# A petition to save German Shepherds from WAR!



## k.abhimanyu11 (Oct 1, 2008)

The United Kingdom is all set to airdrop German shepherd dogs to take on the well armed Taliban and the al-Qaeda insurgents in Afghanistan. These German Shepherds would jump from an aircraft at 25,000 feet after being parachuted in hostile terrain and would lead the assault in SAS (Special Air Service) raids to seek out Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents. With tiny cameras fixed to their heads, these magnificent canines, by putting their own life in danger, would beam live TV pictures back to the troops, warning of ambushes and showing enemy leaders locations. In fact, The SAS source admits that "The dogs will be exposed to very high levels of danger on these operations."

This absurd and cruel tactic of deploying dogs in situations that are too dangerous for soldiers has been devised to cut down the soaring casualty rates in Afghanistan and Iraq. These valiant but powerless and vulnerable dogs would have to helplessly face the armed terrorists who do not mind blowing themselves up. In fact for them, these dogs at best could be target practice.

Instead of putting the lives of these beautiful creatures on the block, the SAS should probably devise alternative ways like sending automated robots to save the precious lives of the soldiers. But this despicable and outrageous plan has been adopted only because the poor German shepherd dogs cannot stand up for themselves.

Please help STOP this cruel tactic of sending German Shepherd dogs to War in Afghanistan. Stand up for the German Shepherds and send a message to Rt Hon Des Browne MP, Secretary of State for Defence, UK, today.

Please sign this petition and help reverse this decision.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-sending-helpless-german-shepherd-dogs-to-take-on-taliban


----------



## Sherush (Jan 12, 2008)

I did it thanks for posting.


----------



## crackem (Mar 29, 2006)

I won't be signing it. Besides the parachuting stuff, which i'm sure is as safe as any other repelling stuff they do with dogs, it doesn't sound like they will be used any differently than dogs have been used for a long time right along with the soldiers. Yeah they have camera's, but it's not like they're unleashing dogs to roam the country side, they are used as forward patrols like they have for a long time. Dangerous yes, but what war isn't


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

Does anyone have a link to a <u>news article </u>about sending a group of dogs off to war in such a manner?


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

Okay I found one.
Newspaper Link 

It does sound like what has already been going on by the military and except for the planes what is done many times by law enforcement. _Reading the original I thought it was saying the dogs would be roaming around on their own and I just couldn't believe that._ Brave dogs and brave handlers. As far as robots go, they have their uses on a smooth surface but I don't think they have any that can climb rocks.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

Here's an article from the BBC about training dogs to parachute with members of the SAS - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7518560.stm

Training dogs to parachute with soldiers is not a new concept. In the United States, this was first done during World War II. The book "War Dogs" mentions one dog who parachuted in the European Theater along with US Airborne troops, which, as far as I know, was the only combat jump any dog had during WWII. The concept of parachuting with working dogs was later brought back in Vietnam and, more recently, in the UK. (Long before this current article.)

The dogs don't jump by themselves, they are attached in a special harness to their handler and jump with them. This is not any more dangerous for the dog than rappelling over the side of a building with his handler or being lifted to and from a helicopter using a sling, both of which are frequently done with military working dogs and, in some cases, even with police dogs.

There are NO news articles I have been able to find that actually said what the SAS is planning to use the dogs that are currently in training for. I certainly have not seen mention of them "being sent in with cameras attached to their heads." I would assume that these dogs would most likely be used as sentry dogs, tracking dogs, or detection dogs. The UK has, by the way, currently one of the best working dog, and particularly tracking dog, programs in the world. 

It's a military working dog's primary task to detect danger - either by locating enemy ambushes or locating explosives - and has been since we have had dogs on the battlefield. There is nothing "wrong" or "cruel" about this - it's what these dogs are bred, and trained for.

I think, like many petitions, they are written by well-meaning people who have little understanding of what these dogs will be used for (or are basing their opinions on sensationalized articles) or how working dogs in the armed forces are used. This petition makes it sounds like hundreds of dogs will be dropped without soldiers nearby, and left to run around with cameras - as if the dogs would know where to go or what to look for without their handlers nearby.


----------



## mastercabman (Jun 11, 2007)

I agree with crackem,they are at risk to get kill,but so is bomb sniffing dogs,police dogs,or any dogs use in combat.
I know it's sad,but maybe this would be better for troops to complete their missions.


