Aw Jeez...semantics already...;)

Its not a major issue to me and I really dont care if our soldiers have to use weapons with bible verses on them or not, but it leaves me feeling uneasy, because it does imply to me (an atheist) that the killing done with these weapons is religiously sanctioned, and I just never thought we still did that. But I guess we do.

Gee I didn't know sights were considered weapons now. The notion that there are "weapons with bible verses on them" is false. The sight is a piece of equipment, akin to a pair of binoculars, flashlight, backpack, tent, MRE, etc. etc. If these were stamped on the weapon itself, then I could potentially see a problem since the weapon itself is the means to which the military projects force. Not a harmless attachment.

FFS...they are rifle sights. Honestly.

But OK, I get it that it wasnt intentional. That this company does it on all its stuff (right?). Its just an unfortunate turn of events that put these particular sights on US military rifles.

Its still eerie from my perspective.

yeah, but they could be used for checking out the showers of the opposite sex. ;)

Hee Hee...is there an appropriate bible verse for that?

Yes the company puts these on many of their products, and has been doing so long before the military ever started buying them. I just have a hard time seeing how this is any different then lets say if all the MRE packages had verses printed on them. Neither are weapons, however both are used by the military to enhance their ability to wage war. But I highly doubt the same stink would be raised if it was MREs instead of rifle sights.

No, but it's a religious experience, even if it falls under don't ask don't tell. ;)

Why do you doubt that?

AAAh, well then - Fuck You Pico. You made a statement. I said I didn't get it. You made another statement that didn't explain it. I said I didn't get it. You don't want to explain what you meant, that's fine but just say so.

A soldier's objective is to eliminate the enemy. I never looked AT my scope.... I looked THROUGH it.

Yeah, I think Monster said that's what Song of Solomon was all about. But there are no pictures, so...

BUT! had they had the scopes then there might have been pictures if they'd also had camera attachments...

And film and cameras.

Not to be a thread killing fun sponge, but I think the real point about this isn't so much the issue of is this a crusade against Islam or is it old testament new testament, east coast vs west coast what seems particularly hypocritical about the whole thing is that no where does baby J advocate killing for any reason. In fact he seems to go to great lengths to dissuade people from doing so.

Honestly partly just on a hunch, MREs aren't a source of sensational news like guns are. It's like the perfect storm of hot-button issues in the media: guns, Iraq, and religion. Compare that to lets say a stash of dusty surplus MREs with verses printed on them sold at some Army-Navy surplus store in South Dakota. Which would grab the headlines more?

Government endorsement of religion on MRE wrappers would be an epic shit-storm.

Hey, if we're going to take issue about this sort of shit, let's start with something that affects everybody and get god off the money. :p

ooh, just had an idea, I think I might get one of those credit cards you design yourself and put "In :fsm: we trust" on it! :lol:

Ok MRE packaging was a bad example since they're government produced. How about on the bottles of Tobasco included in those meals then? Think that would cause a similar sensation?

The biggest problem here is the media IMO. "Firm ending Bible references on guns"-CNN, "No More Jesus Rifles"-ABC, "Company to Remove Bible References From Combat Rifles"-FOX, "'Jesus Guns': Two More Countries Rethink Using Weapons with Secret Bible References "-ABC. They're not on the guns, they're on something completely harmless. Not the guns. Completely irresponsible and sensational reporting is making this into some huge issue, when a number of service members have known about these references for years already.

The rifle thing probably does have traction because of the apparent perversion of Christ's message and the anti-gun notions of many reporters.

Maybe we could have a Scopes Honky trial? ;)

Fixed that for you.
Or that Jesus is the light:

What if MREs had something made by Proctor and Gamble in them, with this image:
http://www.twoagespilgrims.com/doctr...lelogo_big.jpg

Who be the crybaby then? Who would be creating a shit storm then? christian fundies, that's who.

I heard that the letters/numbers referred to passages in the koran that spoke of killing christians.

I'm personally offended that that every single bottle of tobasco used in chow halls and MRE's for the past 20 years has been marked Kosher. I'm not jewish and I find it offensive.

This whole story is stupid and has very little traction among the troops. They could give a shit. Is it sighted properly and will I hit my target is a much more important question. There is no story here.

Fuckin' crybaby

I really hope you don't actually buy into that P&G hoax... anyone who does is an idiot.

No.

Really, Pico?

"He teacheth my hands to war... I have pursued mine enemies and overtaken them: neither did I turn again till they were consumed." Psalms 18:34, 37 -- that end of that lengthy, variegated Psalm is not all sweetness and light, is it?

"To everything there is a season... A time to kill and a time to heal...A time to love and a time to hate; a time of war and a time of peace..." Ecclesiastes 3 is a mighty fine chapter about perspective, and having it.

I'm not saying these could not be found distasteful; I reckon the writers found it distasteful in their far time too. You can find as many horrors as beauties written in the Bible -- and what is this but a reflection of life itself? The Bible has some rich veins of philosophy, right there for the mining.

I think you could stand to have a more mature understanding of that which is in the Bible. Its tales run from the mystical to the ethereal to earthy to bloody to legalistic to historic to, well, science fiction from Patmos -- all over the place. If someone decorates the tools of blood with a bloody sort of inscription drawn therefrom, is there cause for complaint? I don't think so.

"Justified conveniently"? A common -- too common -- complaint among those with but secondhand knowledge of Christianity -- but not one in the end much borne out. It's more the Bible observing that bad things happen, and sometimes to good people too. It may go on to chronicle what somebody did about them.

