As a Marine Corps combat veteran of Viet Nam who "walked point" in 1969 & 1970, I support Lt. Pantano 110%.
Until someone has had to put themselves in a combat situation facing an enemy that would sooner blow themselves up as look at you people have no idea.
I encountered the enemy on a daily basis and believe you me if it came down to them or me and my fellow Marines; well let's just say that, I and my fellow Marines came home and the enemy didn't!
Semper Fi,
Kelly
Kelly,
I respectfully ask, how many gooks did you uncuff so they could go back into the hooch and look for boobytraps?
How many zipperheads did you tie up, then execute?
And, how many little dink babies' skulls did you buttstroke with your M-16 A1 because you didn't want waste the round?
Once again, I don't mean any disrespect, I'm just trying to find your left and right limits of your sense of right and wrong.
And I will tell you that I also have been in combat. I didn't have as dangerous a mission as you, but I can tell you that I would never shoot somebody who was in restraints, even if they were the enemy. If I did, then I know that I would be in violation of the regulation, and I certainly wouldn't go whining to O'Reilly, Hannity & Colmes, Stone Phillips, and Time magazine about it when charges were preferred against me.
I would hope that I would have the integrity to get up on the stand at my Article 32 like LTC (R) Allen West and say, "I know what I did [violated the regulation] (I wouldn't characterize it as "wrong"), but I would walk through hell with a can of gasoline for my men."
Pantano's either lying or telling the truth. Sounds like whatever it is, you don't care, let him go either way. Am I wrong about that?
I'm not so ignorant where I see only one side of the issue. Don't you have any faith or loyalty to the Corps as an institution?