Rush to judgment--- an appeal for restraint re: the Marine in Fallujah

[Cuban_Liberal]

Speaking as someone who has seen combat and engaged in some house-to-house fighting, I feel as though I MUST rise to the defense of the young Marine in Fallujah, particularly as regards his presumption of innocence. The investigation into the shooting is ongoing, and I have no doubts whatsoever that if a crime has been committed, the young man will be charged and likely convicted.

Is it too much to ask that this.... KID, for God's sake.... be accorded the same presumption of innocence that you, I and every other American enjoys? Will it somehow ruin the rest of your lives to let this soldier, who was himself wounded the day before and who also witnessed the death of some member's of his own company die at the hands of a suicide bomber, have his day in court? Would it?

Sheesh!

:grr:

[Malikshah]

1. Sheesh?

Can we presume innocence for the 14000 plus civilians too.

I agree with you message, but guess what. War is hell and folks have to be held accountable. End.of.story.

[Cuban_Liberal]

2. If he's committed a crime, he will be held accountable.

I know a few guys who were in Afghanistan with me who are or were in Leavenworth. This isn't going to 'go away' or be swept under the rug.

:hi:

[MemphisTiger]

63. I agree, I know people that were in the military

that can attest to the following of rules. Especially when it comes to rules on the battlefield. Let's let the investigation turn up what it may. Then we can all make our judgement. We all know that certain blurbs of video or audio can be taken out of context.

[RapidCreek]

128. Will he be shot in the head, execution style?

The fact is,is if someone hadn't filmed his ass committing murder...it would be swept under the rug.....In fact I doubt sincerely it would be swept at all.

The mere fact that the fucker did what he did....and someone just happened to be around to film it, tells me that this sort of thing is hardly a rare occurrence. Let's consider the odds game here. I'd guess you'd tell me that what this marine did is a one in a million thing....or maybe a one in a thousand thing....or maybe even a one in a hundred thing. What do you suppose the odds are that a marine would do this and that a film crew would happen to be present, that film crew would happen to have have the camera rolling and they would happen to be willing to release the film? I'd say that unless what this marine did is a fairly regular occurrence that the likelihood of such a thing occurring is NIL.

What was the similarity between this "alleged" crime and that those which were committed at Abu Gahrib? One thing comes immediately to mind....both happened to be caught on film.

If as you suggest, this sort of thing is not "swept under the rug". why is it the only time we hear of such criminal behavior is when it happens to be documented on film? Is that just a coincidence?

Of course it isn't.

I'm a veteran too....and I was not engaged in combat....I was however privy to certain grave fuck ups...the nature of which law (which is designed to sweep things under the rug) forbids me from disclosing. These fuckups were not rare....and severely effected the health of service men and woman, and quite probably the public at large, in some instances the Cuban public.

Save your Gung Ho military Human Relations crap for the audience of Fox television.

I saw what I saw....an execution. It is what it is....and the person who did it, did what he did. If it had not been documented and aired by a film crew...the fucker would be doing the same shit today.

RC

[ElectroPrincess]

34. Yes, the Senate Republicans are "dusting that one off" so

they can change the rules to allow an individual who's indited on felony charges to stay in as the majority party leader.

Oh yeah, *presumed innocent* AND allow to carry-on as if nothing has happened. How ignorant.

[Florida_Geek]

3. presumption of innocence went out with a video of the Act

IMHO.

[Cuban_Liberal]

8. Fortunately for him, it didn't.

:eyes:

[DulceDecorum]

35. What happened to these guys?

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5365.htm

Aired October 26, 2003 - 20:00 ET
CROWLEY: Wounded, another Iraqi writhes on the ground next to his gun. The Marines kill him -- then cheer
RIDDLE: Like, man, you guys are dead now, you know. But it was a good feeling.

[Cuban_Liberal]

42. I have no ida what happened to them.

I'll wait for the investigation to be completed.

