Chris Kyle, Hero or Murderer?

[muzzled dogg]

Hero or Murderer?

by Laurence M. Vance


Chris Kyle, a former Navy SEAL, and the U.S. military’s most lethal sniper, was deliberately and fatally shot recently by another veteran while on a gun range.

According to Star and Stripes, Kyle had been awarded two Silver Stars, five Bronze Stars with Valor, and two Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medals. He is officially credited with more than 150 kills during four tours in Iraq; he is unofficially credited with up to 255. Kyle won’t say just how many people he has killed.

"I don’t care about the medals," Kyle told the Star-Telegram in a 2012 interview. "I didn’t do it for the money or the awards. I did it because I felt like it was something that needed to be done and it was honorable."

I blogged about Kyle twice last year, once in January and once in February. I included this quote from him:

It was my duty to shoot the enemy, and I don’t regret it. My regrets are for the people I couldn’t save: Marines, soldiers, buddies. I’m not naive, and I don’t romanticize war. The worst moments of my life have come as a SEAL. But I can stand before God with a clear conscience about doing my job.

And also this excerpt from his book, American Sniper: The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History:

Savage, despicable evil. That’s what we were fighting in Iraq. That’s why a lot of people, myself included, called the enemy "savages." There really was no other way to describe what we encountered there. People ask me all the time, "How many people have you killed?" My standard response is, "Does the answer make me less, or more, of a man?" The number is not important to me. I only wish I had killed more. Not for bragging rights, but because I believe the world is a better place without savages out there taking American lives. Everyone I shot in Iraq was trying to harm Americans or Iraqis loyal to the new government.

Will Grigg also wrote about Kyle in 2012.

After Kyle’s death, I blogged that "You reap what you sow." However, what really got apologists for the U.S. military in a tizzy was this tweet by Ron Paul: "Chris Kyle’s death seems to confirm that ‘he who lives by the sword dies by the sword.’"

Conservatives, naturally, because they are in love with all things military, were quite upset. But others expressed their "concerns" as well.

Medal of Honor recipient Dakota Meyer chastised Dr. Paul, calling his tweet "insane," and calling Kyle "a modern, American war hero."

Another veteran said that "Ron Paul has been reading too much Laurence Vance."

Senator Rand Paul responded: "Chris Kyle was a hero like all Americans who don the uniform to defend our country. Our prayers are with his family during this tragic time."

Some libertarians weren’t too happy with Paul’s "social media strategies, or basic skills of persuasion."

Wannabe-libertarian Glenn Beck ("I’m becoming more and more Libertarian every day") termed Paul’s statement "despicable," "ugly," and "offensive."

But there is nothing honorable or heroic about anything Chris Kyle did in Iraq. He defended no American’s freedoms. He didn’t fight "over there" so no American would have to fight "over here." Soldiers who kill for the state in unjust wars are murderers, not heroes. As Future of Freedom Foundation president and Army veteran Jacob Hornberger recently wrote: "Since the U.S. government was the aggressor in the war on Iraq, that means that no U.S. soldier had the moral authority to kill even one single Iraqi. Every single soldier who killed an Iraqi or who even participated in the enterprise was guilty of murder in a moral, religious, and spiritual sense."

Here is a simple test to determine whether a soldier is a murderer or a hero. There are only fifteen questions and only one of two responses is possible so you should be able to keep track of your answers.

1. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and throws grenades at Americans. Hero or murderer?

2. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and incinerates Americans with a flamethrower. Hero or murderer?

3. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and blows up Americans with a land mine. Hero or murderer?

4. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and blasts Americans to kingdom come with a tank. Hero or murderer?

5. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and drops bombs on Americans. Hero or murderer?

6. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and cuts Americans in half with a machine gun. Hero or murderer?

7. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and launches missiles at Americans. Hero or murderer?

8. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and shoots Americans with a pistol. Hero or murderer?

9. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and maims Americans with mortar fire. Hero or murderer?

10. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and fires rocket propelled grenades at Americans. Hero or murderer?

11. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and shreds the flesh of Americans with cluster bombs. Hero or murderer?

12. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and burns Americans to a crisp with napalm. Hero or murderer?

13. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and destroys Americans with attack helicopters. Hero or murderer?

14. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States and kills Americans as a sniper. Hero or murderer?

15. A soldier from a country thousands of miles away travels to the United States via drone and performs targeted killings of Americans. Hero or murderer?

I don’t know of a single American who wouldn’t say, and say it fifteen times, that these foreign soldiers were murderers.

But why is it that when American soldiers do these things they are heroes but when foreign soldiers do them they are murderers?

Time for another test. Again, there are only fifteen questions and only one of two responses is possible so you should be able to keep track of your answers.

1. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they wore a government-issued uniform?

2. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they were just following orders?

3. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they joined the military to serve their country?

4. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they were patriotic?

5. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because their government said America needed a regime change?

6. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they joined the military because they couldn’t find a job?

7. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they were just obeying their commander in chief?

8. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they didn’t make their country’s foreign policy?

9. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they were drafted?

10. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because their government said there were communists in America?

11. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they joined the military because their father had been in the military?

12. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they just did what they were told?

13. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because their government told them they were fighting a defensive war?

14. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because their politicians are the ones responsible for their actions?

15. Should we excuse foreign soldiers because they thought they were defending the freedoms of civilians in their country?

