Monty, come to the pit and bring the truth with you.

The BBQ Pit
1

Monty, come to the pit and bring…

your truths with you…

Because of the posts in this thread …

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/newreply.php?s=&action=newreply&postid=2616822

I want to talk about half truths of omission, innuendo and misrepresentation to civilians.

Yes, you are a veteran, so am I, so what?

Yes you served in those places and times, so what?

The Geneva Convention says what it says.

Your MOS is not relevant and neither is mine.

Were you personally in an exchange of gunfire with an enemy? Not you ship, not your airplane, y9ou , on the ground, up close and personal? Were you ever in a position to be present at the capture of a prisoner? You implied to the young civilians on this board that you had been there / done that. Have you? What did you actually do while in the military?

Why is a lack of actual combat so big a deal? I was in the Special Forces. That does not mean that I was out on deep insertion and can speak with authority on what is in mission orders or what actually happened in places I was not at. You imply that because you were in the military that you have that capability, … … Feh!!!

You also would not answer the questions about what really happens, yeah, was not the OP, well here it is the question and I don’t care what your MOS was, or anything that you have said about where you were in general terms
I want to know what you actually did. Not all the smoke and mirrors you do so well, what did you do that you can prove? Heck, just make a clean claim about what you did.

I opined that to admit that I broke the “LAW” in a public form about “murder” would be a silly thing to do. I am not even saying or insinuating that I was ever in the position to do so. You have made that claim with your weaseling and double speak.

You insinuated that you were in actual combat. Now we both know that you did not really say that, I do know a bit about what you actually did in the service.
Did you ever “Go there”?

I don’t think you will own up to it. You know a lot but get stuck in the black and white because you were never in the position to have to just do it, right or wrong, but right now, live or die. To imply that you were is not cool. IMO.

I make no claim about such matters concerning myself but it really winds me up to see you doing this again and again.

Prove me wrong, ok?

You won’t but I do want there to be a note to one and all about your ability to use smoke and mirrors about yourself.

As someone said, you were correct in your answer. But in a most dishonest manner… IMO

…

2

link to thread (yours links to a ‘reply to thread’ ) that links to page one.

page three perhaps you can direct the viewers to the pertinent page??

3

Yepper, although I feel the whole thread needs to be looked at, the second to last post at the bottom of page three by Monty…

This is what put me over the top. Smokie and mirrors and …Feh!!!

As I said and other did to. His rules are just fine, but he kept on wioth the B /W attitude and then comes on with the big smoke cloud about his qualifications to make the moral judgements on combat troops. :: sheesh :::: IMO

Again, I am making no claim about myself. I just don’t thinhk this is fair to civilians. There is so much that they will never know, it is wrong IMO to let them think it is like this IRL.

I am wrong a lot of times, seems Monty never is.

4

Although you are evidently stupid beyond reason and a moron to boot, I shall respond to your bullshit.

The truths were there to begin with and I did not lie. That you incorrectly parse the English language is your fault, not mine.

That you incorrectly parse the written language is also your fault, not mine.

I did not omit, make inuendo, nor misrepresent.

As a member of this country’s fighting forces, I actually did receive training regarding the issue under discussion. Apparently, between the two of us, I’m the one who listened to that training.

What places? What times? I never said I served in Iraq. I said I served in the Army and in the Navy.

Didn’t make a false claim. Answered the actual question on the board.

Your own words just did that.

Didn’t do that.

Right. That was the question. I served in combat arms units and in those units I got the training in the rules of war, you know, what you’re supposed to do with prisoners instead of just murdering them.

[qutoe]But in a most dishonest manner… IMO
[/quote]

Your opinion is just as much bullshit as you are.

Had relevance to the comment someone made and that person knew, IIRC, that I had served in those units and it kind of pissed me off to be called a civilian.

So, all those trials of the troops who committed war crimes shouldn’t have taken place since many of those judges weren’t qualified in your opinion to make moral judgments? That’s hilarious! Also, the black/white attitude regards the actual question.

Oh, I’m wrong plenty of times. I’m not wrong on this and if you think that you can draw the conclusion from this once that it’s always then you’re a bigger fool than even I thought you were to begin with.

You piece of shit.

5

Yo, Gus, I read that thread MANY times, knowing Monty was and/or is in the service, but I didn’t read into his posts that he implied he had served in combat. From the posts I rather deduced he had never been faced with a dilemma such as was posted as that thread title “What are you supposed to do with the enemy when taking them prisoner isn’t feasable”, a question which his repeated references to the Geneva Convention and (snort) UCMJ do not address.

