Video scenes shots:
Watch the video:
| URL: | |
| Embed: |
Display Video Comments | Hide Video Comments | Add Comment
======================================
Try Ecigarette For FREE At http://tryecigarette.com
======================================
Other videos by this author:
Latest comments made on this video:
By: Treblaine. on 29 May 12, 22:24:14
That is not what I said, I did not say medics can UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCE fire on the enemy, what I said was OFFENSIVE use of weapons is in contravention of being a Medic. Geneva conventions say you can't fire on a medic or his patient, medic can only shoot back PURELY? defensively. So if THEY break the rules (fire on a medic), then you can fire. But imagine if Medics could shoot first: every soldier would be made a "medic" and get the enemy to not fire the first shots.
By: Jerry68W. on 29 May 12, 22:03:03
The? last bit of my comment was from the Soldier's Creed. Every Marine is a rifleman, as is every SOLDIER. We are ALL trained to destroy the enemy...even cooks and Nurses (I was a Nurse also). The Geneva Convention does NOT say that I cannot fire on an enemy. What it says is that if that enemy is wounded and no longer a threat, I need to treat that casualty as I would treat any other, based on triage (IDME)
By: Treblaine. on 29 May 12, 21:50:22
That phrase I cannot find, It sounds like the Creed of the Marine Corps: "Every MARINE a rifleman" It's quite undeniably obvious that? there are people in the Armed forces who are not for offensive combat roles, such as Chefs, nurses and so on. As a soldier medic you should know the Geneva Conventions and how that applies to medics and the limitations of your use of personal defence weapons, how using them offensively is in defiance of the conventions that voids you of its protections.
By: Jerry68W. on 29 May 12, 21:41:31
What about all the women who proudly proclaim to be "fag hags"? Nobody seems to be hurt by that! Fact is, words only hurt as much as you allow them to. If someone calls you a faggot for being gay and you're "hurt" by that, then you're probably not very comfortable with who? you are.
By: Jerry68W. on 29 May 12, 21:21:21
I was an enlisted Medic (68W). I was issued an M4 by the US Army 1st Cavalry? Division. EVERY Soldier is a rifleman. EVERY Soldier carries a weapon and "extra" ammunition. NOTHING says that I (as a Medic) cannot destroy the enemy as I was trained to do. It is a part of the Soldier's Creed. I am an American Soldier....I stand ready to deploy, engage, and destroy the enemies of the United States of America in close combat...
By: bf2lover42. on 28 May 12, 19:30:22
Short effective range? You can land all pellets from a 00 buck shell inside a deer sized target at 80 yards. 80 yards is short if you're in? open spaces. The photos had been taken in a forest with very dense forestation and bush everywhere. Any battle taking place in those areas would have an average engagement distance of 50 meters, well inside a shotgun's practical range.
By: Treblaine. on 28 May 12, 12:27:12
A shotgun is a highly defensive weapon due to its short effective range, he may push the limits carrying extra ammunition but that would be? him going BEYOND HIS REMIT! Women are in general weaker than men, but they can still drag fully geared men. I've seen a female nurse manhandle a 300lbs unconscious man from one bed to another in a hospital.
By: bf2lover42. on 28 May 12, 10:00:43
I was pretty active on a gun/military forum last year. One guy posted photos of a medic, armed with a shotgun and carrying a fuckload of? shells in a pouch and in his MOLLE straps. Medics are all about the make-do you need to resort to when you have to perform duties that were supposed to be done in a hospital. Modern gear has a loop designed to help dragging people because it keeps people from dying.
By: Treblaine. on 28 May 12, 01:37:44
Medics may be armed but only for personal protection, not for offensive combat roles. They have a pistol or possibly a carbine but no extra ammo. Soldiers? are armed not for protection but to hunt down and destroy the enemy force (unless surrender is arranged).
By: LXJRGNSN. on 27 May 12, 22:11:33
People from Phoenix? are Phoenicians.
By: bf2lover42. on 27 May 12, 20:56:47
Medics are not supposed to? be armed. Yet they are. This last decade we have understood that when you are not fighting an actual army everyone will be shot at, even medics. So medics are armed.
By: Treblaine. on 27 May 12, 20:25:28
As a medic? or a cook. That's how. What I'm saying is medical expertise is SO RARE it is better to recruit a woman with such expertise who can't drag not quite as well than have one less medic available. Remember in a hospital who does the heavy lifting: Nurses. Even 300lbs obese patients. According the Geneva Conventions, medics are not supposed to be armed for offensive operations, personal defence weapons only. Modern combat medicine IS about finesse, it's not as simple as "just superglue it".
