UK LCpl takes the first hit while Afghan insurgent hides behind 10-year old girl.
Pretty amazing.
|
|||||
Hot Mic
Bloggers in Arms
BlogrollContinuous WavePaid to BlogReciprocating EnginesSmarter'n MeWingmen
OmakaseAmazon Search |
Taking the HitBy lex, on December 21st, 2010
36 comments to Taking the Hit |
Targets of Opportunityblog advertising is good for you Credo"Sign on, young man, and sail with me. The stature of our homeland is no more than the measure of ourselves. Our job is to keep her free. Our will is to keep the torch of freedom burning for all. To this solemn purpose we call on the young, the brave, the strong, and the free. Heed my call, Come to the sea. Come Sail with me." -- John Paul Jones "Pardon him, Theodotus; he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature" --George Bernard Shaw, "Caesar and Cleopatra" "And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music."--Friedrich Nietzsche "A kind Providence has placed in our breasts a hatred of the unjust and cruel, in order that we may preserve ourselves from cruelty and injustice. They who bear cruelty, are accomplices in it. The pretended gentleness which excludes that charitable rancour, produces an indifference which is half an approbation. They never will love where they ought to love, who do not hate where they ought to hate."--Edmund Burke “You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours.”--General Sir Charles Napier "Μολὼν λαβέ" -- Leonidas "Blogito Ergo Sum" -- Neptunus Lex Amazon AssociateFor the Effort!Winnar! Subscribe CategoriesPagesTagsacademy
afghanistan
Araby
Blogging
buffoonery
culture
Defense Industry
economy
Flying
Friday Musings
geopol
Gratuitous slap
GWOT
Headlines
health care
History
iran
iraq
issues
libya
Media
Memory Lane
Military
Navy
norks
Oz
pakistan
piracy
politicians
politics
Politics and Culture
prc
pundits
science
sea stories
silliness
Small Stuff
SoCal
Tech Lust
technology
UAVs
UK
usaf
usmc
weapons
|
|||
|
Copyright © 2013 Neptunus Lex - All Rights Reserved |
|||||
“So others may live”
Maybe not his unit’s motto, but certainly he lives by the creed. I’m glad he’s still with us.
God bless and keep him…the brave LCpl is one lucky “Tankie”. Best
“I tried to stand up, but I had disco legs…”
Pure British understatement. There’s hope for the Empire yet. Hearts of oak, indeed.
Lions indeed, but led by who? (And this time not the officers, but the occupants of 10 Downing and Parliament)
LITERALLY “Beyond Belief.”
I am gonna tell Sal, that guy is Fullbore!
Perhaps I am too much of a crumudgeon but this is what gets me about the West, my Gawd do we have the raw materials on hand to continue making a better society as guys like this attest to, but IMHO the Left has won the culture war and taken us to place of narcissistic nihilism in general. What might have been are considered by some the saddest words in the English language, does anyone else wonder why the freest, most prosperous and most domestically at peace generation mankind has ever seen has lower SAT scores than in the 1960′s and as cultural achievements has produced Lady Gaga, Jersey Shore, and a top 10 chart consistently filled with rap music? I know this is way off-topic and we should be praising this incredible man, but what is his bravery and sacrifice for?
Sorry too off-topic. This guy is amazing. I’ll be spreading this story to my family and friends.
I believe it’s because stupidity and hedonism is the easy path to take; thinking is not required, nor is any exposure to physical danger.
Good thing he wasn’t an American. He’d be assigned a gay roommate and then charged with sexual harassment and then brought to explain why he’s making John Kerry & Obama look bad. He’d then be told he doesn’t qualify for the medal of “courageous restraint” because that medal only saves terrorist lives and a black mark would go in his service file.
Bravo Zulu however!
Hey you all…lets get real here…”state-of-the-art Mark 7 Combat Helmet” or not..two/three inches to the right …the LCpls luck abruptly runs out…and it becomes a very different story indeed. Best
PS, Roachman…news flash…the (British)… Empire no longer exists in any meaningfull way.
As long as there are men like this in the Queens (or Kings) ranks, the Empire lives.
Snake,
Well aware of the passing of the Empire. It’s more of an honorific, like referring to a retired 06 as Colonel or Captain.
Cheers.
Roachman, I was sure you were…it was just a quick response to the “Empire lives/hearts of oak”, type of comment that has no relation whatsoever to the simple fact that this hesitant/thoughtful “Tankie” was one extremely lucky trooper…I meant no offense. Best
I’m sure your quick response was just a knee-jerk reaction to a quip typical of the British sense of humour. Be it `hesitant or thoughtful`, these judgment calls are made in such circumstances that the vast majority of people who comment on them and sit in judgment on the outcomes, be they good or bad, have no idea. Sadly for many of our war dead, those who judge the actions of others are often those who draw up the ROE’s from behind their desks or in committee rooms. I’m sure you have `an idea` so lest you think my comments are personal and offensive – I meant neither, but then I had the time to think my response through.