Then why do we excuse American soldiers for these same reasons?

U.S. foreign policy is aggressive, reckless, belligerent, and meddling. We don’t need a foreign policy that strikes a balance. We don’t need a foreign policy that we can afford. We don’t need a foreign policy that is like Reagan’s. We don’t need a foreign policy that is less interventionist. We need a wholesale repudiation of the past century of an evil and murderous U.S. foreign policy.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance321.html

[TheTexan]

Those questions would make the average American's brain explode..

[Indy Vidual]

Murderer?
He was just doing his job. :o

[Anti Federalist]

What clown downvoted this?

Show yourself...

[Anti Federalist]

One victim, Monica Quan, is the daughter of a retired LAPD officer who’d defended Dorner in a departmental matter. Dorner is also suspected of shooting three police officers in Riverside, CA on Thursday, killing one.

As Dorner explains it, this was all a “necessary evil.” In his manifesto, he says that the killing will continue—not only of LAPD officers, but of their children. And they made him do it. He’s not responsible.

Obama White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs on collateral death of children:


GIBBS: I would suggest that you should have a far more responsible father if they are truly concerned about the well being of their children

....

[anaconda]

Stefan Molyneux would answer this easily.

[awake]

Those he killed will be sitting as jury on him.

[A Son of Liberty]

Morality doesn't have a nationality. It's never inconvenient, either.

Kudos to Vance. We need more people like him.

[BlackJack]

He was a psychotic murderer who killed hundreds of people who had a right to defend their homeland. Plain and simple.

[Danke]

He was a psychotic murderer who killed hundreds of people who had a right to defend their homeland. Plain and simple.

What about US troops that fought along South Korean, South Vietnam troops, etc? What if the majority of any people want us there? Is the minority right?

[BlackJack]

What about US troops that fought along South Korean, South Vietnam troops, etc?

What about them? Are they Chris Kyle?


What if the majority of any people want us there? Is the minority right?

This is subjective.

The "majority" of who? Americans? The govt has a knack for sticking its nose where it doesn't belong then claiming victim status while launching assassinations and psychological operations against a foreign country. Just because millions of Americans are ignorant to the atrocities the govt has committed doesn't mean that is the "majority" that agrees with sending our troops overseas into a war that does not affect us. And just because there's a "majority" who agrees with something doesn't make something that is immoral, moral or justifiable.

If you've actually read some passages from Chris Kyle's book, you'd see he enjoyed killing defenseless families and his only regret was that he couldn't do more of it. This man has murdered possibly up to 300 people (150 of them confirmed, 255 the "unofficial number") and the guy doesn't even bat an eye at what he's done when asked about it in interviews. That's not someone who had a healthy state of mind.

[Shane Harris]

There are savages in the US. Is it heroic for someone to take it upon themselves to murder 150 Americans for being "savages". Or is that a serial killer?

[osan]

There are savages in the US. Is it heroic for someone to take it upon themselves to murder 150 Americans for being "savages". Or is that a serial killer?

That is rep-worthy.

Pony up guys.

[A Son of Liberty]

That is rep-worthy.

Pony up guys.

Done.

Well stated, Shane Harris.

[RickyJ]

There are savages in the US. Is it heroic for someone to take it upon themselves to murder 150 Americans for being "savages". Or is that a serial killer?

It depends on what they did. If they are serial killers themselves, traitors to the American people, and have allegiance to a hostile nation, then you might be a hero for killing them. If they are none of those things and are just common criminals that have murdered no one, then of course it would be murder.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

What about the guy who killed Kyle? Was this his first confirmed kill?

[RickyJ]

What about the guy who killed Kyle? Was this his first confirmed kill?

Well, if he did it then he has two confirmed kills now, Kyle's friend that was with him was also killed.

A person just getting out of a mental hospital that is suicidal really should not have gone to a gun range with people who were "proud" of what they did in Iraq. It was a disaster waiting to happen.

[MoneyWhereMyMouthIs2]

Well, if he did it then he has two confirmed kills now, Kyle's friend that was with him was also killed.

A person just getting out of a mental hospital that is suicidal really should not have gone to a gun range with people who were "proud" of what they did in Iraq. It was a disaster waiting to happen.


For sure. I don't think I'd go to a gun range with any of them.

[pcosmar]

For sure. I don't think I'd go to a gun range with any of them.
I certainly wouldn't turn my back to them.

[thoughtomator]

Murderer?
He was just doing his job. :o

It is worse than that - much worse. The guy actually said he liked killing. But for the war this guy would be a serial killer here at home.

[No Free Beer]

I disagree with what is being written here.

As I have stated on other posts, this issue is not black and white.

A lot of people who fight overseas, whether American or not, fight for each other, regardless if the war is justified. The troops are not policy makers.

Are you saying that every Nazi soldier was a bad person? How about every British Red Coat? How about every single American Soldier/Marine/Airman/Sailor who has fought during the "War on Terror"?

This article in THEORY may be close to correct, but it is not realistic, which makes it utterly ridiculous. For all those out there who say "a real hero puts down his gun."

Ya, because that's realistic. Good luck with that.

Even with Iraq, a war I am against, not EVERYONE who was fighting us was protecting their property. Once again, it's not as black and white as that. There are instigators over there, just as our politicians force us to be instigators.

It just seems to me that everything the US does is wrong and what other nations/countries/groups do is all well and good.

