Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

Ok so the even the vice president is promising to "get the evil americans"..... after a US court dismissed the charges against former Blackwater security guards for a shooting incident in Iraq , Joe Biden has announced that the United States Government will file an appeal to "bring these men to justice"...when I first heard this I said to the wife " no, its Joe biden, that idiot can't do anything right ." I really wonder how many american people who are "the United States Government" want their tax dollars to fund a vendetta by the Obama administration against these men?


http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld ... 9846.story

This is just like Congress deciding that they can pass a law targeted against a certain group of folks who got bonuses.

I wonder how many Americans recognize what this truly represents.

Glock27Bill wrote: I wonder how many Americans recognize what this truly represents.

not enough anyway....

I know I am giving MR Biden to much credit, but I wonder if this is a political ploy to remove their defeat in mass and issues with Obama care out of the spotlight. Or it could be they will drop this to buy votes for Obama care.

GS78 wrote:

Glock27Bill wrote: I wonder how many Americans recognize what this truly represents.

not enough anyway....

If enough truly did I'd be able to see the flames of DC from my front yard...

You better come down to Woodbrige and visit me, all that hot air and bull---- in washington you would be way to close in SpringField to be safe.

Yep, I'm only about 10 miles from downtown but a little off the beaten track.

Yeah Biden along with Obama give us a whole lot to be proud of,Chief executives who will throw American citizens under the bus to enhance the US/ Iraq relationship irregardless of what our Justice System has decided. Not to mention campaign a little too. They'll probably take the trial to Iraq if the appeal fails here in the US. I gotta wonder how many of our soldiers were killed by the innocent civilians over there that will never know justice because of this spineless administration??

Biden like his boss has done fell and bumped his frickin' head.

Help me understand this....

a. the Blackwater gentlemen had charges dismissed correct?

b. there was no admission of guilty, or adjudication of guilt/innocence; just that the USAtty did not follow the rules in pursuing this paticular case.

c. if the gentlemen are guilty - would'nt we want justice served?

d. if the gentlemn are innocent - wouldn't we (and them, I'll assume) want vindication in the integrity of their actions (in Iraq)?

I agree that MOST politician's really, really, really enjoy hearing the sound of their own voices - so Biden is no exception to that rule; however, if the Blackwater gentlement are guilty, they should be tried until justice is served - a dismissal does NOT preclude the USAtty from seeking charges, to include additional charges at a later date.

It is also my belief that Bush/Cheney (and Company) USED Blackwater operators to push, promote and achieve an "agenda" that was not militarily feasible or allowed in Iraq. Protecting diplomats, and providing security wasn't the only actions taken by Blackwater - and even those actions should have, and should continue to follow "rules of engagement" clearly outlined; it cannot be a free-for-all. It just seems to me that a "pretext" existed then (Bush/Cheney's actions) and one exists now (Obama/Biden) - after the evidence is presented - it would be my expectation that the truth would come out and folks can then make informed decisions; not political announcements.

jadedone4 wrote:Help me understand this....

a. the Blackwater gentlemen had charges dismissed correct?

b. there was no admission of guilty, or adjudication of guilt/innocence; just that the USAtty did not follow the rules in pursuing this paticular case.

c. if the gentlemen are guilty - would'nt we want justice served?

d. if the gentlemn are innocent - wouldn't we (and them, I'll assume) want vindication in the integrity of their actions (in Iraq)?

I agree that MOST politician's really, really, really enjoy hearing the sound of their own voices - so Biden is no exception to that rule; however, if the Blackwater gentlement are guilty, they should be tried until justice is served - a dismissal does NOT preclude the USAtty from seeking charges, to include additional charges at a later date.

It is also my belief that Bush/Cheney (and Company) USED Blackwater operators to push, promote and achieve an "agenda" that was not militarily feasible or allowed in Iraq. Protecting diplomats, and providing security wasn't the only actions taken by Blackwater - and even those actions should have, and should continue to follow "rules of engagement" clearly outlined; it cannot be a free-for-all. It just seems to me that a "pretext" existed then (Bush/Cheney's actions) and one exists now (Obama/Biden) - after the evidence is presented - it would be my expectation that the truth would come out and folks can then make informed decisions; not political announcements.

Yes, but I'm not sure they ever could get a fair trial now. The rules exist so that the government can't bias your trial (they still try to anyway, just look at how many people are "convicted" in the press only on government statements.).

Edit: There are several, very popular TV shows about cops who circumvent the rules to get the bad guy. I personally think they are disgusting and are assisting a general demise of American law. The shows always show the bad guy nearly getting off on a technicality and it makes the audience want revenge, not justice. The assumption with these shows, is that you know the bad guy is actually bad and not just someone in the wrong place at the wrong time. Often, they even show the crime to enhance your support for the rogue cops (you now know he is guilty).