[minorl]

53. Courts martialed and in Levenworth

Two convictions...

That was my unit.

[DulceDecorum]

56. When will that be?

Two days after they find the body of Jimmy Hoffa?

[Cuban_Liberal]

58. Your skepticism is duly noted. n/t

[Name removed]

68. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bowens43]

4. The video speaks for itself.

What happened previously to this kid is irrelevant. I certainly do NOT trust the military to investigate this incident.

[Cuban_Liberal]

9. It's HIGHLY relevant.

Mens rea is an essential part of any criminal act.

[Bragi]

87. Mens rea!

You mean maybe he just blkew off the guy's head just to find out if the guy was okay?

What a pathetic rationalization.

[lastliberalintexas]

101. Do you even know what that term means?

Because from your post it certainly doesn't sound like you do. Mens rea is the mental state required for a criminal act. We don't really know anything about this KID, what happened to him the day before, the stresses he was under, or even whether he was still legally sane. And yes, all of that IS relevant information that both any prosecutor and defense atty would want and need prior to a trial of this.

Some of the people here have responded to this in the same knee jerk reactionary way that freepers do. I just hope I never end up with any of those posters on one of my juries.



And CL- I completely agree. It's been rather frightening to see the rush to judgment here these past couple of days.

[Garage Queen]

47. Oh, please. This wasn't a cold blooded murder ...

it was a cold blooded execution.

Get it straight, kids!

(/sarcasm)

[DS1]

5. Don't expect a lot of goodwill towards this thread

:shrug:

Innocent until guilty innocent doesn't apply when it's against the DU groupthink.

edit: laughable slip

[Forkboy]

67. Innocent until guilty

I agree...the soldier shouldn't have killed the guy.Due process is a good thing.Hopefully you'll ask for it for all parties involved someday :shrug:

[Pithlet]

97. DU is not involved in his trial

and is not a barrier to his due process. I won't defend the notion that he shouldn't get his day in court, or that the mitigating circumstances of war don't exist. But I'm not all that outraged at the outrage of what he did.

[Karenina]

99. It's the "cumulative effect."

NO AMERICAN has been held accountable in the eyes of the ROTW. After the "torture photos" the most common question I fielded was, "How the HELL does Rumsfeld STILL have a job?" Politicians worlwide have been forced to resign for simply suggesting the obvious; * is a dingbat." EVERY ATROCITY committed by Americans has been swept under the rug. In fact, if anyone were even BOLD enough to demand accountability, there is a plan in place to INVADE HOLLAND and BOMB THE HAGUE. This is just the latest episode in the series, WE CAN FUCK ANYONE WE WANT TO WITH IMPUNITY, WHATCHA GONNA DO ABOUT IT? FUCK YOU. YOU DON'T MATTER. Viewing it from another perspective, that Marine is simply than a poster boy for American "foreign policy."

There was NO presumption of innocence when the inspectors were prevented from doing their job. All of Iraq was, and continues to be BRUTALIZED, based on FALSE ACCUSATIONS. Now come the pleas to wait for "evidence" when what the world sees on film is evidence enough. Never mind that this Marine's action is well-known to be STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE in Iraq. Blame the camera. It's only a problem if one gets caught. I'm sorry if that comes as a surprise to you that American kids have been summarily EXECUTING "towel-head-sand-niggers" since they've been deployed there. "The chick got in the way."

This FUBAR clusterfuck has ZIP to do with one soldier's "snapping experience" and EVERYTHING to do with the ATROCITIES being perpetrated in the name of Americans.

[lastliberalintexas]

102. But that's not this kid's fault

Why should he be used as an example or as proof to the rest of the world that we're acting appropriately over there? He shouldn't. It's people like Bus, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, etc. who should be held accountable.

I agree that we're in Wonderland. But again, that's not this kid's fault.