If you are going to criticize us and our boys, do the same for the others overseas.

Politically speaking, keep this rhetoric up and see how successful the liberty movement becomes.

[VBRonPaulFan]

I disagree with what is being written here.

As I have stated on other posts, this issue is not black and white.

A lot of people who fight overseas, whether American or not, fight for each other, regardless if the war is justified. The troops are not policy makers.

Are you saying that every Nazi soldier was a bad person? How about every British Red Coat? How about every single American Soldier/Marine/Airman/Sailor who has fought during the "War on Terror"?

This article in THEORY may be close to correct, but it is not realistic, which makes it utterly ridiculous. For all those out there who say "a real hero puts down his gun."

Ya, because that's realistic. Good luck with that.

Even with Iraq, a war I am against, not EVERYONE who was fighting us was protecting their property. Once again, it's not as black and white as that. There are instigators over there, just as our politicians force us to be instigators.

It just seems to me that everything the US does is wrong and what other nations/countries/groups do is all well and good.

If you are going to criticize us and our boys, do the same for the others overseas.

Politically speaking, keep this rhetoric up and see how successful the liberty movement becomes.

In his book, Kyle talks about his first confirmed kill. He was on over watch for a squad of marines securing a small village town. He talks about how the group marines comes driving in the town, and they all step out of their vehicles fully armed and begin walking through the main street, going door to door. He sees a woman watching her child pull a grenade from her person and get ready to pull the pin. He killed her where she stood before she could pull the pin.

Does that sound like a lady who was instigating a fight, or doing the last and only thing she could try to do to keep troops from murdering her kid, like they've done to countless other kids? I can't even imagine the kind of violence most of those people see on a day to day basis by our military. There's the stuff we hear about, and then probably twice as much stuff we never find out about.

He said he had absolutely no regrets whatsoever about taking that shot. Kyle was a sick, disgusting person. That example alone pretty much shoots down your entire argument.

[sailingaway]

I don't think it is murder if you are a soldier acting under orders. Murder is a specific thing. But slaughtering innocents, or those involved because we brought a nondefensive war there, regardless of what you call it, leaves scars. That may be what caused Kyle to seem to revel in it. It may be what caused the PTSD of the guy he brought with him who killed him.

But none of it is pretty, and it all stems from non defensive wars.

And I agree some killed are awful, being stopped from blowing up innocents themselves. But that doesn't make the others less problematic for those ordered pull the trigger.

[puppetmaster]

I don't think it is murder if you are a soldier acting under orders. Murder is a specific thing. But slaughtering innocents, or those involved because we brought a nondefensive war there, regardless of what you call it, leaves scars. That may be what caused Kyle to seem to revel in it. It may be what caused the PTSD of the guy he brought with him who killed him.

But none of it is pretty, and it all stems from non defensive wars.

And I agree some killed are awful, being stopped from blowing up innocents themselves. But that doesn't make the others less problematic for those ordered pull the trigger. so if not murderer then hero?

These soldiers assist the power of evil.....period. therefore they are accopmlises in crime. Now which crime is it?

[sailingaway]

so if not murderer then hero?

These soldiers assist the power of evil.....period. therefore they are accopmlises in crime. Now which crime is it?

I don't see why you jump right from murderer to hero. There is all the breadth of possibilities in between.

[donnay]

I don't think it is murder if you are a soldier acting under orders. Murder is a specific thing. But slaughtering innocents, or those involved because we brought a nondefensive war there, regardless of what you call it, leaves scars. That may be what caused Kyle to seem to revel in it. It may be what caused the PTSD of the guy he brought with him who killed him.

But none of it is pretty, and it all stems from non defensive wars.

And I agree some killed are awful, being stopped from blowing up innocents themselves. But that doesn't make the others less problematic for those ordered pull the trigger.


Murder is murder is murder any way you slice it. We cannot keep making excuses for it. Kyle was a sniper, no one went after him per se, he just murdered people indiscriminately--regardless of orders.

The guy that allegedly killed Kyle was said to have not been in any combat (http://www.infowars.com/us-marine-questions-narrative-behind-chris-kyle-murder/). I wonder what gave this guy PTSD?

[pcosmar]

I wonder what gave this guy PTSD?

A Headshrinker.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/head-shrinker

See also
Witch Doctor.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/witch+doctor

1. (Social Science / Anthropology & Ethnology) Also called shaman medicine man a man in certain societies, esp preliterate ones, who appears to possess magical powers, used esp to cure sickness but also to harm people

[mike6623]

He was a psychotic murderer who killed hundreds of people who had a right to defend their homeland. Plain and simple.

Really? Shut the fuck up dude. You sound like an ass. How the fuck do you know what he was into while there? How do you know he wasn't having guns pointed at him? Was he supposed to just not defend himself? He was a sniper, we are at war (like it or not), and he took an oath, an oath he obviously believed in or he wouldn't have carried out his missions. And how the fuck do you know all of the people he killed were from the country in which they were killed? You don't, so there goes the "defending their homeland" theory.

Christ, no fucking wonder Ron Paul was never elected. No need for media manipulation, just come here and read the outrageous posts made by his followers. I did not and do not support the Iraq war, at all, but we are there and like it or not, there are people there trying to kill Americans (I understand they were wrongly invaded) so I have no issue with this man killing people who are trying to kill him.