----------



## WiscTiger (Sep 25, 2002)

While I love my dogs and the breed, if one of my dogs could save human lives by wearing a camera and being on forward patrol, I would be so proud. These dogs are bred to protect and serve, just like soliders are trained to protect and serve. A human life has more value to me than dogs and I love dogs.


----------



## Papanapa (Mar 1, 2008)

I did read articles on this and find that the dogs are doing a great service to our Country with their work. I agree with Wisc. on this one. I love love dogs, but if they can save thousands of human lives with their service let them do what they were born to do. Work.


----------



## GunnerJones (Jul 30, 2005)

obviously Kak is just that, kak


----------



## Halen (Feb 16, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: MaxGunnarobviously Kak is just that, kak












Huh?


----------



## GunnerJones (Jul 30, 2005)

> Originally Posted By: Halen
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: MaxGunnarobviously Kak is just that, kak
> ...


 in some areas "kack" means excrement and I think this guy is trolling


----------



## Halen (Feb 16, 2007)

Oh, gotcha. Sorry I'm not with it!!


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

The original intent of the GSD was as a dog that could be used for herding and war. Sorry, but these dogs are working dogs. And I agree that I would be proud of any of my dogs doing something like that. 

What worries me is to ensure that when all of this is as over as it will be, the dogs (that survive) will come home. I guess in Vietnam they made the stupid and disgusting decision not to transport the dogs back. The dogs are the property of the Government, and soldiers cannot just bring them back. 

My thought on this petition though was a PETA petition. I also doubt that this is soley a GSD issue. Sometimes they breed for the military, and sometimes the military gets dogs from shelters, or people donate them for whatever reason. Being trained to parachute out of airplanes sounds better than being gassed in a PETA shelter. 

Ok, not sure if they are gassed in PETA shelters, just that almost none of them make it out alive.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

These German shepherd dogs are being used for the most noble of purposes. It was bred to be a working dog and they are serving our nation. They may not understand it, but no one with knowledge of those dogs will forget them, or any animal who has given for any war.

I will not sign the petition.


----------



## Maryn (Feb 15, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: DianaMThese German shepherd dogs are being used for the most noble of purposes. It was bred to be a working dog and they are serving our nation. They may not understand it, but no one with knowledge of those dogs will forget them, or any animal who has given for any war.
> 
> I will not sign the petition.


I completely agree.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

Not to go off topic, but ...



> Quote: I also doubt that this is soley a GSD issue. Sometimes they breed for the military, and sometimes the military gets dogs from shelters, or people donate them for whatever reason.


I don't know about the UK, but the US military does not get its dogs through shelters or donations (although law enforcement sometimes does). The US military's dogs are purchased from breeders, in the US and overseas.



> Quote: I guess in Vietnam they made the stupid and disgusting decision not to transport the dogs back. The dogs are the property of the Government, and soldiers cannot just bring them back.


In Vietnam, that decision was made on the (false) assumption that not bringing the dogs back would prevent certain parasitic infections / diseases from entering the country through these returning dogs. 

Not all of the war dogs sent to Vietnam were euthanized or left in Vietnam, they just weren't returned to the States. A fair number went to US military bases in Korea, Japan, and elsewhere in the Pacific to end the rest of their working lifespan. They could not be returned Stateside, but they weren't killed, at least.

...

Either way, I'm not signing this nonsense.


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

This is a hard one for me. I had to walk away and think about it. 

I still need to think about it. First instint NO GSD in war, sign it. 

But whoever brought up the bomb sniffing dogs and other nobel things dogs do. That is a good point. 

They have handlers. That makes me feel better. They are doing a job for our country. 

This is NOT a troll. I went to the petition. It is a new site (well new to me) called Care2, started by a Mom. I just got something else from them, from my local shelter. 

I will think about this. I just know it is hard for me to stomach war. I have to think would I send my own guy in? (or my son for that matter, it just brings up a whole deal for me), the war issue. I understand it is necessary. Like hunting I hate hunting. 
OK, I will think and read what others have to post, and stop thinking out loud.


----------



## rjvamp (Aug 23, 2008)

I find it hard to believe the UK would send expensively trained dogs in to be blown up just so they can get pictures. There are better ways to find hidden people - flying drones anyone? Going with handlers I could see, but not by themselves...I think the person who started the petition should investigate further. But WAR dogs have been a part of all militaries, regardless of the side people are on and have provided a great service to their countries.


