Pat Tillman, an independent thinker not a sheeple.
Coulter and Hannity discussed this recently on Faux and neither of them could believe it.
Better believe it…
No surprise the right wingnuts don’t want to touch this one.
I’ve already posted about this on the original Pat Tillman thread.
Well, as I didnt get to post on the last Pat Tillman thread Ill start here.
Tillman was made such a hero. And dont get me wrong a hero is just what he is.
But, for that reason I believe is why the Army was so reluctant to give the information on the fratricide.
I mean what would the people rather hear that he died fighting the enemy or that he was killed by his on people while fighting the enemy.
It was all in political intrest to say he was killed fighting the enemy.
But, it was wrong not to tell the truth.
And, the Army need to tell the Tillman family just what did happen. They owe them that much for what has happened.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
No surprise the right wingnuts don’t want to touch this one.[/quote]
Marmadogg, how come you state that it is only the right wing?
[quote]Michael C wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
No surprise the right wingnuts don’t want to touch this one.
Marmadogg, how come you state that it is only the right wing?
[/quote]
That’s all he has in his playbook. He calls everything/everyone he disagrees with right wingnut, as if that automatically wins the debate for him.
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Michael C wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
No surprise the right wingnuts don’t want to touch this one.
Marmadogg, how come you state that it is only the right wing?
That’s all he has in his playbook. He calls everything/everyone he disagrees with right wingnut, as if that automatically wins the debate for him. [/quote]
LOL
[quote]
. . .
According to the files, when one of the humvees became disabled, thus stalling the mission, commanding officers split Tillman?s platoon in two so one half could move on and the other could arrange transport for the disabled vehicle. Platoon leader Lt. David Uthlaut protested the move as dangerous, but he was overruled. The first group was ordered out in the late afternoon, with Pat Tillman in the forward unit. Kevin?s unit followed 15 to 20 minutes later, hauling the humvee on an Afghan-owned flatbed truck. Both groups temporarily lost radio and visual contact with each other in the deep canyon, and the second group came under attack from suspected Taliban fighters on the surrounding ridges.
Pat Tillman, according to testimony, climbed a hill with another soldier and an Afghan militiaman, intending to attack the enemy. He offered to remove his 28-pound body armor so he could move more quickly, but was ordered not to. Meanwhile, the lead vehicle in the platoon?s second group arrived near Tillman?s position about 65 meters away and mistook the group as enemy. The Afghan stood and fired above the second group at the suspected enemy on the opposite ridge. Although the driver of the second group?s lead vehicle, according to his testimony, recognized Tillman?s group as ?friendlies? and tried to signal others in his vehicle not to shoot, they directed fire toward the Afghan and began shooting wildly, without first identifying their target, and also shot at a village on the ridgeline.
The Afghan was killed. According to testimony, Tillman, who along with others on the hill waved his arms and yelled ?cease fire,? set off a smoke grenade to identify his group as fellow soldiers. There was a momentary lull in the firing, and he and the soldier next to him, thinking themselves safe, relaxed, stood up and started talking. But the shooting resumed. Tillman was hit in the wrist with shrapnel and in his body armor with numerous bullets.
The soldier next to him testified: ?I could hear the pain in his voice as he called out, ?Cease fire, friendlies, I am Pat f?ing Tillman, dammit.? He said this over and over until he stopped,? having been hit by three bullets in the forehead, killing him.
The soldier continued, ?I then looked over at my side to see a river of blood coming down from where he was ? I saw his head was gone.? Two other Rangers elsewhere on the mountainside were injured by shrapnel.
Kevin was unaware that his brother had been killed until nearly an hour later when he asked if anyone had seen Pat and a fellow soldier told him.
Tillman?s death came at a sensitive time for the Bush administration ? just a week before the Army?s abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib in Iraq became public and sparked a huge scandal. The Pentagon immediately announced that Tillman had died heroically in combat with the enemy, and President Bush hailed him as ?an inspiration on and off the football field, as with all who made the ultimate sacrifice in the war on terror.? [/quote]
[quote]Goku_SS4 wrote:
Well, as I didnt get to post on the last Pat Tillman thread Ill start here.