Following the incident, ‘Murf’ was straight back out on patrol with his colleagues, showing his dedication to making life better for the Afghan people.
“It’s just a flesh wound!” British unflappability at its finest.
That was my thought too, Snake… I’m thoroughly happy things turned out as they did (live squaddie, dead fleabag, escaped munchkin) but I have to shudder at the coulda’s involved here.
His refusal to engage might have cost his life, his squadmate’s life, or (had Abdul been sheilding behind the kid just long enough to reach the trigger of an IED) his entire unit’s lives.
The West has far greater respect for the lives of the enemy’s neighbors’ children than the enemy does. That’s strongly to our credit morally but it operates to our extreme detriment tactically and strategically.
In this case, all worked out well. But treating a war zone like a police action is what is getting far too many of our side’s people dead.
And sadly, any local goodwill earned by saving a young girl’s life will be lost the next time somebody’s auntie dies in a Predator strike.
Or when dad’s honor demands he kill the girl for daring to hold hands with a boy, 6 years down the road.
And now Abdul’s surviving buddies know that child human shields are effective, even if you fire – - so long as you don’t let go.
What a world.
I’m not sure whet it is we’re actually doing in the Af at this point, but I’m not sure if the definition of ‘war’ applies any more. Might be we don’t have a precise word for it yet.
This is why many, many experienced observers say we are utterly unprepared, mentally and tactically, to counter a Beslan or Moscow Theater type situation here in America. Spetsnaz are trained to shoot through the hostage, something utterly unthinkable not only to our police, but to our military as well. I’m not arguing that Russian tactics have proven to be the best or only option, only that nearly any hope of counterattack involves the loss of civilian lives, and we are simply not prepared for that.
N.B. Waco and Ruby Ridge, however, may indicate that I am entirely wrong.
Sorry, wrong on the Waco & Ruby Ridge bit, Zane. One involved a Christian sect (what’s the difference between a sect and a Religion? Ans: 500,000 adherents) burned alive during an assault ordered by a Democrat Administration and a Kafka-like bureaucracy hypersensitive to charges of “child-abuse” as well as overtly hostile to gun ownership; the other a conservative shot dead on the orders of Govt agencies who STILL consider people like Randy Weaver and gun ownership a greater threat to national security than Islam. But REAL terrorists? Zane, Zane, Zane, you should know better…orders WILL ALWAYS BE to “bend over backwards” ….to avoid excess terrorist bloodshed, not that of the children…Obama’s minions were HIGHLY upset the three Somali Pirates were shot dead under orders of the on-the-scene commander according to multiple inside accounts…shooting thru the children would mean the terrorists would be killed too, rather than be captured to be held for a civilian “fair trial” so beloved of the left..
Signed: Unbelievably Cynical
Zane, let me just postulate the following and tell me if I’m off the mark:
In order of preference I list what I believe the Obama Administration would have preferred the outcome of the Somali Pirate rescue operation to have been:
1) The Pirates captured alive and their hostage rescued unharmed.
2) The Pirates captured alive even if it meant the death of their American hostage.
3) What actually happened..
Signed: STILL unbelievably cynical.
VX, methinks you misunderstood my poorly stated point (apologies, haven’t dipped into the 15-year oak barrel scotch yet), which is given the willingness of government storm troopers to murder innocents in Waco and Ruby Ridge, they might prove me wrong in being willing to shoot subhumans holding children as human shields.
One of my favorite post-Waco bumper stickers read, “Is your church ATF approved?”
The problem here is that current government types see gun owners, religious people, and conservatives as the “subhuman” and they see the terrorists as the ones deserving protection.
Sarge, I concur…and well said. Best
I appreciate and respect your words here, Sarge. The fact that this incident got reported at all is yet another reminder of how reportage can impact on tactical doctrine to achieve, as you rightly observe in your final sentence, a very shaky and unfocussed strategic one. As others argue, he could/should/shouldn’t have engaged but if the outcome was that everybody died justifiably and the dead civvy child was another casualty of war, it would be just another bloody blot on the big picture, and may even have gone unreported.
But that aside, what touches me so much about this guy is that the confrontation was so much like the sort of justification dilemma we used to train our tactical firearms officers on in the police. His reaction was instinctive and, in doing what he did in split seconds, lets us peep into his psyche and see the humanity and the compassion vying for a place alongside the professional soldier.
There are many arguments within these comments where the `what if’s, the for’s and against’s are debated, all having their own merits in the wider picture. But our guy did what he did, with his instructors words ringing in the back of his mind “watch and shoot, watch and shoot”. He watched, assessed, made his choice and moved on. I see a great human being under that beautiful Kevlar helmet.