----------



## Crabtree (Jan 6, 2006)

> Originally Posted By: Wisc.TigerWhile I love my dogs and the breed, if one of my dogs could save human lives by wearing a camera and being on forward patrol, I would be so proud. These dogs are bred to protect and serve, just like soliders are trained to protect and serve. A human life has more value to me than dogs and I love dogs.


I couldn't have said it better!


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

> Quote:This is NOT a troll. I went to the petition. It is a new site (well new to me) called Care2, started by a Mom. I just got something else from them, from my local shelter.


Just because the Care2 website is legitimate, does not mean that this petition is based on fact or that it was not started by PeTA folks.

ANYONE can start a petition on Care2, in just "three easy steps". You just put in all the information and voila, you now have your very own petition. Nobody checks it to make sure that it's legitimate or that your petition is based in fact. Ahem ... example: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/allow-cats-to-remain-in-presidential-race


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

Just because the Care2 website is legitimate, does not mean that this petition is based on fact or that it was not started by PeTA folks.

ANYONE can start a petition on Care2, in just "three easy steps". You just put in all the information and voila, you now have your very own petition. Nobody checks it to make sure that it's legitimate or that your petition is based in fact. Ahem ... example: http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/allow-cats-to-remain-in-presidential-race [/quote]

Thanks Historian I really did not know that about Care2. 

There are the 2 news paper articles. 

Anyway I am not signing, I am just still not sure.


----------



## GunnerJones (Jul 30, 2005)

anybody that just flies in and makes just one post and its anti something rant, smacks of troll or spammer


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

Probably right, and now they are gone.


----------



## WiscTiger (Sep 25, 2002)

Ah one post wonders.

It did stimulate some interesting posts though.

Val


----------



## Shadow&Bubba (Sep 29, 2008)

I've seen some amazing work done by dogs in war and not all of them were GSD's. The GSD's that i did see loved what they were doing or appeared to anyway. You may not agree with the war or the politicians who send us to the war. You should understand that the people who are sent to the war don't always agree with it either. However, when you are over there those of you who have never been might not understand the bond that is created among the troops and their working dogs. Those dogs you can just tell would be willing to sacrifice their lives for their handler it was amazing.


----------



## wsumner26 (Jan 27, 2006)

The petition link has been posted to other forums recently. If true, this doesn't seem like the normal roll of dogs in war. It doesn't mention that they will be returning to any handlers, so I don't think they expect any to come back. As soon as the enemy sees them running around loose in the desert with a camera on their head, they are going to be blown away. 

I agree with the earlier post..don't they have drones/spy planes to locate the enemy?


----------



## Shadow&Bubba (Sep 29, 2008)

Drones, spy planes can't detect the subtle differences in smells that one cave can have containing a person than the other. Some have heat detection abilities but really those are hit and miss because it also shows the heat emanating from the rock face as well. Also, while the planes are extremely high tech and versatile they dont have the instinct of a tracking dog. While I think its sad that the dogs may not return from their mission i do feel proud knowing it will be once again my breed of dog that steps up and gets the job done again.


----------



## Shadow&Bubba (Sep 29, 2008)

If this upsets you then actually being there would sicken you. On several of my convoys i would see dogs hanging from tree's, and being shot down for just walking around by the Iraqi army. Maybe, if you can look at it like the dogs are sacrificing their lives to give their brothers/sisters in the region a better life it will help you feel better about the situation. Either way the petition won't have any effect. If the SAS decides to go through with the mission, *if its a real mission in the first place* no petition signed by anyone other than Her Majesty or the Parli is going to do anything.


----------



## MollyM (Feb 4, 2004)

I don't think there is any "may not return" about it. Where are the dogs supposed to get water and food ?

I remember the sad, sad stories about the animals in the zoos starving and being bombed.

The animals don't have a choice - people do.


----------



## Halen (Feb 16, 2007)

That pic of the statue of the GSD and soldier gives me goosebumps. Boy, this breed is so amazing.


----------



## Shadow&Bubba (Sep 29, 2008)

I agree i love this breed they are simply amazing and the stories that are told about them almost always gives me goosebumps. More than any other breed I feel safe when I know my two boys are watching over me.... even though right now about all they are good for are kisses and hugs but hey those are needed too!  lol


----------



## Halen (Feb 16, 2007)

They are so amazing. And people cannot resist one when they see one in public.