By: bf2lover42. on 27 May 12, 19:49:23
Explain how can a man without the min req. join the armed forces? During combat? a medic can be under fire. If a medic cannot drag an injured soldier he might be hit by stray bullets (or actually shot at). We are talking about "shit your pants" battles where there might be nobody able to help the medics. A combat medic can be a soldier in irregular warfare - so he/she should be a soldier, not a "finesse" person. They actually use superglue to shut wounds during battle.
By: Treblaine. on 27 May 12, 19:42:52
Many males do take these jobs but women to a greater proportion. Look, it's simple if you stop to think how it works. Being a medic isn't about? dragging, any other male in a squad can be on dragging duty. The expertise needed is how to stop bleeding and stabilise spinal injuries, that is not a matter of strength but training and finesse. It's not enough just to postulate if "gender doesn't matter", HOW could that work?!? Gays react to straight guys differently than straight men to women.
By: bf2lover42. on 27 May 12, 19:01:50
Then why aren't men who are not fit enough for those jobs filling those spots too? Nothing makes them less able than women. Women who have difficulties to drag heavier men and their gear? might make it harder to save lives in combat. Plus, when I mentioned the movie I was obviously talking about a futuristic setting where gender doesn't matter. Isn't that what we are trying to do with races? Gay people might the outnumbered but they exist and it just shows how antiquated those notions are.
By: TehHonkyTonkMan. on 27 May 12, 18:57:55
are? there really people arguing on a louis ck standup clip?
By: Treblaine. on 27 May 12, 18:52:52
Well that's a fictional movie. Who? knows what else was in place to get to the point of practical co-ed showering. It's different with gay men as they'd be outnumbered by straight men who wouldn't be interested. Lower standard doesn't mean more death. It means women have roles like truck drivers, radio operators and other roles which don't require high standards, it frees male soldiers from these jobs so you have more at hand for operations. It HELPS!
By: bf2lover42. on 27 May 12, 15:54:56
I think it's on a Robocop movie this happens. Men and women using the same locker room, and people just don't give a fuck. Like you feel uncomfortable if you go to the street without clothes, you feel strange - but there are places in the world where it's normal. If gay men can be on male locker? rooms and have boners, I think all bets are off - my vision of "actual" equality stands. Also, lower standards mean more deaths in combat. We shouldn't use them.
By: MASTERZERO92. on 27 May 12, 04:46:48
Wow, your point was? so gay. Words can mean different things. He's not out to offend someone, he's using the word how he knows it. SO unless someone is out to hurt you or be racist, should it really matter? So the fact that his dislike bar is less than 10%. So stop being a faggot and develop a harder skin. Just cus we use faggot doesnt mean were out to get you.
By: Treblaine. on 27 May 12, 00:24:58
Close friends there can be exceptions for anything, as you have your own agreed meaning, but wider group of associates or strangers is the issue. You *can* use that word on white people... but it just wouldn't make any sense. Women have lower standards in the military as they have lower requirements of their? job and lower pay and honours from that. Simple. Equality =/= identical. There is the practical issue of guys getting boners showering with women.
By: stianchrister. on 27 May 12, 00:22:10
shut? up faggots.
By: bf2lover42. on 27 May 12, 00:05:34
And I said that I refrain from using the word around black people unless I am somewhat close to them. The word is used on a daily basis on the "world"? I grew up. That means I can't use it on white people? There is no racial segregation there. Plus, I am a person of extremes. I don't understand why can someone claim he/she defends gender equality and then accepts that women have lower physical standards in the military or that changing rooms can't be used by both genders.
By: Treblaine. on 26 May 12, 23:49:47
That's a superficial assessment of? apartheid. Men's and women's changing rooms are segregated, that's not apartheid. The difference is real as racism IS BETWEEN RACES, the inference from using the "nigger" slur is racist denigration. But a black person referring to another black person by that the effect is not the same. It is practical. It is not arbitrary and petty like South Africa's Apartheid.
By: bf2lover42. on 26 May 12, 23:43:08
Which brings me to my actual point: in those terms, the word is filled with prejudice and discrimination - isn't that the actual basis for racism? Ignoring what other? people are feeling just because of their "outside"? I despise double standards, and I can accept some. But "you can do this if you are X, you can't if you are Y" smells like fucking Apartheid.
By: Treblaine. on 26 May 12, 23:38:39
Rock said BOTH things, and they don't contradict each other. He seems to be justifying black people calling other black? people "niggers", presumably under the assumption black people can't get as carried away in racism against-black-people as too many non-blacks do.