Quote:
Originally Posted by tw
Should one want to create conflict and instability (what extremists want), then ones takes a shoot and runs away. Then 51 others get shot.
That is the responsibility of a soldier. To be shot at and not fire back. Because the one in 1000 was not identified.
There is nothing fair about being responsible. Soldiers can complain about how life is unfair. But they must ACT responsibly. Let's never forget the murder of innocent students at Kent State. And in the days of Nixon, those soldiers were considered innocent. To this day, some blame students for their own death. Because soldiers violated their responsibilities.
|
I saw an interview with an Egyptian doctor. He described *lots* of patients who had been shot ... right in the forehead. BOOM, headshot.
The impression I got was of a big crowd being generally boisterous, then as individuals stepped up to become leaders and agitate for further trouble, a sniper would target them. Just like on the battlefield, where snipers target junior officers who have to make themselves conspicuous to act as leaders.
I would say this has happened too many times for it to be one rogue sniper acting without orders. It looks deliberate and ordered to me. It does NOT look like a bunch of panicky soldiers "returning" fire into a mob after a few shots in their direction.
If so, it is ruthless, and almost certainly illegal, but also a very effective way of pruning off the 1% most dangerous of the troublemakers in the Brotherhood, and intimidating the rest into behaving.