----------



## gshephlvr (Feb 21, 2006)

ish. With all the technology we have there has to be a better way then sending dog to their slaughter to get pictures. Dogs don't have a choice soldiers do. And I see no comparison between this and K9 dogs etc. K9 dogs have a partner, as do bomb sniffing dogs that try to keep them out of danger. 

I don't see any honor in a dog being sent ahead to its death. All it says to me is once again animals are expendable.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Soldiers do not have a choice. If there is no draft, a soldier has a choice to join or not to join. That is where their choices end. 

If they say we need you to do this. You do it. At least that is how it always used to be. 

Dogs were bred to serve men in a working capacity. Sorry, but that is why there are German shepherds today. If you want to jump ship and join the peta people wanting dogs to be free and not pets and not used for work, then feel free. But dogs scavanged around humans and were compliant to us.


----------



## wsumner26 (Jan 27, 2006)

> Quote: If you want to jump ship and join the peta people wanting dogs to be free and not pets and not used for work, then feel free.


<span style="color: #333399">*Let me guess.....you don't work with a rescue, do you??? and I don't mean with PETA.*</span>



> Quote:But dogs scavanged around humans and were compliant to us.


----------



## Chicagocanine (Aug 7, 2008)

The original post makes it sound like the dogs are being sent off alone, but if you read the article ILGHAUS posted you will see that is not the case. They are however being sent into potentially dangerous areas first by their handlers, which I don't believe is really anything new with military dog usage.

As far as PETA is concerned I don't think is necessarily has anything to do with them. If it was PETA I think they'd be telling people to send babies in or some other such nonsense, they like to be as outrageous as possible to get the most attention they can. Just look into their recent Ben & Jerry's hoopla.


Here is a photo of the US War Dogs Memorial, also a GSD


----------



## gshephlvr (Feb 21, 2006)

soldiers have a choice or should I say HAD a choice. They chose to serve thus putting their life in danger. Do not get me wrong I think it is a great thing to do and I respect and thank them for making that choice. Dogs do not have that choice we choose for them. 

So what its one or the other? I either think dogs should be blown to smitherens or I join PETA? is there not a happy middle? I do not believe dogs were meant to serve us. I do not think any animal should be used an in entertainment capacity ie) circus, rodeo etc. I think dogs should be first and foremost pets. And before you go there I have no problem with working dogs on farms or in competition as long as they are family members and INSIDE pets. I do not advocate keeping a dog outside in a kennel, in a barn or any other outside structure. 

As far as PETA goes I know paid peta workers personally and all have pets, even have pictures of them in the office I think it is one of those things people like to throw out "Oh peta doesn't believe in animals as pets" not sure how true that is.


----------



## MollyM (Feb 4, 2004)

How do we/did we make the leap from the concept of a working dog herding sheep to putting a dog in a war zone? 

When I hear "working" dog I think "herding" dog - or a narcotics dog but NOT putting dogs into absolute life and death situations and thinking it is ok. I don't think it is.

The thought of someone taking or using one of the dogs we have rescued for something like this is unimaginable to me.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

No, Capt. Max Von Stephanitz (Sp?) wanted to create a dog that could be used to herd sheep and be used as a military dog -- war dog. The breed was not created to herd sheep only. 

gsheplvr, so I would suppose that you would be against horses being used for riding? I mean afterall, now adays that is only for recreation/entertainment. 

Dogs made the choice to scavange around humans and to be compliant to them, take their food and be obedient. That was many years ago, but dogs chose humans in a sense. Some animals are more prone to being domesticated and dogs are one of those. Much more so, than even cats.

But to discuss whether a dog has a choice to be used in a war, I think that is stretching it. Better not have any police dogs around. I mean, the dog does not have a choice to be used as a bomb sniffing dog, or a dog used to find drugs. Those dogs are sent into buildings to find the bad people at great risk. They have no choice. Anyone would say, if they had a choice, they would be rushing to do it, they love the work. But they do not have a choice. 

So we should hold out until the critters can make their career choices known to us? 

Dogs are dogs and yes, I love them. But they are not humans. No they do not have a choice. Their lives are NOT equal to human lives. I applaud the government for using dogs to save the lives of our soldiers, soldiers who have wives and babies at home. 

The training and care of the dogs the military uses is not cheap. I highly doubt that they are throwing that money, and training, down the drain needlessly. 

I suppose the 12 year olds in Iran that would be roped together and sent through the mine fields before the troops had a choice. I suppose wearing a t-shirt that says, I live to die for Iran, means the child made a choice. 