[Karenina]

110. The point is they haven't been held accountable

BY THE AMERICAN CITIZENRY. So now we have "Film at 11" that condenses the clusterfuck into a quickly digested representation and ONCE AGAIN a stressed-out, misdirected young man gets to take the fall for those who AMERICAN CITIZENS seem to refuse to hold accountable.

You cannot "protect" this individual Marine with protestations of "due process" that the U.S. denied to the ENTIRE POPULACE OF IRAQ. That dog won't hunt. There is no news-junkie in the world who has not seen this film and formed an opinion based on what s/he saw. My point is that as an agent of U.S. policy, this Marine acted out accordingly. (Personally, my heart goes out to him and I cannot second guess his condition, although I AM certain he snapped). GET THEM OUTTA THERE!

[mike_c]

120. why should he be held accountable...?

Third. Geneva. Convention.

[Surikat]

6. I'm with you. I heard that this kid had caught...

...a nearly spent sniper bullet in the face the previous day and was still on the line with a first aid patch job only. I also heard that the insurgents had made a regular practice of setting a few of their number to pretending to surrender while their buddies waited for the Marines to put their heads up.

I remember my grandfather telling me that during an advance in WWI it was standard practice to put a bullet behind the ear of any "dead German" you found on the battlefield because too often they'd have been "playing possum" and would happily shoot you in the back after you walked past them.

[Inland]

13. I guess your point is that the marine is excused from following orders.

After all, he had been slightly wounded, traumatized by war---so orders, schmorders.

This war, and any other war, is destined to fail if excuses like that hold.

[Cuban_Liberal]

15. The Latin term is 'mens rea'.

In English, we call it 'criminal intent'. If you don't have the requisite intent to commit a crime, you can't be convicted of that crime. I'm not saying he's innocent; what I'm saying is he's been neither charged, nor convicted.

[Inland]

23. All the intent needed is the intent to kill.

That's the mens rea for the crime. He didn't need the specific intent to break a law or disobey commands.

And whether he is charged or convicted doesn't mean shit for the conduct of the war. The thing about this war is, it isn't just about him, just as Abu Gharaib wasn't just about the guards. Its bigger than that, and Americans are going to die whether or not this kid gets convicted. Because we saw it, and they saw it.

[Cuban_Liberal]

28. I'm sorry, but you're wrong.

If he cannot form the requisite criminal intent, he could kill FIFTY, and would be found NGRMI.

[Inland]

36. Or he could be found to be the Tooth Fairy. I don't care, and neither

does Iraq, about any particular mental illness this guy could be found to have six months from now in a courtroom.

It isn't about him.

It is about what we know is happening from OUR people TO Iraqis.

And I can't pretend it didn't happen.

[Cuban_Liberal]

45. Don't make him the scapegoat.

Your beef is with Bush.

[Inland]

51. I'm not. But don't tell me I have to presume him innocent.

That's just silly, since pretend and make believe will get people killed in a war that relies on the US being the giver of peace, civilization and democracy.

We saw it, and we have to judge our country and policies accordingly. If only because everyone else is.

[DulceDecorum]

52. By your reasoning

Hitler was the ONLY guilty party.
All those guards were as "innocent" as the "kid" you are trying to defend.

[Cuban_Liberal]

62. That's not my reasoning at all.

If anything, that's deliberately misconstruing what I've said.

[DS1]

78. Hitler bomb in 52

A new record?

[RyomaSakamoto]

124. it's a got damn SHAME how often it comes up in the same sentence NOWADAYS

though I still say it's much more analogous to imperial japans behavior in ASIA during wwII, with Fallujah being our Nanking though i those who won't forget are appalled by the growing RACISM against MUSLIMS and the similarities to hitlers nazi germany among many others.


Japanese aircraft bombed south Shanghai Station Aug.28,1937.
About 200 people in the waiting room were dead or wounded by the bombing. A crying baby was left alone after the bombing. "Life" Oct.4,1937.


i'm sure these times will give you plenty of opportunities to post, though :hi:

[RaleighNCDUer]

81. Mental illness isn't required.

The kid is in a combat zone. A body that he thought was unconscious or dead makes a sudden movement. He panics, yells "He's moving! He's not dead!" and fires a burst into the man's chest.