6

The hell they don’t. Monty’s position is a perfectly acceptable–and perfectly accurate–GQ answer to the question of what you are supposed to do in such circumstances.

Well done Monty. Calm the fuck down, everyone else.

7

His position was to follow the rules, the proper answer to what you should do with the enemy when taking them prisoner is feasable. The rules do not cover what to do when it is NOT feasable, the title of the thread.

8

Why, thank you. Seriously, thank you very much, minty green.

And thanks to UncleBill for the first part of his posting above. The second part, I disagree with it.

Come to think of it, I don’t recall if in the thread the “workable” answer a friend of mine who served in the South Korean Infantry suggested: Shoot the enemy soldier before he has a chance to surrender, while the enemy soldier is still a combatant.

9

Nevertheless, the Geneva Convention requires adherence to its rules. It makes no exceptions for expediency. Thus, Monty’s position is perfectly accurate. So like I said, calm down.

10

** Respect the silent vet **

He’s silent for a reason. These threads have driven that message home.

11

Well no, but you may infer that if you wish.

As to calling you a liar face to face Monty, I’m in N/ W Arkansas, anytime you are in a reasonable distance, let me know. (one of my complaints about the internet mentality, "NO intention of owning what is said. )

I agreed that he answered the OP with B / W fact. Why does everybody disregard that? ::: sheesh :: My complaint is his smoke and mirrors about what he has actually done.

Uncle Bill, you are starting to sound like you have never been there either. IMO

You can yell all you want Monty but you have not answered my question.

I still maintain that you, in that thread, tried to put yourself over and a tried by fire veteran and that you were above the mere mortal combat soldier.

I did say that you use evasion and smoke and mirrors to evade and suggest.

Oh, and here are my frothing at the mouth so as to be a real pit thread @@#$$$ #%@#@# ##%#%^

Boy, that sure told Monty… < veg >

12

And I REPEATEDLY agreed with that. ::: sheesh::: I am talking about his omission and innuendo…

Yeah, I have known Monty’s posting for years… This is not new behavior on his part. ::: first time he made me mad nuff to bring it up though.::::

Yeah, I know some about Monty’s service record too…

So what…

You said

and I say that he tried to imply that he has… That was my point,

“Monty, please state in plain words if or if not you have been in that situation.”

He will not do that.

13

I have seen nothing in that thread that “implies” Monty has been faced with such a situation. As I recall, he’s not even the one who started playing the game of “More Military Than Thou.” His military experience–the details of which he has identified quite plainly in response to the OP–serves as a basis of his knoweldge about the GQ question of what one is supposed to do when taking prisoners is inconvenient. Whether he has ever actually done so is utterly irrelevant to the answer he provided, and your continued personal attacks are entirely unwarranted.

14

Clearly “Murder” by definition according to your previous posts. Weapon falling, hands raising but not having yelled, “I surrender” = combatant… he he he

I was in Korea too Monty, so South Korean Infantry = ROK soldiers, right? And this general image is what you hold up as an shinning example of… Bwhahahahah …cough, cough…l sorry…
No, just your friend, the exception maybe? Bwhahahahah
Smoke and mirrors
Smoke and mirrors
Smoke and mirrors

15

So you don’t see it? That is a surprise how?
You said above something about “perfectly accurate”, right?

If you operate in a “perfectly accurate” way on the SDMB, I am in awe I tell you, awe…

16

Your last post, as though any more proof is need, Gus, shows exactly how moronic you are.

Where did I say, “It’s required to state, ‘I surrender’ to become a POW?” Where did I say my friend is still in Korea?

NW Arkansas, you say? Surely the schools there have classes for you to learn English.

17

Ya cain’t lern english onse u dun bin wacked wit’ th’ dumass stick.

18

Monty, you said he was in the South Korean Inf. So was he? And I said I knew a few too and my opinion of them as an example was a bit different than yours. You go back to school too okay? :: sheesh ::::

Oh, and get back to me on the “face to face” thining would ya?

19

Can I use this as a sig ? , With attribution of course? :wink:

20

Yep. Right now he’s one of my classmates at University. He was in the Infantry during his conscription.

We’ve already seen the value of your opinion.

Interesting thing is that one can go back where one’s been. You, on the other hand…

BTW, I’m in school right now–University to be exact.

Whooppee.