War is an ugly thing no matter where it is. It is not clean and sweet. People die. Dogs die. Nature and death are ugly as well. In the wild when an animal is young or weak with illness or age, nature has a way of taking care of it. Lions and Crocodiles come to mind. It aint pretty. 

As for dogs in kennels. I have a dog that lives in a kennel and sleeps in a kennel. He went with me today to meet a puppy buyer. We had a nice walk. Then we stopped at PetSupplies plus and visited the rabbits and the parot. Then he went to my parents' house. Finally, I took him home and put him in his kennel. He will sleep outside tonight as he always does, summer and winter. Why? Because he LIKES it outside. When I give him the CHOICE, he takes himself OUTSIDE to sleep? So, I decided that it would be his job to watch the property at night. He couldn't be happier. My other seven dogs and whatever puppies I have are inside, he is outside.


----------



## MollyM (Feb 4, 2004)

Well, through my years of rescue work, I have come to have the opposite opinion. I think that life is life, none is more valuable than the other. The cow that is about to be killed to be eaten values its life as much as you value yours - I also think that people need to believe they are different or they wouldn't be able to do what they do to animals and say it is OK.

Just as an example - look at the amount of meat that is thrown away every day by grocery stores because it has become "outdated" if not sold. The cow lost it's life to be thrown away as garbage and to keep our food economy balanced.

I will grant you that our society does not value animal life and by extension I also believe that is one reason our society is in the mess it is in. How can we teach our children to value life when we, as adults, put all kinds of filters on which lives we should care about?

The animals in our world don't stand a chance against humans and that is why I will always take up their cause. There is a very big difference between a police dog and dropping dogs into war zones in the desert - and no - I don't think that our lives are worth more - people are the ones that have messed up this earth - not animals. Dogs don't start wars - we should clean up our own mess.

As to the founder of the breed wanting the German Shepherd to be a military dog - I doubt that he could have foreseen what the world has come to.


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

[Removed by Admin. This is not a Political debate] 

Why is it that people focus so much on how awful the world is and what horrible things we people have done to it. 

I just don't buy it. 

The world is beautiful, as is life in general. Death is a kind of ugly part of life. Death is ugly wherever it happens and to whomever it happens, be they any living creature. 

If life was perfect and there was no death and disease we would not need heaven to look forward to. ( I am not blaming God or anything.)

I sometimes think that the course of events is structured so that people (for the most part) and animals (for the most part) get sick and suffer before death. This sickness and suffering prepares the individual and the survivors for coming journey. Because people get sick and die does not make the world an awful place. 

As for people starting wars. Animals fight and kill eachother, sometimes one on one, sometimes several on one, sometimes several on several. And it isn't pretty. 

You can go ahead and believe that people have ruined the earth. I just refuse.


----------



## ILGHAUS (Nov 25, 2002)

Please those who keep saying the dogs are being dropped in the desert and abandoned read the articles. This is nothing new as it has been done in the past. It is now newsworthy because the dogs are going in from higher altitudes. Look at the picture of the dog with the mask. He is with his handler. *They are dropping together*.

Quote:
_Fearless German Shepherds are being trained to jump from aircraft at 25,000ft wearing their own oxygen masks and strapped to special forces assault teams. _

LINK 

These dogs are being dropped with their handlers. They are not running around loose in the desert with cameras. The handlers are with them. Just like with law enforcement, the camera is put on the dog just before it goes to work. The police officer waits outside the building while the K9 enters and does a search. Then the handler calls the dog out or goes in to the dog.

Again, these dogs have their handlers with them. They are from time to time sent into a cave, house, whatever to do the exact thing as their countparts in law enforcement. The handler is waiting for them (yes they are fed and given water) and not just left in the desert to fend for themselves.


----------



## MollyM (Feb 4, 2004)

My party of choice is "Dog". I have no interest in turning this into a political discussion.


----------



## wsumner26 (Jan 27, 2006)

from link mentioned: 
"Get down, Shep ... <u>how para dog may look gliding to target </u>with SAS heroes"

Not wishing to contribute any more to this thread, but if you look closely at the picture of the dog with oxygen mask, you can tell it is "doctored". This is how para dog "may look".


----------



## Catu (Sep 6, 2007)

If the petition were all about throwing dogs by themselves to die in the desert as four legged kamikazes, I'd sign it up. But so far there are no real proof of that but the word of the person who wrote it, no real link, no oficial information, nothing but the intention of being sensationalist. 