Better that nine guilty men go free, than one innocent man be punished. Everyone forgets this or disagrees with it until they are the mark or witness it first hand. Then they are aghast at their presumed guilt vice innocence.

There is an old saying "All is fair in love and War". I am a firm believer in that. We the American people are hold to a higher standard by the press and liberals in this countryand the rest of the world. We continue to fight by a set of rules the our emenies do not. We should have learned that in Korea or Vietnam. How many more American men and women have to die in far a way lands before we learn that this isn't a prize fight were we have to fight by the Marguess of queensberry rules.

Don't you find it a bit strange that our "leaders" want to give the terrorists all the rights, privileges and protection of our Constitution, but wish to deny it to US citizens. It would not be the first time our "inJustice" people approached a case with the attitude that they would try someone over and over again until they get the results they want. I put absolutely NOTHING out of contention when it comes to this regime under Obama and the likes of his Attorney General Eric Holder.

graybeard321 wrote:There is an old saying "All is fair in love and War". I am a firm believer in that. We the American people are hold to a higher standard by the press and liberals in this countryand the rest of the world. We continue to fight by a set of rules the our emenies do not. We should have learned that in Korea or Vietnam. How many more American men and women have to die in far a way lands before we learn that this isn't a prize fight were we have to fight by the Marguess of queensberry rules.

How many of us look back trying to figure out the tactical strategy that armies, such as England, used in military engagements. Such as marching lines of soldiers across a field to slaughter. I wonder how many will look back after America has fallen. Trying to figure out our strategy of sending men and women into harm's way while restricting their ability to fight the battles we ask of them.

Somehow I do not believe that if the battle was in our homeland the forces fighting here would restrain themselves as ours are required to.

Fordtek, just reminded me of very valid point. If our forefathers had fought the Brit;s by there rules and not the indian tactics we used. We might still be subjects and not citizens.

jadedone4 wrote:Help me understand this....

a. the Blackwater gentlemen had charges dismissed correct?

b. there was no admission of guilty, or adjudication of guilt/innocence; just that the USAtty did not follow the rules in pursuing this paticular case.

c. if the gentlemen are guilty - would'nt we want justice served?

d. if the gentlemn are innocent - wouldn't we (and them, I'll assume) want vindication in the integrity of their actions (in Iraq)?

I agree that MOST politician's really, really, really enjoy hearing the sound of their own voices - so Biden is no exception to that rule; however, if the Blackwater gentlement are guilty, they should be tried until justice is served - a dismissal does NOT preclude the USAtty from seeking charges, to include additional charges at a later date.

It is also my belief that Bush/Cheney (and Company) USED Blackwater operators to push, promote and achieve an "agenda" that was not militarily feasible or allowed in Iraq. Protecting diplomats, and providing security wasn't the only actions taken by Blackwater - and even those actions should have, and should continue to follow "rules of engagement" clearly outlined; it cannot be a free-for-all. It just seems to me that a "pretext" existed then (Bush/Cheney's actions) and one exists now (Obama/Biden) - after the evidence is presented - it would be my expectation that the truth would come out and folks can then make informed decisions; not political announcements.

The "truth" is probably much closer to reality. Reality is that even contractors deserve the support of the United States when acting as representatives of . Another reality is that the ROE are fluid in that at any given moment they can change, unfortunately one cannot say the same for a projectile already fired. One last claim, when soldiers , brothers in arms are being blown up by people dressed as civilians, who pack their babies' diapers full of explosives and drive to the nearest check point in hopes of martydom, someone will shoot first, and everytime one of ours does, they should be able to assume that their "leaders" will stand behind them.... if they cannot, perhaps they should stand in front of them. As for the rest of your post, I assume you have never been 'in country' so I will cut you some slack. Suffice it to say that nothing goes as planned after the first few minutes.... the rest is improv, and usually not very funny. Still, even though you may not understand the complications of battle, you ask "if the blackwater men are guilty?" of what? You clearly don't understand armed conflict... you do whatever it takes to win. Nothing is off the table, its always been that way, always will be that way. They are not guilty of anything. They were not playing Xbox or Playstation. Before you come back with a morality check for me , I admit I have seen and done things that are reprehensible. I do not and refuse to "feel" bad about any of them. You do what you need to do.There are no rules, except one, live.

graybeard321 wrote:Fordtek, just reminded me of very valid point. If our forefathers had fought the Brit;s by there rules and not the indian tactics we used. We might still be subjects and not citizens.

Yup, and we'd all be speakin the kings english and drinking non-fluoridated water...

GS78
No I have not been in country, my 20 year military career ended after the first gulf war. But after reading your post it appears that we both agree that you can't fight wars with rules especially when they only apply to 1 side.
This what I had said in my first post on subject.
How many more American men and women have to die in far a way lands before we learn that this isn't a prize fight were we have to fight by the Marguess of queensberry rules

The rules of engagement are different from contractors and the military. Suprised me no one has mentioned this.

Contractors often have no ROE.