Tillman was made such a hero. And dont get me wrong a hero is just what he is.
But, for that reason I believe is why the Army was so reluctant to give the information on the fratricide.
I mean what would the people rather hear that he died fighting the enemy or that he was killed by his on people while fighting the enemy.
It was all in political intrest to say he was killed fighting the enemy.
But, it was wrong not to tell the truth.
And, the Army need to tell the Tillman family just what did happen. They owe them that much for what has happened.
[/quote]
The Army did it to comfort his family. It is a long standing tradition in the military dating back to WWI. Nobody wants to hear that their loved one was killed in an accident or by friendly fire. Most prefer to believe that their loved one died with honor engaging the enemy.
That means something to the folks back home. It doesn’t mean as much as it used to in today’s PC world where honor is viewed as something negative and duty is something only the naive are expected to perform.
Accidents in combat are frequent and lethal in modern combat. Sadly they are unavoidable. The US does a great job in keeping them in check but they still happen.
The man died in the service of his country. Serving honorably and doing his duty. Nothing more needs to be said.
I mourned his loss and I hope his family finds comfort.
[quote]hedo wrote:
The Army did it to comfort his family. It is a long standing tradition in the military dating back to WWI. Nobody wants to hear that their loved one was killed in an accident or by friendly fire. Most prefer to believe that their loved one died with honor engaging the enemy.
That means something to the folks back home. It doesn’t mean as much as it used to in today’s PC world where honor is viewed as something negative and duty is something only the naive are expected to perform.
Accidents in combat are frequent and lethal in modern combat. Sadly they are unavoidable. The US does a great job in keeping them in check but they still happen.
The man died in the service of his country. Serving honorably and doing his duty. Nothing more needs to be said.
I mourned his loss and I hope his family finds comfort.
[/quote]
I’m going to have to go ahead and disagree with you here. The Army did not do the same in other cases where fratricide was the cause of death. It is obvious this was a special case, and the circumstances surrounding the investigation are giving the Army a blackeye fairly similar to the Private Lynch debacle.
I don’t know how the Lt that protested the decision to split the platoon was in turn booted from the Rangers, but the whole story was not told in that article, just an outline so who knows all the details involved.
The intersection of the fog of war, careerism, and left wing politics. Many military members have not been wild about certain aspects of the war they are fighting. The second hand tales of Tillman supporting Kerry, and thinking the war was illegtal is more whiny leftism than important fact, and if he was meeting Chomsky he was in for a big disapointment.
Lots of culture at conflict here. Nothing in the article is surprising or event that strange.
Bottom line: Tillman was a hero, he died fighting for his country. His death was preventable tactically. His chain of command did not handle it properly.
[quote]hedo wrote:
Goku_SS4 wrote:
Well, as I didnt get to post on the last Pat Tillman thread Ill start here.
Tillman was made such a hero. And dont get me wrong a hero is just what he is.
But, for that reason I believe is why the Army was so reluctant to give the information on the fratricide.
I mean what would the people rather hear that he died fighting the enemy or that he was killed by his on people while fighting the enemy.
It was all in political intrest to say he was killed fighting the enemy.
But, it was wrong not to tell the truth.
And, the Army need to tell the Tillman family just what did happen. They owe them that much for what has happened.
The Army did it to comfort his family. It is a long standing tradition in the military dating back to WWI. Nobody wants to hear that their loved one was killed in an accident or by friendly fire. Most prefer to believe that their loved one died with honor engaging the enemy.
[/quote]
I know nobody wants to hear that. I mean if it happened to me one day when I was in Iraq I would hope that it would be from me trying to save someone or fighting. Instead of being hit by and IED or friendly fire. Im sure that is how every Soldier,Airman,Marine or Seaman would want to go.
But, if it didnt go down like that. Me personaly,I would want my wife to know the truth. And I know she would want to know because we have talked about it.