Then he finds out the man was unarmed.

It wasn't an execution, a single bullet to the head. He freaked, and shot before looking.

That's how it looked to me.

Not making excuses for him, and I could be wrong, but I think there's a reasonable doubt there.

[Cuban_Liberal]

83. I saw what you saw.

:shrug:

[RapidCreek]

132. So what's your point?

If I decide to run a stop sign.....and I get busted for it...you telling me I could say "Gee I didn't know running stop signs is against the law" and avoid conviction based on Mens Rea?

Perhaps you should study up on your legal terminology and application. If I decide to run a stop sign and I do...I had the requisite intent to run the stop sign...whether or not I know execution of such intent is illegal is not relevant. The court assumes that as a carrier of a drivers license I am privy to the laws of driving an automobile....and subsequently privy to the law I broke.

I should think that a military court would assume a marine is well aware of what happens when you point a gun at someones head and pull the trigger....I would further suspect that they would assume a marine who has made it out of boot camp has been trained that shooting an unarmed, wounded enemy combatant is in direct violation of the Geneva Convention.

Mens Rea? Come on.

RC

[mike_c]

39. have you watched the video?

One person in the squad is clearly heard identifying the Iraqi POWs as the disarmed wounded left behind for pickup by the previous squad, and he says it both BEFORE the shooting and again after it. The mosque was regarded as having been previously secured, and there were no weapons in sight. The Iraqis had been gravely wounded and disarmed, and were considered hors de combat under the Third Geneva Convention. The comments made by the marine as they entered the mosque prove that the shooter knew this before he killed the POW.

Regarding the presumption of innocence, there is absolutely no ambiguity about whether the marine killed a POW-- that was captured on video, as was the information that the squad was aware of who the Iraqis were and what their situation was. Nonetheless, you are correct-- the marine is entitled to the due process that he can be clearly seen denying the Iraqi POW. he is receiving that due process now. However, it is largely a procedural formality in this instance, since there is no question that he did in fact commit the act. There is still the question of WHY he committed an unambiguous war crime, and the larger question of whether his reasons were somehow mitigating. But recall too that the standards set at Nuremberg were quite high-- rightfully so-- and that any question of factual innocence rests solely on those reasons, because there is no ambiguity about whether he shot the POW. He seemed damned pleased with himself about it, too.

Finally, the Geneva Conventions are not meant to apply only outside the fog of battle. Rather, they are intended to overrule the passions and prejudices of war, so any reasonable defense of the marine cannot rely upon appeals to suspend the Conventions "under the circumstances."

[minorl]

71. I agree whole heartedly...we must hold ourselves to a higher standard

I've witnessed proceedings/investigations of this sort. He will be given due process, though significanly more critical, with less loop-holes for defense. The UCMJ is a cruel tool. (Article 134 alone, the general article, will ruin someone for what most people do every weekend.)

We have to hold leaders responsible. The buck stops at the SNCO and officer immediately in charge of him. William Calley, from My Lai was personally guilty, regardless of "command climate."

It breaks my heart to see the video, but I have to admit...the "evidence" as presented in the media, is damning. Then again, I don't trust the media.

Semper Fi

[mike_c]

119. the only versions I've seen presented by the media...

...were in fact highly edited. The shooting itself was blacked out and more importantly, the dialog before the shooting was edited. That's the part that I see as especially damning, because it undercuts the argument that the shooter was not aware of the precise circumstances he'd walked in on. There is a link to an unedited version (or at least a version containing the shooting and the dialog) in the DU thread about the marines rallying around the accused. Trust the media? I agree.

[mike_c]

121. but was it standard practice to kill wounded POWs...

...known to have been disarmed and left as hors de combat by a previous squad? That's what this marine did.