This is front page stuff, right WaPo and NYT?
I’d like to be first in line to buy the LCpl a pint and say BZ. Line forms to the left.
Big brass ones. I hope he has children and lives long enough to raise them.
I am led to understand that in Afghanistan and other areas men are assigned the role of protecting their families, police and the rule of law not really having the breadth that it does here in the West. They may kill a daughter to protect the family honor, but the protection of that honor is their task and they approach the task with a certain zeal.
How does a man protect his family, or claim himself a man, by using a child as a shield? How does The Merciful One allow a British soldier to live and the coward hiding behind a child to die and the child to live if that is not His Will? If it be His Will, should we not take note that hiding behind children displeases The Merciful One and he will reward men, even infidel men, over cowards who squander His gifts of life so easily.
Broadcast that from every TV station, let’s see how many stand behind their women and children afterwords.
I’m betting it’s only the cowards.
– Max
Max, I think you or I would find such an appeal compelling… but my understanding is that in tribal societies, those not of the tribe are not considered fully human. sacrificing one of the ‘others’ in order to save your life for your tribe is considered both moral and just common sense.
And in fundamentalist Muslim tribal societies, a FEmale not of your tribe isn’t hardly worth swerving the car to avoid running over, except that she might scratch the paint, going under.
When you’re dealing with a society where marriage to your first cousin is considered the preferred path, you’re talking ‘tribal’ with a vengeance.
As the saying goes, “I against my brother. My brother and I against my cousin. My cousin, my brother, and I against the world.”
Two thoughts from a civilian:
‘We can forgive the Palestinians for killing our children. We cannot forgive them from forcing us to kill their children.’ Golda Meir
Somewhere in the last year I read a thoughtful article from a military man (at BlackFive? I don’t remember) presenting a persuasive and troubling argument that our hesitation to injure non-combatants actually put them at greater risk. In the face of a merciless mortal enemy, he wrote, the kindest course was to be equally or even more ruthless. It was a rational argument, which I can’t yet accept.
In the face of ultimate and eternal justice (our Creator promises it), protecting the defenseless has got to be the right thing to do.
Best regards, Peter Warner.
In attempting to defeat an enemy, it is imperative that we do not become our own enemy or indistinguishable from our enemy.
We are dealing with an enemy who uses women and children as shields which at times leaves us little option than to take their lives.
It is critical that we do not hesitate in our resolve to win our conflict, but there are certain things we must not trample on in order to win – one of which is that we never lose sight of the sanctity of life. Second, in becoming more ruthless than our enemy, one has to ask “what does that mean?” “Ruthless” is a poorly chosen word if you ask me.
One thing the US can do better than any other country in the world is wage a war without injuring non-combatants. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen – it means we are better at it. Precision weapons, rules of engagement…a sense of morality and a memory of world that is better than the one being fought in, help us accomplish this. This is what sets us apart from the enemy. This is why people want to join us – not everyone – but the people we need to join us want to, this includes mothers and children who are the future generations of the country.
One has to remember, winning the peace is only the first step, you have to maintain it after that, how you win it is going to affect how well you are able to maintain it afterward.
Saturday’s Warrior pointed out:
‘in becoming more ruthless than our enemy, one has to ask “what does that mean?” “Ruthless” is a poorly chosen word if you ask me.’
You’re right, and to be clear that was my mistake in wording, not the writer who I was paraphrasing (poorly). Perhaps ‘more determined’?
I agree strongly with Saturday’s last sentence. The IDF (Israel Defense Force) also has a stellar reputation for minimizing collateral damage.
Yet Sarge’s following comment below suggests the answer will not be tidy or comforting. There was a report some time ago of a young woman from Gaza who had been given life-saving therapy by an Israeli clinic, who had gone back to that same clinic as a suicide bomber. What possible kindness can overcome such poison within?
Best regards, Peter Warner.
To actually win a war, rather than just prolonging one or devolving it to multi-generational stalemate (see Korea), you have to actually and completely remove the enemy’s desire to fight. This can be done either by killing him directly en masse and wiping out his ideology, or by making him realize that there is no benefit, and in fact serious detriment, to be gained by continuing to fight.
But when you are dealing with an enemy which profoundly believes that dying in the process of killing you (and/or your family) is not just a duty owed to their society, but is vastly preferable to living, that doing so ensures an immediate path to a promised paradise that is long, painful, and difficult to attain in any other ways, the latter is nearly impossible to obtain.
No amount of generated goodwill or reason can trump a true zealot’s shortcut to Heaven.
Nobody `wins` a war, they just lose less badly than the other side.
Relativism is one of the more irritating isms wandering the planet these days.
“Losing less badly” is winning, when “losing more badly” equates to capitulation, occupation, decimation, or cultural extermination, don’t you think?
You got it sarge. Cheers.