Chris Kyle mentioned in a Sirius radio interview that he blatantley disobeyed orders because a child was carrying RPG'S to a camp and he couldn't shoot a child.

I swear to God, a lot of people on this site are the reason a lot of Americans think that Ron Paul supporters are nut jobs.

[Brett85]

This is where I'm always going to disagree with libertarians on foreign policy issues. I agree on the substance of the actual issues such as opposing preemptive war, opposing foreign military bases, opposing foreign aid, etc. But, I don't agree with the rhetoric at all. According to the Lew Rockwell crowd, you can't be a non interventionist unless you hate the United States military, say that they all participate in "murder," and that they all go out of their way to murder innocent civilians. You can't simply take the position that our members of Congress are using our military for the wrong reasons, they they're using them for offensive purposes rather than defensive purposes. You have to take it to the extreme that the members of our military are actually "murderers" intent on bringing death and destruction to the world. This is the kind of rhetoric that really turns people off and turns them away from libertarianism and non interventionism.

[pcosmar]

I should start another thread,,

Vlad the Impaler , Hero or Murderer?

seriously,,,,

:(
.

[AuH20]

Really? Shut the fuck up dude. You sound like an ass. How the fuck do you know what he was into while there? How do you know he wasn't having guns pointed at him? Was he supposed to just not defend himself? He was a sniper, we are at war (like it or not), and he took an oath, an oath he obviously believed in or he wouldn't have carried out his missions. And how the fuck do you know all of the people he killed were from the country in which they were killed? You don't, so there goes the "defending their homeland" theory.

Christ, no fucking wonder Ron Paul was never elected. No need for media manipulation, just come here and read the outrageous posts made by his followers. I did not and do not support the Iraq war, at all, but we are there and like it or not, there are people there trying to kill Americans (I understand they were wrongly invaded) so I have no issue with this man killing people who are trying to kill him.

Chris Kyle mentioned in a Sirius radio interview that he blatantley disobeyed orders because a child was carrying RPG'S to a camp and he couldn't shoot a child.

I swear to God, a lot of people on this site are the reason a lot of Americans think that Ron Paul supporters are nut jobs.

I agree. I don't think he is a hero nor murderer.

[Brett85]

Most of the people we were fighting in Iraq came across the Iraq border from other countries in order to kill our soldiers. So it's not really accurate to say that the people our troops were fighting were simply "defending their homeland." Perhaps some were, but the majority weren't.

[mike6623]

I agree. I don't think he is a hero nor murderer.

Right, also he could have just have easily saved scores of men, woman, and children while serving which in my book would be heroic but who knows.

Ron Paul is obviously never running for anything again, but with that said, kiss any change of having a true libertarian president any time soon. Linertarians will always be considered "Ron Paul Nuts"...thanks to a lot of half retarded jagoffs on this forum and others like it. Thanks guys! You ar doing more harm than good

[pcosmar]

Most of the people we were fighting in Iraq came across the Iraq border from other countries in order to kill our soldiers. So it's not really accurate to say that the people our troops were fighting were simply "defending their homeland." Perhaps some were, but the majority weren't.

That is the propaganda.. I have heard it too.
I doubt it,, but I have heard it..

Our troops should not be there, should have never been there.
Period.
If people came there to kill American Troops it was because the troops invaded the country.

IT WAS FUCKING WRONG. from the start, and everything that followed. WRONG.

[Brett85]

Our troops should not be there, should have never been there.
Period.

I agree, but I would just prefer to criticize the members of Congress who voted for the war, rather than the soldiers themselves.

[The Free Hornet]

You have to take it to the extreme that the members of our military are actually "murderers" intent on bringing death and destruction to the world.

Kyle and the media took it to the extreme. This discussion is balance.


This is the kind of rhetoric that really turns people off and turns them away from libertarianism and non interventionism.

The truth hurts. Those so turned off to the point of dismissing freedom ideologes would be the first to cut and run or glob onto the next big thing MSM promotes.

[mike6623]

I agree, but I would just prefer to criticize the members of Congress who voted for the war, rather than the soldiers themselves.

Why would anyone do that? They have much more fun bashing the soldiers who are doing what they signed up to do (like it or not), take orders. If you know so fucking much then run for office instead of saying what should have and should not have happened, it does no one any good.

[pcosmar]

Why would anyone do that?
Criticize them as well,,but also criticize the continuing propaganda and false Hero Worship that is infecting the young and gullible minds of the children of this country.

I was a victim of that bullshit brainwashing in my youth. I joined to go to Vietnam.. and kill Gooks.

Thankfully we pulled out of that while I was in Ft Polk training.

[No Free Beer]

In his book, Kyle talks about his first confirmed kill. He was on over watch for a squad of marines securing a small village town. He talks about how the group marines comes driving in the town, and they all step out of their vehicles fully armed and begin walking through the main street, going door to door. He sees a woman watching her child pull a grenade from her person and get ready to pull the pin. He killed her where she stood before she could pull the pin.

Does that sound like a lady who was instigating a fight, or doing the last and only thing she could try to do to keep troops from murdering her kid, like they've done to countless other kids? I can't even imagine the kind of violence most of those people see on a day to day basis by our military. There's the stuff we hear about, and then probably twice as much stuff we never find out about.

He said he had absolutely no regrets whatsoever about taking that shot. Kyle was a sick, disgusting person. That example alone pretty much shoots down your entire argument.

