From Marcus Luttrell's Facebook page last year:
Posted on 01/18/2015 8:18:04 AM PST by Oldpuppymax
By now, the story of Navy Seal sniper Chris Kyle is familiar. He holds the record for the most confirmed kills, he wrote a book which led to a movie, and he was killed on a shooting range by a PTSD ex-Marine. There is also the troubling business regarding comments he made about Jesse Ventura.
No doubt, he was a skillful killer. By all accounts, he displayed little emotion—possibly facilitated by the extreme distance from his targets.
OK. Skillful killer, shows little emotion, and kills only the bad guys. But for the fact that these deaths are sanctioned by the State, how is his career fundamentally different from Richard Kuklinski, the notorious Iceman? Arguably, many of Kyle’s targets are soldiers doing their thing, albeit for the other side, and are probably nowhere near as “bad” as the Mafia scumbags offed by Kuklinski. Possibly, one distinction is that Kyle’s targets might kill “innocent” people. I assume we would define “innocent” as non-combatants.
Of course, a non-combatant can still aid the enemy.
But, let’s move on. Given Kyle’s tremendous skill, why was he not deployed in missions to assassinate enemy leaders, rather than combatant targets on the ground? Why do we have Marquess of Queensberry rules that seem to prohibit killing the very leaders who are promoting these wars in the first place? No doubt, there were dozens of opportunities for the Allies to take out locations where Hitler was ensconced, for example. Somehow, though, the only such operations were inside jobs, and they failed.
With all due respect, what was wrong in the minds of Kyle and Chad Littlefield, that they would take strung-out Eddie Ray Routh...
(Excerpt) Read more at coachisright.com ...
After returning he showed some issues with the facts as his widow can attest to by looking at her checkbook reciepts.
This putz knows nothing about LOAC, the Just War concept and what can and can’t be attacked, double-effect and US anti-decapitation policy.
The moral equivalency that this punk is brainstorming would logically extend to every soldier or policeman - their killing is no different than that of the enemy or criminal.
Therefore, I guess that we should all roll over and die, and allow evil to run rampant, rather than fight it. I guess that he has not thought this through enough.
He should have more respect for those who do stand up and shoulder the hard responsibility of doing what needs to be done, like men.
Also, one thing about the movie that I did not like (although I do strongly recommend the movie), that this numbskull echos, is that the guy who shot Chris Kyle was just an unstable psycho who popped - the liberal stereotype of veterans. In fact, another guy was at the range with a gun, and they were arguing over a girl. Chris Kyle got shot trying to intervene in their fight.
It seems to me that if you can’t think straight, you still have the right to seek an outlet for the chaos between your ears by attempting to put it into words.
Unfortunately for Michael D. Shaw, a chaotic mind is not likely to understand itself. Especially when your thinking is so incoherent that you measure the morality of one entity against that of another, while calling into question your own metric with quotations around the word “bad.” Making a moral claim and then showing you don’t think morality really exists. I know nothing about Shaw’s politics, but he makes an excellent liberal.
Bottom line—if islamist torture of children isn’t enough to shock Shaw’s chaotic mind back into reality, his case is about as severe as it can be.
From Marcus Luttrell's Facebook page last year:
Ummm #4
I guess Coach and everyone else has forgotten about the Church Committee.
yep
And they put out the famous -DECK OF CARDS-
with all of the leaders pictures- offered
TENS of MILLIONS for the bodies -DEAD or ALive
Assigned special forces to try and locate the leaders-
This ass wipe has NO idea what he is talking about-
There’s always one.
Outstanding!!
What a boa wearing scumbag.
Blogpimping: A blogpimp’s view (excerpt, click here)
” Given Kyle’s tremendous skill, why was he not deployed in missions to assassinate enemy leaders, rather than combatant targets on the ground?”
That is a question that should be addressed to Kyle’s superiors and not one that is used in an attempt to slander Kyle.
Who is this asshat? The best I can find out he is some kinda environmentalist wacko, sure doesn’t claim any military connections in his Bio.
I guess until you have done it people will never grasp the concept of what being a combat soldier is all about.
We have one basic mission, to seek out, identify, close with and kill the enemy. Most do it as part of a unit, a team and some do it from long distance and quite alone other than the occasional spotter.
We are the sheepdogs and we do it to keep the wolfs of the world at bay. What made Kyle special and worthy of this movie is he, without a doubt, did it as well as anyone we have in the service today.
I haven’t seen the movie but look forward to it with great anticipation.
Oh and every Seal friend that I have thinks Ventura is a asshat too.
Yes, I think there was a scene with the enemy sniper with his family.
I vaguely remember him getting a phone call and leaving his house. I don’t remember if he was eating with his family or not. In any event, nothing in this movie showed him in a sympathetic light.
Because social media/24-hour news cycle. IOW, no operational security.
Not a contrarian view but rather an asinine one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.