I'm against the war itself, not against dog used on wars nor any other activity that put their safety at certain amount of risk, because more or less, almost all do. the hunt dog can be shot or hurt by his prey, the cattle dog endure big risks every day on the farm and police dogs are often a living shield. Mine detection dogs... no words needed, I also knew a beautiful yellow lab who was drug detection trained in a border pass, but the mafia put a price to his head and is dead now.

In SAR we share risks with our dogs all the time, they are even taught to search where we can't go with them and if given the choice of losing my dog to save myself, a teammate, another rescue person, or a living victim... I wouldn't think twice.

But I signed for the cat...


----------



## gshephlvr (Feb 21, 2006)

?? yeah thats what I meant



> Quote:I suppose the 12 year olds in Iran that would be roped together and sent through the mine fields before the troops had a choice


This simply has nothing to do with the topic at hand



> Quote:Nature and death are ugly as well. In the wild when an animal is young or weak with illness or age, nature has a way of taking care of it. Lions and Crocodiles come to mind. It aint pretty.


yep if there is one thing the military is known for its being frugal. Absolutely no waste in the military



> Quote:The training and care of the dogs the military uses is not cheap. I highly doubt that they are throwing that money, and training, down the drain needlessly.



Yeah and my dogs choose to eat poop, chase cats, dig holes and eat the garbage. Doesn't mean they should. 



> Quote:As for dogs in kennels. I have a dog that lives in a kennel and sleeps in a kennel. He went with me today to meet a puppy buyer. We had a nice walk. Then we stopped at PetSupplies plus and visited the rabbits and the parot. Then he went to my parents' house. Finally, I took him home and put him in his kennel. He will sleep outside tonight as he always does, summer and winter. Why? Because he LIKES it outside. When I give him the CHOICE, he takes himself OUTSIDE to sleep? So, I decided that it would be his job to watch the property at night. He couldn't be happier. My other seven dogs and whatever puppies I have are inside, he is outside


----------



## selzer (May 7, 2005)

Well, my dog may choose to eat poo, but safely in his kennel, he cannot chase the cat, dig holes, or eat garbage, so I will opt for keeping him safe and happy. I am fortunate that this particular boy is not a poo-eater. 

Ya know what's funny, I am in classes with my dogs and with other dogs who are kept so much better than I keep mine: they are walked every day, live unrestricted in the house, or crated when their owners are gone. And for some reason, my dogs seem to behave so much better than these dogs in classes. They do not bark and lunge at other dogs or people, they do not snap at me, they do not chew on the leash, they do not refuse to go down. They are not submitting to a prong or halti collar or draggin their owners off their feet. Kind of makes me scratch my head a bit. 

Some police dogs and military dogs are kept kenneled when they are not working. I do not see anything wrong with this at all given the kennel is properly sized and contains water and shelter for the dog.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

Moot discussion.

Half the people in this thread are basing their ASSUMPTIONS of what the dogs will be doing and how they will be used on the (already skewed) wording of the original petition and the first post.

In fact, the petition makes it sound like these dogs will be dropped from airplanes with cameras attached to them, and no human handlers anywhere nearby. Let's just think logically about this for one second. If this were true, how would the dogs get the parachutes off? How would they activate the cameras? How would they know which direction to go in?

Now, besides the fact that other articles already stated that these dogs would be with their human handlers and would be sent ahead of the soldiers to locate the enemy, the questions above should raise any logically thinking person's eyebrows and have them second-guess the way the first article sounds. Instead, we have everyone here acting with their emotions and running around like headless chickens, "OMG OMG OMG they're going to drop dogs by parachute and get them all killed."

Unless everyone has read all the articles on how these dogs are used and people become aware how dogs are trained, used, and cared for by the military, any discussion on the subject is moot.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

> Quote:Not wishing to contribute any more to this thread, but if you look closely at the picture of the dog with oxygen mask, you can tell it is "doctored". This is how para dog "may look".


You are absolutely correct that the photograph in the link ILGHAUS posted is a created photo, as an example of what a dog jumping with special forces troops may look like. And it is clearly marked as such.

BUT - the concept of parachuting dogs along with soldiers is nothing new. It appears the news outlet publishing the story just does not have a CURRENT picture that shows a dog parachuting and wearing the oxygen mask. This is no different than papers using concept images, or stock images that may not have anything to do with the story itself.