*sigh*

More generalizations.

[No Free Beer]

good luck winning elections with your rhetoric.

[Brett85]

Why would anyone do that? They have much more fun bashing the soldiers who are doing what they signed up to do (like it or not), take orders. If you know so fucking much then run for office instead of saying what should have and should not have happened, it does no one any good.

Why are you criticizing me? I pretty much completely agreed with the comments that you've made.

[pcosmar]

good luck winning elections with your rhetoric.

Actually,, Obama won twice as an anti-war candidate (false as it may have been). Republicans beating the war drums have lost twice.

Good luck winning by promising more death and destruction.

[mport1]

He was a psychotic murderer who killed hundreds of people who had a right to defend their homeland. Plain and simple.

This.


good luck winning elections with your rhetoric.

If we don't properly use the language to describe government actions, it will be more difficult to get people to eventually accept reality. People need to realize what Chris and others like him really are - murderers.

Language is used to obfuscate what is actually occurring in the government sphere.

[Antischism]

I don't have much sympathy for people who willingly sign up to invade other countries. That might have a little to do with some of the younger soldiers I've met who bragged to me about how exciting it was to "kill those sand ******s."

[No Free Beer]

I don't have much sympathy for people who willingly sign up to invade other countries. That might have a little to do with some of the younger soldiers I've met who bragged to me about how exciting it was to "kill those sand ******s."

Ya because when they sign up, they all think to themselves, "I WANT TO INVADE OTHER COUNTRIES."

[No Free Beer]

This.



If we don't properly use the language to describe government actions, it will be more difficult to get people to eventually accept reality. People need to realize what Chris and others like him really are - murderers.

Language is used to obfuscate what is actually occurring in the government sphere.

I dont have a problem going after the policy makers and exposing their wargames. But, going around and calling our armed forces murderers is just ignorant and its going to kill our chances of winning.

[No Free Beer]

Actually,, Obama won twice as an anti-war candidate (false as it may have been). Republicans beating the war drums have lost twice.

Good luck winning by promising more death and destruction.

Who said anything about beating the war drums?

[AuH20]

Ya because when they sign up, they all think to themselves, "I WANT TO INVADE OTHER COUNTRIES."

Or "I WANT TO KILL BROWN PEOPLE." Once the brown people start shooting at them, their sentiments change very quickly.

[No Free Beer]

Or "I WANT TO KILL BROWN PEOPLE." Once the brown people start shooting at them, their sentiments change very quickly.

Exactly.

If you talk with most military people, they say that when it comes to actual work in the field, regardless of one's MOS, they do it for their men (group). All that "America" shit gets thrown out the window pretty damn quickly.

I find it sad that people who sit comfortably behind a computer talk with such confidence of understanding war and the intricacies of battle.

I don't claim to understand it, either. However, I know people who served and I take their word for it. It's especially interesting to hear it from people who are vets AND Ron Paul supporters.

[anaconda]

Any soldier who participates in an unconstitutional war is violating his/her oath.

[No Free Beer]

Any soldier who participates in an unconstitutional war is violating his/her oath.

a violation of an oath and murder are two completely separate issues.

[Brett85]

Actually,, Obama won twice as an anti-war candidate (false as it may have been). Republicans beating the war drums have lost twice.

Good luck winning by promising more death and destruction.

Obama didn't win on a platform of calling our soldiers "murderers," which is what "No Free Beer" was referring to. I haven't seen anyone here who's "pro war." Some of us just disagree with the rhetoric that is used here.

[No Free Beer]

Obama didn't win on a platform of calling our soldiers "murderers," which is what "No Free Beer" was referring to. I haven't seen anyone here who's "pro war." Some of us just disagree with the rhetoric that is used here.

HEAR, HEAR! (hits floor with foot)

[bolil]

Ya because when they sign up, they all think to themselves, "I WANT TO INVADE OTHER COUNTRIES."

Implicitly, yes.,

[pcosmar]

Exactly.

If you talk with most military people, they say that when it comes to actual work in the field, regardless of one's MOS, they do it for their men (group). All that "America" shit gets thrown out the window pretty damn quickly.

I find it sad that people who sit comfortably behind a computer talk with such confidence of understanding war and the intricacies of battle.

I don't claim to understand it, either. However, I know people who served and I take their word for it. It's especially interesting to hear it from people who are vets AND Ron Paul supporters.
Oh Fuck your dumb shit.
I was Infantry. Nam Era Vet. I heard enough shit about Killing Gooks then. I was recruited for Angola and Rhodesia to kill Jungle bunnies, and have heard enough from Military Vets of this era talk about sand ******s. Folks join to kill.

All that patriotic bullshit is just that. Bullshit attempting to sound respectable.

Well it is NOT respectable. It should not be respected.

[pcosmar]

HEAR, HEAR! (hits floor with foot)

Hobnailed BOOT.
:(

[Aratus]

hi AF!

[QuickZ06]

I find it sad that people who sit comfortably behind a computer talk with such confidence of understanding war and the intricacies of battle.


O is that right? You find it sad that we as Americans want to protect our way of life and want to stop pissing off the world with our foreign policy? I hope no one in here has to know war, as most if not all in here would only take up arms if our shores (key word our shores) were being invaded. War is a racket that is a fact and you cannot sit here and spin it any other way. You don't have to physically do something to know it is bad and totally pointless especially when you are the aggressing force. Sure it might give you a better understanding but you do not have to be in those shoes to understand the consequences. I know rape is pure evil, but I did not go and rape someone in an attempt to better understand the madness of it. You logic is flawed and nonsense.

