US Soldier Kills 16 - Where Should He Face Trial?

im pretty sure it's impossible to being with. i'd imagine one of the requirements to get a medical license (or w/e they call it) is having a degree + your residency or w/e. doesn't matter if you grew up with doctors and in a hospital and could do anything >< it's useless without that piece of paper. it's all about the name and the perception.

While all of those people are medical professionals... they are trained in that profession which does differ from being a doctor. While some of the knowledge may coincide I don't think its complete. Take for example.. a nurse who spent 10 years assisting a doctor in surgery and has seen the doctor perform this same surgery hundreds of times but never once performed the procedure as I'm sure they don't let nurses perform the procedures. Would you think that gives them the experience to do it? Granted they'd be more qualified than me but yeah I still wouldn't want them operating on me.

I'm not arguing that you can accumulate knowledge and experience without going to school but someone does have to teach you regardless whether you read their material or learn directly from them. I would think it is very rare that someone just knows something without building off those before them.

I don't think just because you've been a medical professional for a certain amount of time just gives you the experience you need to move to a different level.

Either way you can't become a doctor without passing certain checks and balances and whether or not you have the knowledge and skill it doesn't matter without that piece of paper(at least here in the states)

well one thing, doctors always have a first time performing on a live person, though i do imagine they practice a shitton, but there's still always the first time. someone has to do it and someone has to be the patient. though i guess it's on easy stuff with supervision incase something goes wrong, then there's all the new experimental surgeries, but since they're experienced in general, they could perform them, idk! i hope i never need surgery or have to go to the doctors for something serious ;; shits expensive

Indeed, but could you see a Nurse with 10 years experience moving to the position of Doctor in a shorter period of time than someone moving in to their major?

Take into consideration I'm not saying because a Nurse has 10 years experience, they're automatically equivocal to a doctor. The argument before was, someone with equivocal knowledge and experience but no diploma... etc.

All those professions you listed require a piece of a degree. PA's, RN's and NP's are the highest of "sub-physician jobs" and are near physician status, but not quite. They arn't promoted, to physician status, because they have different functions in a hospital.

Physicians acquire indepth biochemistry, pharmocology and pharmokinetics, pharmophysiology.

RNs/PAs acquire basic pharmacology. They don't have the same indepth understanding of how drugs work. When i say indepth im talking about the drug is working on the molecular level.(i wont get into NP's because thats more complicated).

A RN/PA can explain that penicillin kills bacteria. A physician can explain that penicillin breaks the beca-lactam ring, which thereby kills the bacteria.

You can get promoted, kinda. RN > Nurse Practioner or Certified Registered Nurse Anesthiologist. It just require u go back to school for 1-2 years. Nurses usually don't ever seek to become physicians because they have the option to become NPs or cRNA's.

Yeah but where are you going to find someone with equivocal knowledge and experience in a doctor unless they've been educated in the profession?

Honestly if you put a nurse in medical school after 10 years as a nurse against someone who just got into medical school sure. If you give someone ten years they can become a doctor though...

Difference between Nurse Practioners and Doctors

Good article. It explains why most RN's dont ever wish to become doctors, when they have the option to become NP's

Can always go PA :P

-edit- Whoops, was already mentioned.

But to stay on topic, I've always found it kind of amusing that DNPs are doctor nurses. :3

-edit 2- and by on topic, I mean, wtf happened to this thread and how did it get here (not that I'm complaining :x)

much more pleasant conversation imo

Yeah, go ahead and change the title so noone will know what it was really about >,>

It started with the Solider massacre > death penalty > insanity as a plee? > death penalty > quality of armed forces > college degree vs veteran job market > RNs > FFXIAH awarding PhD's in Forumology > and now Nurse Practioners


lol

Given Baconwrap's helpful summary, I really don't think anything I name it will succinctly epitomize the actual content of this thread.... o_o

Anyone who is proud that their family has served in our absolute corrupt military since WW2 needs their gd heads examined!! What righteous war or conflict have we been in?? NOT A SINGLE ONE!! Find out the facts from the troops dont get all facts from corporate media. We are over there protecting big business and oil PERIOD. Meanwhile our troops are killing babies for ***. And IDGAF what horror stories yall hear bout war it isnt a gd GI JOE cartoon its war and pointless at that. Reverse the roles wtf would you do if an "Invading" and "Occupying" army came to our country? The same gd thing they are obviously id hope we wouldnt have to resort to suicide bombers but wtf choice do they have they cant obviously raise an army anything bigger than small cells are shut down. Ten *** years of occupation with only "loonies" helping us WTF WOULD YOU DO???