Indeed.
No matter how he died he did just as you said.[quote]
I mourned his loss and I hope his family finds comfort.
[/quote]
As did I. I hope his family also finds comfort.
But, maybe just a little of that comfort will come from the truth of what happened.
[quote]Goku_SS4 wrote:
hedo wrote:
Goku_SS4 wrote:
Well, as I didnt get to post on the last Pat Tillman thread Ill start here.
Tillman was made such a hero. And dont get me wrong a hero is just what he is.
But, for that reason I believe is why the Army was so reluctant to give the information on the fratricide.
I mean what would the people rather hear that he died fighting the enemy or that he was killed by his on people while fighting the enemy.
It was all in political intrest to say he was killed fighting the enemy.
But, it was wrong not to tell the truth.
And, the Army need to tell the Tillman family just what did happen. They owe them that much for what has happened.
The Army did it to comfort his family. It is a long standing tradition in the military dating back to WWI. Nobody wants to hear that their loved one was killed in an accident or by friendly fire. Most prefer to believe that their loved one died with honor engaging the enemy.
I know nobody wants to hear that. I mean if it happened to me one day when I was in Iraq I would hope that it would be from me trying to save someone or fighting. Instead of being hit by and IED or friendly fire. Im sure that is how every Soldier,Airman,Marine or Seaman would want to go.
But, if it didnt go down like that. Me personaly,I would want my wife to know the truth. And I know she would want to know because we have talked about it.
That means something to the folks back home. It doesn’t mean as much as it used to in today’s PC world where honor is viewed as something negative and duty is something only the naive are expected to perform.
Accidents in combat are frequent and lethal in modern combat. Sadly they are unavoidable. The US does a great job in keeping them in check but they still happen.
Indeed.
The man died in the service of his country. Serving honorably and doing his duty. Nothing more needs to be said.
No matter how he died he did just as you said.
I mourned his loss and I hope his family finds comfort.
As did I. I hope his family also finds comfort.
But, maybe just a little of that comfort will come from the truth of what happened. [/quote].
Perhaps Goku I hope so.
I admired Pat Tillman for his committment. Many others did also.
No matter how he died, all regret his loss. I am sure the man who took his life, in error, regrets it more then anyone.
The main point was lost here for a few. Yes, he was killed by friendly fire and it was covered up by the Army for political reasons. Lying is wrong whether it’s to be “caring” or not.
The main point I was addressing is that fact that those who support the Iraq war and consider Bush totally just in his actions rallied around Tillman’s death and used it as a banner to condemn those against the war.
Remember hailing him a true T-Man, “the ultimate man like only an american can be” as Ann Coulter stated. Would she have said that if it was known he thought the Iraq war was illegal or that he supported Kerry?
Would many who on these boards that called him the ultimate T-Man called him that if these beliefs or views of his were known?
I think not. Instead it’s called by one poster whiny leftism. Any view that differs from that of George Bush is smeared and labeled “liberal whiners” “ABBrs”.
I like others admire Pat Tillman because he fought for his beliefs like other soldiers have and are doing. I also admire him for walking away from luxury to back those beliefs up whether he was a Bush supporter or not.
I just find it extremely interesting and it makes me admire him more to know he viewed this war as wrong and didn’t support Bush. As one who didn’t swallow the propaganda from the right.
In my opinion he is someone to look up to for his strong morals, values, and ideals.
[quote]Dedicated wrote:
The main point was lost here for a few. Yes, he was killed by friendly fire and it was covered up by the Army for political reasons. Lying is wrong whether it’s to be “caring” or not.
The main point I was addressing is that fact that those who support the Iraq war and consider Bush totally just in his actions rallied around Tillman’s death and used it as a banner to condemn those against the war.
Remember hailing him a true T-Man, “the ultimate man like only an american can be” as Ann Coulter stated. Would she have said that if it was known he thought the Iraq war was illegal or that he supported Kerry?
Would many who on these boards that called him the ultimate T-Man called him that if these beliefs or views of his were known?