[Aratus]

In a previous much more innocent century for good or ill,
would Chris Kyle have ridden with Gen'l G. A. Custer ~~?

[Brett85]

O is that right? You find it sad that we as Americans want to protect our way of life and want to stop pissing off the world with our foreign policy? I hope no one in here has to know war.

Once again, no one is advocating preemptive war or intervention overseas. "No free beer" and I both believe it was a mistake to go into Iraq. We just disagree with some of the rhetoric that is used here, that our troops are a bunch of "murderers" intent on causing death and destruction across the entire planet.

[Aratus]

Those questions would make the average American's brain explode..

post number two is perceptive... if he as a sniper did not kill civilians and is unlike our air force in WW2 in that
it was almost impossible to exclude the deaths of civilians from a major bombing run, if he knew he had hit from
a distance a fighter and/or a combatant, then technically he was a good & chivalrous soldier. modern war is at
times an abysmal bloodbath. GOTO the old tv show 12 O'Clock High if one needs a feel for random killings and a
moral issue. it is not his actions we need to question, even though expert snipers were with us from the Civil War
onwards, its our policy as a nation we must ask questions of often & again and again. we are acting like a great
empire in that our foreign policy has an intrusive thrust and is not purely defensive. he was not a lousy soldier...

[Aratus]

if he lived his life in a most chivalrous manner and died like the warrior he was, then he was not an indiscriminate murderer...
this is a technical judgement call that hinges on at least about one thousand years of warfare & custom in western europe...

[mz10]

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone. You guys should all know (at least those of you who were raised Republican) how hard it is to open your mind when you've had jingoistic bullshit beaten into your head your whole life, and have been taught that everyone who is anti-war is just a flaming pinko liberal.

The fact is, most of these people don't pay enough attention to the nuances of foreign policy to understand why non-interventionism is better. They just see it as us vs. them, good guys killing the bad guys, because that's what they've been taught. So no, I don't think of Chris Kyle as a hero or a murderer, just a dumb jock who is really good at shooting.

[No Free Beer]

O is that right? You find it sad that we as Americans want to protect our way of life and want to stop pissing off the world with our foreign policy? I hope no one in here has to know war, as most if not all in here would only take up arms if our shores (key word our shores) were being invaded. War is a racket that is a fact and you cannot sit here and spin it any other way. You don't have to physically do something to know it is bad and totally pointless especially when you are the aggressing force. Sure it might give you a better understanding but you do not have to be in those shoes to understand the consequences. I know rape is pure evil, but I did not go a rape someone in an attempt to better understand the madness of it. You logic is flawed and nonsense.

You are acting as if I support the wars.

I do not.

However, I don't see it politically smart to throw around words such as "murderer" when discussing our troops, nor do I think its logical to say such things when war is not black and white.

[Aratus]

we have to tone down the overblewn rhetoric and take to heart all of Edmund Burke's
phillipics against Warren Hastings if we want a much better foreign policy over tyme...

[Brett85]

You are acting as if I support the wars.

I do not.

However, I don't see it politically smart to throw around words such as "murderer" when discussing our troops, nor do I think its logical to say such things when war is not black and white.

It seems amazing to me that those of us who are opposed to labeling our troops "murderers" are labeled as being "pro war." I guess people like you and I who are pro military and anti war are pretty rare.

[pcosmar]

nor do I think its logical to say such things when war is not black and white.

War is Black and White.
There is an invader and there is a defender.

The only war that is just (in any way) is one of defense. Invasion is always wrong. Period.

[QuickZ06]

You are acting as if I support the wars.

I do not.

However, I don't see it politically smart to throw around words such as "murderer" when discussing our troops, nor do I think its logical to say such things when war is not black and white.

Never said I thought you were pro wars and I would never expect you to be especially being on site of all places. I did address how you can think people cannot understand war even if they have not been in war themselves.

[donnay]

Really? Shut the fuck up dude. You sound like an ass. How the fuck do you know what he was into while there? How do you know he wasn't having guns pointed at him? Was he supposed to just not defend himself? He was a sniper, we are at war (like it or not), and he took an oath, an oath he obviously believed in or he wouldn't have carried out his missions. And how the fuck do you know all of the people he killed were from the country in which they were killed? You don't, so there goes the "defending their homeland" theory.

Blah..Blah...Blah...



Just like Kyle went on the Opie and Anthony Radio show telling every listener that he punch former Navy Seal Jesse Venture in the face because Jesse allegedly disrespected a Navy Seal wake, at a bar in California. It was a fabricated lie--Jesse was taking him to court for defamation of character.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bhjHWovwix4


Jesse Ventura Gets Backing Of Former SEALs In Lawsuit Over “Punch” Hoax (http://www.infowars.com/jesse-ventura-gets-backing-of-former-seals-in-lawsuit-over-punch-hoax/)

[qh4dotcom]

He was a psychotic murderer who killed hundreds of people who had a right to defend their homeland. Plain and simple.

Couldn't agree more.

[anaconda]

a violation of an oath and murder are two completely separate issues.