Here's a real one for folks who don't believe dog and handler can jump together.


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

Why does that picture look so doctored? Because they have not done it yet?? So it is a simulated photo?? 

If everything you say is true historian than it has to be OK with me, because this is what they were trained to do. Like bomb sniffing dogs, SAR dogs, etc. 

I do not have to like it though. If I could stop it I would. For humans too. I guess I am just unrealistic. I pray for peace and GSD's doing safe sports and jobs and curled up by their families.


----------



## DianaM (Jan 5, 2006)

Hah! I love that tail straight in the air and the splayed toes. Poor dog must be thinking "Crap, crap, crap, crap, I'll never dig in the yard again, I'll never bark at the mailman again, I'll never pull on the leash again, heck I'll learn to clean up MY poop JUST GET ME DOWN!!!"









In all seriousness, that is a fantastic photo and I have no doubt that that dog was extensively trained and has excellent nerves and temperament. Thanks for posting that!


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

That pic was posted while I was typing (that is wild looking,







)


----------



## GunnerJones (Jul 30, 2005)

The French have been jumping in with their dogs for awhile now


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

> Quote:Why does that picture look so doctored? Because they have not done it yet?? So it is a simulated photo??


The photograph in the link ILGHAUS posted is doctored - most likely because the newspaper does not yet have a photo of a dog jumping wearing an oxygen mask.

The French, Americans, and British have been dropping dogs by parachute - attached to their handlers - for quite some time. There is a very famous Vietnam-era photo of a US paratrooper and dog jumping as well, and I think I have that somewhere. However, the concept of a HALO (high altitude-low opening) jump with dogs is a new concept, and as far as I'm aware, the Brits are the first to attempt it with dogs and the first to attempt to equip dogs with oxygen masks for this purpose. So I am not surprised there is no actual photo of this being done available to the newspaper. This is not so unusual when you're talking about special forces type equipment. It just means the British MOD (ministry of defense) has not released an official photograph of this equipment.

I don't think anyone has to "like" the ideas of dogs serving humans in the military, especially if this places dogs in harm's way, but if you look at things realistically, you'll see that a dog being sent ahead of his human handler to find the enemy is a far cry from poor dogs being parachuted without handlers into enemy territory and left to fend for themselves.


----------



## Maryn (Feb 15, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: MollyM I think that life is life, none is more valuable than the other. The cow that is about to be killed to be eaten values its life as much as you value yours


A rat is a pig is a monkey is a boy?

I'm sorry, but all life was not created equal and that's where you lose me.


----------



## WiscTiger (Sep 25, 2002)

OK, this is a general warning, this is not a political debate. There will be NO more bashing. People have their own beliefs and you can state yours with out belittling or attacking someone who doesn't have the same values as you. 

This was a Petition posted by I am going to assume a Spammer because I haven't seen them on the board again. The wording skewed what is happening in the real world.

Wisc.Tiger - Admin


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

I just read today in a local Pet Paper that they used to put down military dogs when they were done with them. 

Pres Clinton passed a law that they are to be put up for adoption after they serve.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

> Quote:I just read today in a local Pet Paper that they used to put down military dogs when they were done with them. Pres Clinton passed a law that they are to be put up for adoption after they serve.


The military used to euthanize dogs if they became too old to continue working, or they were in too bad of health to continue working. Even though the adoption law has now been passed, this is still very commonly done with working dogs that are past their working lifespan, if a home cannot be found for them within a reasonable timeframe and with someone who can care for a dog with that type of training. (Former handlers are preferred, but others can apply as well.)

As most old military working dogs are adopted out through the local base where they were last stationed, they frequently don't get the publicity letting people know they are up for adoption. In most cases, it's just a note in the base newspaper or the base website. (When we lived near Fort Belvoir, they would post the information to their website. Last dog was 11 years old, so finding someone who wanted to adopt him was pretty difficult - most people don't want an "old" dog.)

On a side note, the president does not pass laws. Congress passes the bill and the president signs it to become law. You can read the actual bill that was passed, HR 5314, here - http://www.uswardogs.org/id19.html


----------



## CookieTN (Sep 14, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: crackemI won't be signing it. Besides the parachuting stuff, which i'm sure is as safe as any other repelling stuff they do with dogs, it doesn't sound like they will be used any differently than dogs have been used for a long time right along with the soldiers. Yeah they have camera's, but it's not like they're unleashing dogs to roam the country side, they are used as forward patrols like they have for a long time. Dangerous yes, but what war isn't


I don't know what to think. It's better than puting human lives in danger and as this quote says it doesn't sound any different than the way war dogs have always been used. But on the other hand, they can just send out robots, I know that they have the technology.