I think not. Instead it’s called by one poster whiny leftism. Any view that differs from that of George Bush is smeared and labeled “liberal whiners” “ABBrs”.
I like others admire Pat Tillman because he fought for his beliefs like other soldiers have and are doing. I also admire him for walking away from luxury to back those beliefs up whether he was a Bush supporter or not.
I just find it extremely interesting and it makes me admire him more to know he viewed this war as wrong and didn’t support Bush. As one who didn’t swallow the propaganda from the right.
In my opinion he is someone to look up to for his strong morals, values, and ideals. [/quote]
Who are you referring too? Who changed their opinion of Tillman because of this revelation?
I know everyone disagrees with me on sparing his family but I am basing my opinion on experience. I have been out of the army for over 12 yrs. If someone with more recent combat experience wants to chime in feel free. The army always went to great lengths to present the death of a loved on in the most favorable light possible. Officers were always cautioned not to provide painful details but instead focus on admirable qualities and accomplishments of the individual when reporting a death to the family. Has that changed?
Discreet questioning, especially in a small group such as the Rangers and other Special Forces, will often provide the answers a family is looking for.
It may be politically convenient to paint the army and the administration in the most menacing light possible but the public, in my opinion, is not entitled to every detail of a soldiers service and death.
[quote]hedo wrote:
I know everyone disagrees with me on sparing his family but I am basing my opinion on experience. I have been out of the army for over 12 yrs. If someone with more recent combat experience wants to chime in feel free. The army always went to great lengths to present the death of a loved on in the most favorable light possible. Officers were always cautioned not to provide painful details but instead focus on admirable qualities and accomplishments of the individual when reporting a death to the family. Has that changed?
Discreet questioning, especially in a small group such as the Rangers and other Special Forces, will often provide the answers a family is looking for.
It may be politically convenient to paint the army and the administration in the most menacing light possible but the public, in my opinion, is not entitled to every detail of a soldiers service and death.
[/quote]
hedo,
I agreeded with you on most everything you said until the last statement.
The current administration along with the army used Tillman’s death as a rallying point in support for the war (Much like they did with Jessica Lynch, but that is a whole other topic). That is a fact, not a spin point or revisionist history. Once that was done, it made the facts of his death public fair game. Had this not been done, and it was just the army telling the family that he was killed in action, no one would even have batted an eye. It wasn’t political convenience to paint the picture as bad. It was bad because they brought it to our attention to begin with and then tried to cover it up when the whole truth got out.
It amazes me that this administration is all about preaching a “higher standard” and “moral values” but when it gets caught in public deception, we shouldn’t question it. We should just ignore it and go back to our lives like nothing happened. “Nothing to see here folks! Move along!”
[quote]rainjack wrote:
Michael C wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
No surprise the right wingnuts don’t want to touch this one.
Marmadogg, how come you state that it is only the right wing?
That’s all he has in his playbook. He calls everything/everyone he disagrees with right wingnut, as if that automatically wins the debate for him. [/quote]
Wow!
It took you that long to figure it out.
Ding dong Delay is gone. The wingnut movement in the GOP is on its last breath. Maybe we can get back to real governance and keep the liberals from controling the house.
I hope so.
[quote]Michael C wrote:
Marmadogg wrote:
No surprise the right wingnuts don’t want to touch this one.
Marmadogg, how come you state that it is only the right wing?
[/quote]
Are the right wingnuts bad mouthing Tillman?
The left wingnuts are gleefull that Tillman was an intellectual and did not support Bush or the war but supports the troops.
Imagine how the left wingnuts would make an example of the GOP if the right wingnuts were to bad mouth Tillman because of his beliefs…
If you still do not understand I am sure Zeb and RJ can explain it to you.
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
Ding dong Delay is gone. The wingnut movement in the GOP is on its last breath. Maybe we can get back to real governance and keep the liberals from controling the house.
I hope so.[/quote]
Delay is going nowhere. The trumped up charges will go long before Delay does. Everyone with a hint of a functioning braincell knows this.