Are you going to complain about the Bible being a tool of oppression? Fah. It's quite like a gun: the very properties that make it useful as an oppressor's tool are the properties you can use as a tool to break that oppression and the oppressor with it -- "...as on the day of Midian."

It's vegetables: it's parve. :p

UG, if you used the quote function, we might have a better chance of following you.

More than one. Heck, you can use the whole Song of Solomon as a stroke book. Really.

Now likening somebody's tummy to a heap of wheat, okay, that's a little out there in simile land for me... but no one could say the Song of Solomon was the writing of a eunuch. It was written by somebody who could spooge.

True, Glatt... didn't think how long this thread was -- think I can still edit something in. And Tabasco cain't be nuthin' but parve.

Aaand fixed up. Pico's post was bottom of first page.

First, this is about image and not a "who cares" issue. Ever since the United States began its "war on terror", it has at least attempted to make sure it was not taken as a "war against Islam". They do this because it will much easier for terrorist groups to recruit new members if they can convince people that the US is attempting to wipe out their [Muslims] life and religion, and not just fighting terrorists.

Yes, it is true that these verses really have no effect on US soldiers. Yes, it is true that this company has been putting these on before the "war on terror". Yes, bible versus probably can be found other places in the US Army. But, terrorist recruiters will NEVER bring that up when showing this to others and terrorist recruits will never consider those legitimate arguments either. So, if it is such a non-issue, then why the hell would you keep them on when they can be used as effective propaganda to recruit terrorists against the US?

Trijicon has been putting these on their products for many many years. Who are we to tell them what they can and cannot do? The only right thing for the Gov't to do so that we don't offend anyone, including those we are killing, is to cancel the contract with Trijicon and buy sights from an Asian company. They'll probably be cheaper anyway.



(Dripping with Sarcasm)

What if they were verses from the Koran? Would everybody be all happy and skippy then? :eyebrow:

Funny you say that - I was wondering how upset we here in the US would be if we were getting them from an overseas company that did just that. It would be rather ironic.

Their biggest customer?

Oh, most certainly HM. Did you read my entire post?

The Customer is Always Right.


And when one is a very substantial customer, one has the right to make demands of the company one is buying from. If that company is sensible and wishes to retain the large government contract they'll be willing to make suitable arrangements and amendments: which it would appear they have done.

If you put something in white; dont be surprised if someone doesn't see it :P

I saw it, but I guess I misinterpreted what the sarcasm was supposed to indicate.

It doesn't show at all on my screen unless I highlight it. I don;t know to highlight it unless there are clues that there's something in white there :P

Really Dana? I see them off-white, just figured everyone else did as well.

I agree to a point. Then again they were on there before we became their biggest customer - perhaps that point should have been brought up at the contracts inception. Either way - seems like a big deal about nothing of any real consequence.

You really don't think the image of a Christian Crusade is a big consequence?

"I hope you can sense ... this is of serious concern to me and the other commanders in Iraq and Afghanistan because it can indeed create a perception that is absolutely contrary to what it is that we have sought to do."

- Gen. David Petraeus, commander of United States Central Command

He gets it.

"Big deals about nothing" often result in unintended consequences (and perceptions) and should be corrected....as has evidently now been done.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/01/21/rif...les/index.html

Nope. I have to highlight it to see anything's there. Sometimes if I see a gap in a post I highlight just to check if I'm missing anything :P

I don't see it as a Christian Crusade.

You really missed the point.

I think a big deal is being made of it. This isn't something new, its been like this for many years.

I'm more interested in other issues - this doesn't even make it onto the list of real concerns I have.

You need to realize that this isn't about what any American thinks. It is about what Muslims in countries like Iraq or Afghanistan think. Every since the "war on terror" began, the United States has worked to differentiate it from a "war against Islam" for very obvious reason.

Who cares if someone gets offended? What if that offended person decides that they will join a terrorist group to defend their religion? What if that offended person will refuse to help US forces because they feel the US is attacking their religion?

Once again, this is about image. In Afghanistan, we are working extremely hard to establish and maintain good relations with the local population, but if they feel that our presence there is religious based, all of that will be ruined. The passages were taken off were a reason. And that reason is that those hurt US forces establish and maintain strategic relations with the Islamic population.

They should be more concerned about why the crosshairs are on them rather than what is etched into the scope.

The entire Islamic population? The entire point of taking off the passages off is to tell the majority of the Islamic population that the cross hairs aren't on them.

The actual passages is a non-issue. But since the story blew up, the US military need to cover their asses. That's what they did.

Petraeus got it.

The Cellar generals still dont get it.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/jesus-...ory?id=9618791

Didn't i already say that?

Could be -- I just wanted to say it too. "In my own inimitable... idiom."

Same here, I've mentioned before it's annoying.

I agree.

It is not just about covering their asses.

It is also a recognition of perceptions...and as was also noted by piercehawkeye...about how it might be perceived by Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan...and understanding the need to be a bit sensitive to those perceptions.

Trying to picture General Petraeus in panties.

Speaking of perceptions, Mike Yon mentioned in Iraq the locals thought we would never leave because some outfits built, or moved into existing, buildings.
In Afghanistan, the locals feel we're not going to stay, and protect them from the Taliban, because we're living in tents and not building structures.
The local commanders have to be aware of these perceptions, they can win or lose the war.

Yes. Verse 2.

Scoping her out, was he?