They are not completely separate issues, since murdering foreigners is entirely incumbent on the violation of the oath. If they honorably refused to go to Iraq they would not be murdering Iraqis. Or Afghans, or Libyans, or Pakistanis, or..

[AGRP]

Murderer? He could have protested peacefully.

[No Free Beer]

They are not completely separate issues, since murdering foreigners is entirely incumbent on the violation of the oath. If they honorably refused to go to Iraq they would not be murdering Iraqis. Or Afghans, or Libyans, or Pakistanis, or..

Okay, well they may not be completely separate issues, but they are simply separate issues.

Violation of oath does not equate to murder. That was my point.

[No Free Beer]

It seems amazing to me that those of us who are opposed to labeling our troops "murderers" are labeled as being "pro war." I guess people like you and I who are pro military and anti war are pretty rare.

Very true.

Although, not to split hairs, but I personally dislike the term "anti-war" because I like to think most people don't like war. However, I realize the necessity of it on occasion.

But, yes, essentially you are right. I am amazed that people as smart as the Ron Paul people like to act like issues, such as this, are black and white. The fact is that it is not. I, along with you, am not saying, "HELL YEAH, MAN! LAKE AFGHANISTAN! LAKE IRAQ!" I don't condone the action and invasion of Iraq, however I do realize how difficult and complex the issue of ignoring and order may be for our troops.

I guess what I would like to reiterate, and hopefully with your support TC, is that the supporters of liberty should be very careful with what they type on the internet and what they say to others. At the end of the day, there will be some people who agree with others who say things like, "our troops are murderers!" and there will be A LOT of people who look at those individuals and shake their head and dismiss them AND the movement.

This goes back to my comments on Ron Paul's tweet: It was stupid. Regardless if he was right or wrong. Regardless if his tweet was misunderstood or not, it was stupid. Why do people, RP included, feel the need to comment on every little damn thing.

You have the Right and the freedom to say what you want, but that does not mean that having/holding that Right doesn't carry responsibility.

For all the political junkies out there: if you want to actually win, you better be careful what you say. Pick and choose your battles.

Thank you tho, TC, for backing me up.

Keep the up the good/rational fight.

[donnay]

Here is why I have an issue with what Chris Kyle has done.


Since leaving the Navy, he has started his own military contracting firm, Craft International. It provides military and law enforcement sniper training, as well as private security and protection.

Source:
http://www.neverquitneverforget.org/Chris_Kyle.html

Lot's of money to be made starting up a mercenary organization these days.

mer·ce·nar·y (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2. Hired for service in a foreign army.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.


Source:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mercenary


Our founders warned us of standing armies and how they were dangerous to our liberties!

“None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen” ~ James Madison

“Keep within the requisite limits a standing military force, always remembering that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics - that without standing armies their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones safe” ~James Madison

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. the supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.” ~ Noah Webster

[Brett85]

Very true.

Although, not to split hairs, but I personally dislike the term "anti-war" because I like to think most people don't like war. However, I realize the necessity of it on occasion.

I agree. I should've said "anti preemptive war."

[No Free Beer]

Here is why I have an issue with what Chris Kyle has done.


Source:
http://www.neverquitneverforget.org/Chris_Kyle.html

Lot's of money to be made starting up a mercenary organization these days.

mer·ce·nar·y (mûrs-nr)
adj.
1. Motivated solely by a desire for monetary or material gain.
2. Hired for service in a foreign army.
n. pl. mer·ce·nar·ies
1. One who serves or works merely for monetary gain; a hireling.
2. A professional soldier hired for service in a foreign army.


Source:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/mercenary


Our founders warned us of standing armies and how they were dangerous to our liberties!

“None but an armed nation can dispense with a standing army” ~ Thomas Jefferson

“A standing army is one of the greatest mischief that can possibly happen” ~ James Madison

“Keep within the requisite limits a standing military force, always remembering that an armed and trained militia is the firmest bulwark of republics - that without standing armies their liberty can never be in danger, nor with large ones safe” ~James Madison

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. the supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any bands of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.” ~ Noah Webster


I completely agree with this!

Even a lot of service members agree!

[No Free Beer]

I agree. I should've said "anti preemptive war."

Yes! Exactly!

Or defensive war.

[BlackJack]

Really? Shut the fuck up dude. You sound like an ass. How the fuck do you know what he was into while there? Blah blah blah blah

Another misinformed noob who's only "argument" is expletives.


Christ, no fucking wonder Ron Paul was never elected.

If you've actually taken the time to listen to him, he ran last year to educate the public. He's state plenty of times the establishment was never going to elect him.

Now if you're done whining, maybe you should take the time to do actual research before blurting out another idiotic statement filled with rated R language.


No need for media manipulation

During his 2012 campaign there was plenty of media manipulation by the big propaganda machines such as Faux and MSM.


I did not and do not support the Iraq war, at all, but we are there and like it or not, there are people there trying to kill Americans (I understand they were wrongly invaded) so I have no issue with this man killing people who are trying to kill him.

Typical neocon response.


Chris Kyle mentioned in a Sirius radio interview that he blatantley disobeyed orders because a child was carrying RPG'S to a camp and he couldn't shoot a child.

But he sure didn't mind killing all the other men women and children right? His unofficial total amount of killings is 255, probably even more. You seriously think outta all of those he never killed a child?


I swear to God, a lot of people on this site are the reason a lot of Americans think that Ron Paul supporters are nut jobs.

