen Bindon, Trijicon president and CEO in a statement. "We want to thank the Department of Defense for the opportunity to work with them and will move as quickly as possible to provide the modification kits for deployment overseas." The Trijicon statement said that the company would: "Remove the inscription reference on all U.S. military products that are in the company's factory that have already been produced, but have yet to be shipped" and "Provide 100 modification kits to forces in the field to remove the reference on the already forward deployed optical sights." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 21, 2010 Share Posted January 21, 2010 worrying about the enemy is weakness. Educated Opinion or Fact? I would like to see the statistics or the source on this claim if you are claiming to be presenting facts. Also are you saying all Muslims are the enemy? That is what you seem to be saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 No, it seems to me that he's saying the Muslim's we're fighting are the enemy (the radicals), while the others appear to be fence-sitting irrelevancies. Still, at least the company is agreeing to remove the verse issue from the scopes. An apparent oversight corrected. In a way you are both correct. The opinions of the radicals are immaterial, however we can't say that all muslims are islamists, hence the verses become an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mimartin Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 No, we are not both right, while I agree that I really don't care what the enemy thinks, all Muslims are not our enemy. It is pretty clear that is what moda is implying. So both opinions are mutually exclusive and we cannot be both right. The attitude that we don’t care what other cultures think about our action on their own land is the reason why we have the enemies we do today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 No, he was saying we shouldn't care what the enemy thinks (in this case the radicals)b/c we end up looking weak in their eye for our (over)sensitivities, but I agree with you that he doesn't give much shrift to the rest of the muslim population that either isn't islamist or fellow travelling noncombatants(not the same as calling ALL of them enemies). Hence why I also agree that the practice was shortsighted in terms of our missions over there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tobias Reiper Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 What ever happened to 'Thou shall not kill'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totenkopf Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 It probably got discarded by humanity......much like "thou shalt not commit adultery" and "thou shalt not steal". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth Avlectus Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I really don't know what to make of it. Maybe if marylin manson had a concert down there we'd all just get along? ...Anyone who disagrees with me can get fluffed up like a turkey! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKA-001 Posted January 22, 2010 Share Posted January 22, 2010 I don't see the point of putting any words on the scope of a rifle, much less words that don't assist with the use of the weapon (like the label on a safety switch or something). what ever the troops want on the scope of their rifles is their business... as long as they are hitting the enemy centermass thats all that matters to me.. Huuuaaahh!! **** center mass, shoot 'em in the face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.