SEAL training range will no longer show Muslim woman as target

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

k

Edited July 7, 2012 by Run Herschel Run

[Captain Oates 911]

Why are you making it personal? Are you that intellectually barren?

To say that the world could do with a few billion people less, which you did, when the discussion had turned to war and its undesirability, is clearly callous

My comment was to the effect that people who don't mind the idea of billions being killed by war, should review their attitude after first imagining that THEIR family was the first to die

Most people change their view at that time

Edited July 7, 2012 by Ashud Cocoa

[Captain Oates 911]

Most Americans couldn't discern those squiggles from any other squiggles so unless they were specifically told what the squiggles meant, they wouldn't know any better. Setting the environment with squiggle-laden background is a wonderful idea since soldiers could encounter threats with a background very similar to the one depicted.

However, as soon as it was discovered those were excerpts from the holy works of any religion, they should've been replaced with squiggles that said "Coca Cola" or "KFC" or something like that.

The symbolism of destroying works of any religion is something the military should strive to protect it's soldiers from.

My personal observations are there's an ever-increasing shift in anti-Muslim sentiment and that's permeated into the training and lifestyle of our military.

For practical purposes the Middle East didn't exist to the military (and most of the government... and USA!) until the late '70s. The whole "Iran thing" was a little far fetched (and to this day, Americans still don't realize Persians and Arabs (and any manner of Afghans) aren't the same "brown people") and blew over quickly. Americans were just as upset with Israel as they were with the ME - and they really didn't know anything about what was going on anyway.

Then Beirut happened. The ME was now on the map and "those people over there" were now "the bad people." But, since that was a done deal as well, we shifted our focus elsewhere and didn't give it much thought until 1991.

When Saddam invaded Kuwait - and for more than 20 years after - 99.9% of Americans had no idea why Saudis would want to blow us up. Most still don't. Most couldn't (and still can't) tell you the first thing about why "those countries" would fight one another. Nor do they care.

That war, and subsequent occupation, introduced us to the laundry list of words used to describe "the bad guys" over there but it was very seldom that they were used in training because military training and doctrine was still aimed at overthrowing the Soviet Union or fighting Vietnam-style jungle battles. Our "enemy" was not a guy in the sandbox.

Even after Sept. 11, 2001, there were still "good guys" and "bad guys" over there and the majority of training was done in the woods against military adversaries. The operations in Afghanistan were simple military objectives against armed adversaries who fought in battles that were scripted on the chalk board. This was still a military fight.

The switch wasn't flipped until the war in Iraq was "won." In truth, our old friend Iran probably had quite a bit to do with it by funding and equipping the insurgency in both wars (along with various other outfits around the region) and shifting the battle from "force on force" where guys with guns fought other guys with guns to the death, to "hit and hide" where guys with cell phones made calls that blew up our troops. An unseen, unapproachable enemy.

Around that time the emphasis also shifted. Uniforms and equipment, body armor, vehicles, etc., were actually issued in desert colors. They became the norm instead of the exception. Training shifted from moving through the woods "lookin for Charlie" to clearing urban compounds "lookin for Haji."

His name had changed. His image had changed. America had a new enemy.

And the sad fact of the matter is many soldiers don't acknowledge the difference between a Muslim from Kenya and a Muslim from Indonesia. "They're still Muslims."

"And you're still missing the point."

There are still some very smart soldiers out there and many who understand the situation but the longer we occupy those lands, the more and more "anti-Muslim" our military becomes.

Pretty soon, they'll be wearing their Arabic "Infidel" shirts under their body armor when they invade Iran. "I want all these Muslims to know who I am."

I continue to be impressed by the intellect of some some ex soldiers who have not just experienced, but learned all sorts of things - and I am similarly dismayed by those ex soldiers who go the other way and revel in crudity and violence and actually spend their post-service years becoming less civilized. Slim belongs to the first group.

It's obvious to me that not all the militarily are heroes (contrary to cable television), and the ones who are, are even bigger heroes than the public knows

Anyway, when it comes to racial/religious stereotyping by the militarily, we need look no further than the British Army in the Middle East or the Sudan, or Africa or India or Afghanistan or Malaya, and dozens more places.

As an army officer, it's your job to have your soldiers willing to kill the enemy. It's going to be a lot easier to do that if they regard the enemy as 'lesser' than them and you have invented derogatory names for them. That's why we call certain animals "vermin" - its to differentiate them from baby deer and make them easier to kill.

As a mild example, I always smile when I see a Volkswagen Touareg mini bus. The Touareg are a Berber tribe of North African Arabs that the Brits used to fight occasionally. The British referred to them as "Toe-rags" and it has even entered the British language. You will often hear a scruffy, worthless person being referred to as a "Toe rag"

I am absolutely sure that The Moslems fighters in the middle east have much worse names and stereotypes for western soldiers and don't train to fight turbaned Sikhs from India

My beef would be with civilian gun clubs using images of people as targets. They are supposed to be trying to shoot accurately for sport in a fun sort of way, rather than expressing their hatred of various groups or Michelle Obama or Hillary or whatever. I say leave the hate behind and bring a flask of coffee instead

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

To say that the world could do with a few billion people less, which you did, when the discussion had turned to war and its undesirability, is clearly callous

My comment was to the effect that people who don't mind the idea of billions being killed by war, should review their attitude after first imagining that THEIR family was the first to die

Most people change their view at that time

Appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy. Thanks again for demonstrating the intellectual dishonesty inherent in the liberal mindset.