[Inland]

7. And yet, I can't pretend that I didn't see the video.

He can have a presumption of innocence in his court martial. But the issue of what to do with him has little to do with the conduct of our army, foreign policy and war.

Our country doesn't get a presumption of innocence or a trial.

Our soldiers are going to be facing an enemy who doesn't care if there is sufficient admissible evidence to convict, an Iraqi public who is wondering what our country is trying to accomplish.

It isn't even about him, because the damage done can't be fixed by punishing him or letting him go.

[Cuban_Liberal]

11. Then please, don't punish him because of George Bush.

Let's not make this kid the ritual 'whipping boy' because GWB is an imperialist, warmongering ashhole, OK?

[Inland]

18. No, I'll see him punished after conviction. But how can we pretend

it didn't happen to the Iraqis and the world?

Do we have to pretend to be stupid and naive to the world because we can't put this dude to Leavenworth without a trial?

Punish the marine for his crimes, if any, after due process. Punish Bush for his malfeasance and stupidity in putting marines in a no-win war. Plenty of blame and crimes to go around.

[Cuban_Liberal]

21. I've not defended Bush, nor have I defended the Marine.

I'd like to see Bush on trial in The Hague, personally. ALL i've asked is for people to wait to make a judgment until ALL the evidence is available.

[Inland]

29. Wait to make a judgment? On what? The conduct of the war

that rages as we speak? Because a VIDEOTAPE isn't enough evidence for, say, insurgents to kill Americans or for Iraqis to doubt our intentions?

Well, let's give it six or seven months until the courts martial of this individual before we recognize how wrong the prosecution of this war is going.

[Cuban_Liberal]

38. This kid isn't prosecuting this war, George Bush is.

My opening post wasn't about the prosecution of this war, it was about one marine who may or may not have committed a crime.

[Inland]

46. For purposes of the war, we SAW the crime.

Nobody is rushing to hang the marine because, frankly, it isn't about him. It isn't even about one killed person. That is going to be handled by a courts martial.

It is about the next set of people who die, because we all saw it happen, and so did the foreigners.

I can't pretend otherwise, and the foreigners aren't.

[Cuban_Liberal]

50. You saw an ACT.

Whether or not it was a crime remains to be determined in accordance with the law.

[Inland]

57. No. Whether he is held guilty is a matter of law.

The crime is a matter of fact. Pretending that nobody can make any judgment for any purposes before a trial is the type of see no evil that is going to make this war, if not every war, fail.

[Cuban_Liberal]

65. Wrong.

A crime is a matter of law, not fact/act.

[DulceDecorum]

48. Let us try the case

in the Hague.

[RivetJoint]

61. Why?

The US has first crack at it. We've consistently demonstrated our ability to try our own soldiers for their illegal actions.

[DulceDecorum]

138. Lt Calley of My Lai

comes to mind.
I hear he is selling diamonds somwhere.
I wonder if any of them are as hard as his heart.

Remind me, please,
how did the trial for his illegal actions go?

[RapidCreek]

134. I will make him the whipping boy for the crime he committed.

George Bush is indeed an imperialist, warmongering ashhole.....and this fellow is an accessory after the fact. George Bush is a lying cheating thug whose policies have made the lives of many Americans miserable. Should he be blaimed if one of these Americans decides to shoot your wife in the head? Or should the person who did the shooting be blaimed.

Don't you dare role this fucker up with all the soldiers who are NOT doing the sort of shit this kid has done and no doubt would be doing still, if he had not been filmed in the act.

RC

[quisp]

10. hear! hear!

[nadinbrzezinski]

12. Then you know that at the very least he will face an

article 15, and YOU DO KNOW the UCMJ does not think he is innocent either...

He has to prove his innocence and YOU KNOW THAT

Now the ICRC is doing its own investigating, as well as CID and JAG... and chances are, especially if they decide to only Article 15 him, that YOU AND I will not hear about it. Wanna bet that if this goes to an Article 32 we may.