So finding the terrorists that attacked us on 9/11 wasn't justified considering the WTC, Pentagon and Capitol building were targeted/attacked by Bin Laden and his cohorts?

LMFAO

I needed a good laugh tonight lol...

Its pointless to argue with the ill informed or kool-aid drinkers
so ill leave it at this:

"The bigger the lie the more people will believe it" Adolf Hitler

It's pointless to discuss anything with someone whose ears are closed.

History shows that there are no invincible armies.
Joseph Stalin

I too can quote infamous leaders of the mid 20th century.

How about getting around to a point? You disagree with my claim so elaborate beyond throwing a tired quote at me.

I don't necessarily agree with Kluaf's position, but even I find this to be a stretch, at best.
There's always more to things than what's presented/on paper.

Like a hit-squad.

For a long time, my dad was assumed of being a Vietnam vet (was drafted) Only till recently has he really come to terms with it.

What exactly in that statement is a stretch? Where exactly did I say that was the sole reason we got involved?

All I said was that Afghanistan was justified given we were actually attacked by Bin Laden and his cohorts who we confirmed were being sheltered by the Taliban.

You can be pro or anti war but Afghanistan wasn't Iraq.

I have a real hard time understanding what you're trying to get at.

I simply think that there are more financial motives underlying and thus driving our decision to go to war more so the elaborate unrest of homeland security from native mid-easterners. In the past, war was more sentimentally motivated so to speak, revolving specifically around political idealism and the fear of such powers infringing on our own.

Anger begets anger.

Though(in my opinion) not presented well, I tend to lean toward Kluaf's stance. People unite when faced with an external threat. America united when the towers fell, Afghanistan will unite as these civilians are buried, Iran is uniting as we enforce strict sanctions.

People are silly and will usually default to an "us vs. them" mentality without education and empathy.

Republican? Stupid Democrats.
Atheist? Stupid theists.

Though we've got such technological advances, we still have a tribal mind. Maybe if we thought about these things in 1953 - Iran, or in 1969 - Saddam, or in 1979 - Bin Laden... Actions have consequences and though we shouldn't be blamed for the faults of our fathers, we will be.

Just kinda confirming its hard now a days to be pretty proud of being in the Army when most wars since WWII really didn't have much with defending our country and getting forced into wars or "conflicts" that didn't have much to do with us. In turn, the soldiers who went and fought for their country because they were forced got treated like crap upon return.

I mean, I'm glad because it means we haven't had any major attacks against us (not baring 9/11) but we get involved in things because we want to push our ideals on other people (right or wrong not withstanding) and usually has something that benefits us more than going and giving people their freedom.

I remember having a long discussion with a teacher back in high school, noting how during WW2, America was unanimously adamant about doing their part for the war, supporting it with every fiber of their being, to the point where teenagers lied about their age so they could enlist. Back then, it was beyond a shadow of a doubt that we were fighting not just for personal safety or some political idealism, but rather because we saw a severe and tangible injustice in the world that posed a very heavy threat to not only our own country, or just Europe, but the world in general.
Unfortunately things got more complicated with things like the red scare. War became less refined and more personal and revolved around partisan paranoia and idealism. And even more so now when you have companies like Haliburton profiteering billions from the very war we waged. Doesn't help the former CEO was our vice president during the time we got ourselves into said mess.

I really do fear the direction of war in the future. No wonder I was sucked into MGS4.

I don't have to be proud of what wars I served in to be proud of my service or my accomplishments.

Could give no *** what someone else thinks about it.

Personal sacrifice and endangerment for the benefit of your countrymen is nothing that deserves judgment or question. However, the men that wage it and the conflicts of interest therein along with the specific purpose war serves is worthy of questioning.

Simply: A great deal of respect and honor for our servicemen and women, a great deal of doubt and concern for our previous and current presidency and their administration.