[Captain Oates 911]

Appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy. Thanks again for demonstrating the intellectual dishonesty inherent in the liberal mindset.

May your logic come back to roost, with your suggestion of reducing the world population by killing

I too want to see the world population reduced, not by using your methods, but rather a more bloodless approach

- such as intentionally defective zips

and free Jan Brewer masks for teenage girls

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

May your logic come back to roost, with your suggestion of reducing the world population by killing

Where did I say that?

[slim 1,533]

I continue to be impressed by the intellect of some some ex soldiers who have not just experienced, but learned all sorts of things - and I am similarly dismayed by those ex soldiers who go the other way and revel in crudity and violence and actually spend their post-service years becoming less civilized.

One thing that always baffled me about the military was we were supposed to work with local people yet there was almost no language training and worse still, no desire on the part of our people to learn the local language. We'd have the obligatory "cultural sensitivity" training that would teach us things like "don't touch or talk to a Muslim woman" and "don't show the bottom of your feet to anyone" and it would be capped off with learning the phrase, "Stop or I'll shoot."

Learning things like "Hi. What is your name?" Or even the simple phrase, "Thank you." was never really high on the agenda for most folks. Many of those who did take it to the next level wasted all their newly acquired "skills" on the Sri Lankans in the chow hall. "Uh, say bro, that dude doesn't speak Arabic."

It's amazing to me that we still yell, "Get down on the ground" in English. It's appalling that nobody asks why or requests more.

My beef would be with civilian gun clubs using images of people as targets. They are supposed to be trying to shoot accurately for sport in a fun sort of way, rather than expressing their hatred of various groups or Michelle Obama or Hillary or whatever. I say leave the hate behind and bring a flask of coffee instead

I have no problem with the picture of the guy holding a gun to the woman's head. (We've all seen that target, right?) Generic, "threat" targets are good training tools.

But pictures of famous people - even bin Laden - make the jump from killing a "threat" to killing a person. There's a psychological disconnect there and while I don't think we should prohibit it, I think it shows poor character on the part of the people shooting them. "Look how crass I am!"

The new trend is zombies. You can shoot "people" without shooting "people." Some of the targets are 3-D and even bleed. I'm all for having fun and shooting stuff, but we're starting to toe a thin line when it comes to keeping that disconnect alive and well.

It should not be hard for us to shoot a threat. But, it should be very hard for us to shoot people.

[ready4ONE 5,400]

Appeal to emotion is a logical fallacy. Thanks again for demonstrating the intellectual dishonesty inherent in the liberal mindset.

Should you be thanked for demonstrating the lack of humanity inherent in the right (I'm right, your wrong, stupid, and worthy of death) wing mindset?

There are indeed arguably too many people on this planet, but to suggest a military solution to that problem is a bit callous. And begs the completely logical question should you and your loved ones be the first to go?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

to suggest a military solution to that problem is a bit callous.

Show the link.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Should you be thanked for demonstrating the lack of humanity inherent in the right (I'm right, your wrong, stupid, and worthy of death) wing mindset?

More dishonesty? Typical.

[Captain Oates 911]

The planet could stand to lose a few billion people. Everybody wants to go to heaven, nobody wants to die.

jeez you make me work on a Saturday morning when I am enjoying a female free time..

ok the above is your quote immediately following the WAR discussion

In that context it has to be seen as welcoming war as a method of population reduction

I see nothing here about birth control and other non lethal methods of ensuring that people don't get born in the first place

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

jeez you make me work on a Saturday morning when I am enjoying a female free time..

ok the above is your quote immediately following the WAR discussion

In that context it has to be seen as welcoming war as a method of population reduction

I see nothing here about birth control and other non lethal methods of ensuring that people don't get born in the first place

So, you are projecting your own prejudices into the conversation.

[Darnell 8,479]

I am absolutely sure that The Moslems fighters in the middle east have much worse names and stereotypes for western soldiers and don't train to fight turbaned Sikhs from India

That would be a good battle to see, as all Males over a certain age are sworn warriors (The Sihks) and you would see something new about guerrilla warfare.

[Captain Oates 911]

So, you are projecting your own prejudices into the conversation.

Obfuscation is the strategy of the guilty

My prejudices are usually confined to derision of the gravitationally disadvantaged, and so far I have been unable to detect the presence of that by using my keyboard - so it doesn't apply here

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

One thing that always baffled me about the military was we were supposed to work with local people yet there was almost no language training and worse still, no desire on the part of our people to learn the local language. We'd have the obligatory "cultural sensitivity" training that would teach us things like "don't touch or talk to a Muslim woman" and "don't show the bottom of your feet to anyone" and it would be capped off with learning the phrase, "Stop or I'll shoot."

Learning things like "Hi. What is your name?" Or even the simple phrase, "Thank you." was never really high on the agenda for most folks. Many of those who did take it to the next level wasted all their newly acquired "skills" on the Sri Lankans in the chow hall. "Uh, say bro, that dude doesn't speak Arabic."

It's amazing to me that we still yell, "Get down on the ground" in English. It's appalling that nobody asks why or requests more.

If we invaded their country, that means we are in charge. They need to learn English if they don't want to get shot.