What that young Marine is, though is... the proverbial canary in the mine, WE ARE LOOSING control of that force, and we have many signs of this gong on, from troops having POWs die in their custody, to troops NOT driving fuel, to well this Marine... see what is going on?

[Cuban_Liberal]

14. The world knows about this.

No way he'll get an article 15.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. Yep how many of the kids at Abu Ghraib went to

an article 32? The ring leaders

Look he is the canary in the mine, we are loosing control of this force

Lt and Captains have lost control of their NCOs, and majors and colonels no longer have their JOs in a tight leash... I suspect the leash was broken, Multiple reasons for this, but he is the proverbial canary in the mine

You want to think what a force gone on a rampage looks like? Or the other extreme a force refusing to obey orders?

We have seen both extremes on a micro cosm, and if they can bury this with an Article 15 and they think they can get away with it, they will... and if they think they can get away with a BCD they will... and YOU KNOW IT.

By teh way , under the UCMJ he is guilty, until he proves his innocence, civilian standards of justice do not apply to the military and there are GOOD reasons for it... of course if Geoge can get away with it, he will impose Imperial law on all of us, including a Napoleonic code that woudl leave Napoleon what happened?

[Cuban_Liberal]

33. I wasn't speaking from the viewpoint of the UCMJ.

I agree with most of what you've said about things spinning out of control, but what I meant by 'presumption of innocence' was here, on this board.

[RivetJoint]

40. Wrong

Under the UCMJ, the burden of proof (Beyond a reasonable doubt) is STILL on the Government

[RivetJoint]

25. He does not have to prove his innocence

The burden is still on the prosecution.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Okie dockie

right....

Look as I said if they can they will bury this one with an Article 15 and maybe a Big Chicken Dinner...

I hope they do an article 32 and charge him and do this the way it shoudl be, but our military is not being led by rational people and ULTIMATELy the fault lies in DC

[RivetJoint]

43. I agree that there will be some

who want to Article 15 this away...

[JI7]

16. he might also have mental health problems

as a result of the war experience.

[Cuban_Liberal]

19. Exactly.

PTSD, etc. . If you can't form the requisite criminal intent to commit a crime, you can't be convicted of that crime.

[DulceDecorum]

41. So Marines are nut jobs?

No wonder they are always looking for a few GOOD men.

[Cuban_Liberal]

49. No, they're not nut jobs.

If you were say, a teacher, and a teacher wigged out and killed someone, would it be fair to ask if all teachers were nut jobs?

:eyes:

[DulceDecorum]

73. No, UNLESS he signed fo a job that involved KILLING

and teaching others how to do the same thing.
THEN I would say that he had severe mental problems.
But then again,
that is what makes me anti-war.

From what I have been given to understand,
SOLDIERS ARE TRAINED TO KILL
and KILLING is part of their job-description.
So how come you are all of a sudden saying that that the man was sick in the head simply because he went and killed a helpless civilian in a mosque?

If he is sick in the head, then so is everyone else in the US military who has passed through boot camp.
And I just DARE you to go tell them that.

The soldier did what he was TRAINED to do.
He killed another human being.
He was taught to do that in the Urban Warfare Course.

Six special forces parachuted from 10,000 feet (3,050 meters) with oxygen, commandos rappelled from a Blackhawk helicopter, and two M-47 Chinooks dropped off armed Army Rangers -- two on motorcycles, seven in a souped-up Land Rover and others on foot.
Kicking up dust amid the explosions and commotion, an MH-6 "Little Bird" helicopter fired blanks into the crowd that shook sticks at Bush and chanted "Go home U.S.A.! Go home U.S.A.!"
As Bush watched, special forces went room-to-room in an adjacent building using explosives and machine guns to root out rioters where they hid. Army Rangers kept watch from nearby rooftops, and a refueling plane passed overhead, its gas lines tethered to two helicopter.
After about 15 minutes, Bush radioed to the commander that the battle was over. Bodies and shells littered the ground as silence fell over "Pineland."
http://www.tribalmessenger.org/headlines/3-17-02%20-%20Bush%20Witnesses%20Military%20Training%20at%20Fort%20Bragg.htm

These soldiers are being trained to murder unarmed demonstrators.
The only reason you are here pleading for that hit-man is because we,
who are also civilians
are completely disgusted by these actions.