And you've just revealed yourself to be a sleeper cell.

[mport1]

I dont have a problem going after the policy makers and exposing their wargames. But, going around and calling our armed forces murderers is just ignorant and its going to kill our chances of winning.

Both should be exposed. The politicians would have no power if it weren't for the "police" and "military" members who carry out their orders.

Winning what? I want to end the wars. That can only be done by changing the minds of the people and showing them that the state and their wars are immoral.

[mport1]

a violation of an oath and murder are two completely separate issues.

Soldiers commit both. And I could care less about the violation of some meaningless oath. The mass murder is quite concerning though.

[heavenlyboy34]

I dont have a problem going after the policy makers and exposing their wargames. But, going around and calling our armed forces murderers is just ignorant and its going to kill our chances of winning.
I'll grant that calling soldiers murderers is not good for those who are trying to win elections. However, the term fits-unless we're talking about the wars of olde in which soldiers would march out onto a field and shoot at and/or stab each other. Modern war ALWAYS results in killing innocent people (murder).

[AuH20]

Let's examine the definition of murder:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder


Definition of MURDER
1
: the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought

Nope, doesn't sound like a majority of the U.S. military to me and I'm not exactly a fan.

[heavenlyboy34]

Let's examine the definition of murder:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/murder



Nope, doesn't sound like a majority of the U.S. military to me and I'm not exactly a fan.
Yes, but as your quote says, malice is not necessary for an action to be called murder.

[AuH20]

Yes, but as your quote says, malice is not necessary for an action to be called murder.

No, that would be called be manslaughter. :) The murderer label is really off-base and not grounded in reality. Murder is reserved for conscious preparation beforehand.

[Danke]

Both should be exposed. The politicians would have no power if it weren't for the "police" and "military" members who carry out their orders.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gj79LTeb4SA

[AuH20]

Kyle's legacy is much more complex than hero or murderer. However, this guy was definitely what I would classify as a murderer, though he may have been under the influence of pharmaceuticals:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/11/world/asia/afghanistan-us-service-member

[J_White]

those hard questions would be ignored.

[A Son of Liberty]

We should always hedge our language out of concern for offending people who don't agree with us. For instance, we be very careful about how we speak about the Federal Reserve, for even though we know that the Fed's policies are inflationary, devastating especially to the poor, tantamount to actual theft of every single person on the planet, and may very likely result in a global currency "event" the likes of which humanity has never seen, reaping untold ruin and suffering on almost everyone, but particularly the poor, we shouldn't say those things, because a lot of people will be offended by such comments, especially those whose life depends upon the Fed. They may also think we're "crazy" for saying things like that, and that we don't know what we're talking about, and that we wear tinfoil hats. We should say things like, "I think the Fed is bad"... no, that's too strong. How about, "I think the Fed is not a very good thing"?

Also, when we talk about taxation, even though it is very plainly the involuntary confiscation of our labor, which is what plain-speaking people call theft, and even though we know that when the fruit of a persons labor is not their own we understand that this person is in a condition of slavery, we should not refer to taxation as theft and slavery, because people who believe in taxation would be offended, and a lot of good is done with those taxes anyway and what are you some kind of racist, huh? I mean, taxes go to fund a lot of social programs and minorities are a disproportionate recipient of those social programs so it seems rather obvious that if you call taxation theft and slavery you are some kind of racist. And how dare you start examining the root causes of the fact that minorities seem disproportionately represented on the rolls of social programs? We need to deal with the reality of what's at hand right now, we can't be going back into history and trying to figure these things out, and it's just your opinion anyway, but regardless even if it is government's fault how does that help these people NOW? Racist...

You HAVE to hedge your language. This is how you win elections!

Look, I have family overseas right now. I don't think all of our soldiers are "murderers". There are as many circumstances as there are human beings on this planet, and to cast them all in the same lot as Kyle is a kind of collectivist thinking that I avoid under ALL circumstances. And though I've never spoken a word against Chris Kyle, and my only comments have been that I wouldn't want to be him right now, standing before my Creator answering for the actions of my life, but this guy took an apparent smug satisfaction in what he did that should be disturbing to decent people.

I'll reiterate what I've said before: it is almost universally accepted now that the Iraq war was "a mistake", at best (for the sake of argument). Thus, the war should never have been fought; further, those killed should not be dead; further still, it would be highly appropriate to at least feel a sense of shame over having killed ANYONE, let alone 160 people. Speaking personally, I would be EXTREMELY angry with the government of the US if I came to understand, as any sentient person should by now, that the war in Iraq was "a mistake" (at best), and that I had been responsible for the deaths of 160 people because of their "mistake". See the O&A video above. Kyle makes the comment, early on discussing Jesse Ventura, that he signed up to serve the country and the government told him what to do. To plain speaking people, that is a mercenary, and his 160 "confirmed kills" are murders.

Humanity will continue to regress, and the cause of liberty will ultimately fail, if people who understand foundational principles fear to speak them publicly.

[A Son of Liberty]

http://mises.org/media/7367/What-War-Does

This seems relevant, here.

[No Free Beer]

Winning what? I want to end the wars.

elections.

[Antischism]

If Obama and Bush are murderers, this guy is most definitely a murderer.

[pcosmar]

elections.

http://rense.com/1.imagesH/deesvote.jpg