Tuesday, January 8, 2013

Gen. McChrystal: Assault rifles are for battlefields, not schools

Via WRSA



Pathetic.  He would have been a good general for Stalin.

Former Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who led the war in Afghanistan, endorsed strong gun control laws Tuesday on Morning Joe.

“I spent a career carrying typically either an M16 or an M4 Carbine. An M4 Carbine fires a .223 caliber round which is 5.56 mm at about 3000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed for that,” McChrystal explained. “That’s what our soldiers ought to carry. *I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America.”

*And we don't give a rat's ass what you think. 


More traitorous rubbish @ MSNBC

11 comments:

  1. “That’s what our soldiers ought to carry.

    And when the constitutionally forbidden standing army turns on its citizens? A perfect need for assault rifles.

    "It's designed for that."

    ReplyDelete
  2. He's just a kiss ass, sidling up to Obama cause he wants to be the next tyrant Janet Napolitano.
    History lesson. Start at the top and work your way down. ;)
    Miss V

    ReplyDelete
  3. No kidding he is just scared he will be the target.

    Badger

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm surprised that Obama canned him. I recently read something that said that once Generals of all branches hit the 2 or 3 star level they turn into total politicians.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Tom Sullivan said he is going to be on his Fox show. Plans to ask him about his oath and why we are sending M4's to civilians in Syria and Lybia.
    The general is a traitorous bastard.
    Terry
    Fla.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I guess we shall see the good general on the battlefield. If I may be so bold, I'm just a little better than he is.

    Actually ya'll seem to forget that the upper commands in the military today are led by Marxists and revisionists liberals. They can call themselves Democrats or Republicans but we know they are basically the same. All the old guard of commanders are gone now. This is ONE reason why I believe you won't see much dissension among the soldiers, the largest majority will do as they are ordered. They too have been indoctrinated and screened to follow orders regardless of merit or morality. Most soldiers simply don't have the mental capacity to stand up against rank or to understand the deeper consequences of their actions... The good general above is a prime example of what is in the military today, giving orders to 20 yo's who took an oath to defend the US Constitution, yet they haven't a clue as to what it really means, much less on how to interpret it.

    Michael-- Deo Vindicabamur

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. the upper commands in the military today are led by Marxists and revisionists liberals.

      Absolutely. My friend, who retired from the Pentagon rather than continue his career, did so because of the horrendous PC in the Army today where minorities constantly get promoted over those more eligible. His father was a general officer in WWII.

      Delete