----------



## Daisy1986 (Jul 9, 2008)

On a side note, the president does not pass laws. Congress passes the bill and the president signs it to become law. You can read the actual bill that was passed, HR 5314, here - http://www.uswardogs.org/id19.html[/quote] 

Sorry the article said
President Clinton signed a bill in 2000 that allows military or suitable civilians to adopt military dogs as pets-prior to that the dogs were regularly euthanized following their service. 

I was in a hurry when I posted. 

They used to be treated kinda like the chimps they sent in space. Glad it changed.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

> Quote:They used to be treated kinda like the chimps they sent in space. Glad it changed.


You know, the really ironic part is that they actually treated war dogs very well during World War II. The majority of dogs used by the military in WWII were donated by the public, and when the dogs returned at the end of the war, they went through re-training to see if they would be suitable to return to "civilian" life. Then they were offered back to their original owners, and shipped to them at government cost. If the owners did not want them back, they were offered up for adoption.

It wasn't until the Cold War / Vietnam War that the military started euthanizing war dogs if they were too old / in too bad of health to continue working at the end of their working lifespan. Of course, around that point, most dogs were no longer donated, they were purchased by the government from breeders, so they were viewed as "government property". (They are assigned "stock numbers" and everything even today.)



> Quote:But on the other hand, they can just send out robots, I know that they have the technology.


No, they can't and don't.

There are unmanned aircraft (drones) and land-based robots that are effective in some areas, but they are not nearly as effective as working dogs would be. A drone is obviously limited by where it can go - for example, while it can observe from above, it cannot enter a cave or building. (Though they're working on really small ones that may be able to one day.)

And land-based robots - think, remote-control vehicle type - operate at a limited distance, and have issues with mobility - things like crossing debris, scaling stairways and the like are still limiting the way these machines work.

Dogs, on the other hand, are agile and have a highly developed sense of smell to locate enemy soldiers. The main reason dogs are so extensively used on the battlefield - also the same reason that mine/tunnel dogs were introduced in Vietnam - is that they are more suited to doing the work that we do not yet have the technological abilities to do without them.


----------



## CookieTN (Sep 14, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: Historian
> 
> 
> > Quote:
> ...


----------



## Shadow&Bubba (Sep 29, 2008)

I read somewhere that the reason the GSD which at the time was called the Alstesian (SP?) was even brought over to the US was because of returning soldiers seeing them being used as war dogs by the nazi's. Dont know if its true or not just thought it was interesting trivia and relevant since everyone here obviously loves their GSD and its a thread about military "war" dogs. Not all military dogs are "war" dogs either. Most of them stay state-side and work the Posts here.


----------



## AbbyK9 (Oct 11, 2005)

> Quote:I read somewhere that the reason the GSD which at the time was called the Alstesian (SP?) was even brought over to the US was because of returning soldiers seeing them being used as war dogs by the nazi's. Dont know if its true or not just thought it was interesting trivia and relevant since everyone here obviously loves their GSD and its a thread about military "war" dogs. Not all military dogs are "war" dogs either. Most of them stay state-side and work the Posts here.


Not true.

The German Shepherd Dog breed was first exported to the UK and the United States just after the turn of the Century, around 1908. In the United States, the German Shepherd Club held its first specialty show in Greenwich, Connecticut in 1915 (during World War I).

In 1917, when the US entered World War I, the name of the club was changed from the German Shepherd Club of America to the Shepherd Dog Club of America. In the UK, the name was changed from German Shepherd to Alsatian, and the term is still quite commonly used in the UK, especially among older people. (Alsace being a region along the French-German border, and therefore not really a "German" name.)

In World War I, German Shepherds were used as war dogs by more than just the German, but the US did not have an established war dog program, so some of its own war dog program may have well been influenced by the German use of these dogs.

Incidentally, I only use the term "war dog" to refer to dogs used in World War I and World War II, as that is the term they were known as back then, regardless of what the dogs' duties were. (They were called war dogs if they were stateside, too - then again, back then, we still had the War Department, not the Department of Defense.) After WWII, they became "military working dogs".


----------



## Shadow&Bubba (Sep 29, 2008)

ahh cool thanks


----------