[Cuban_Liberal]

75. Are you arguing with me, or with yourself?

Of COURSE he was trained to kill other people, and of COURSE he understood that that was part of the job. That's not proof of mental illness.

:wtf:

[rabid_nerd]

64. No but remember what Vietnam did to so many of our men's minds...

Volunteering to serve and defend your country without question, and then being put into unbearable situations day after day for longer than you agreed to.

It's liable to do something to you.

Remember where the buck stops.

[mike_c]

123. sorry, that defense-- war is hell-- was rejected at Nuremburg....

eom

[JI7]

141. it's not about blowing it off as "war is hell"

i'm talking about true mental health problems. something doctors could check them for and try to help them get through whatever problems they may have.

[DinahMoeHum]

17. Those kids will need big-time psych counseling when/if they get home.

and we need to help them connect with the various antiwar groups around, such as OpTruth www.optruth.org and Military Families Speak Out www.mfso.org

Besides that, I'm willing to give this kid his day in court. Because right now, it doesn't matter anymore. Guilty or not, what was caught on tape is a propaganda windfall for the likes of Osama bin Laden.

:nuke:

[atreides1]

20. Not All Americans Enjoy The Presumption of Innocence.

I don't have a problem with the presumption of innocence, and until or if he is indicted, and the results of a courts martial determines his guilt, fine.

I was in the Army and saw combat in Desert Storm, and I will admit it was nothing compared to what is happening here. But to offer up as excuses the things that have been faced by American troops all over Iraq, as a reason is BS.

This marine isn't the only troop that has seen friends die or get wounded, others have as well, but for some reason they've mostly avoided shooting someone in cold blood.

I agree let him have his day in court, and let his guilt or innocence be determined then.

And he is not a KID, for God's sake, the first time he killed another human being he stopped being a kid. He's a man, and as a man he is now
responsible for his actions and must face up to them.

[Cuban_Liberal]

24. He's a kid who ought to be worrying about getting laid on Saturday night.

He and every other kid over there have been thrown into a hell of George Bush's creation; it should come as no surpise to anyone that some people come unglued, under the circumstances.

[RivetJoint]

26. You are so right!

[DulceDecorum]

44. Oh, he probably got some R&R

over at Abu Ghraib.

[RivetJoint]

54. That's just disgusting

[DulceDecorum]

59. War ain't pretty

and neither are the actions of the US servicemen in Iraq.

[RivetJoint]

143. SOME of them

A tiny minority.

[mike_c]

125. what about these kids-- were their actions excusable as well?

This is Warsaw, during the uprising, when "insurgents" tried to resist foreign occupation. How are the actions of these kids fundamentally any different from those you are asking us to be understanding towards? They too were in a stressful life-threatening situation, trying desperately to put down an insurgency, just following orders, and etc.

[Buck Rabbit]

27. DU is not a court of law, our opinions are just that.

Presumption of innocence pertains to legal proceedings and law enforcement and does not preclude individuals from having or expressing an opinion or conjecturing as to what we saw. Our opinions are not legally binding and expressing them does nothing to interfere with his right to due process.

By the way I am impressed by the compassion you express for the human being on the other end of that rifle.

Sheesh!

[Zero Gravitas]

31. Presumption of innocence?

that is sooooo pre-Bush Administration thinking.

From what I have seen of that video I can't justify what the marine did, but I have not been in combat and I don't know how accurate the stories of the insurgents booby trapping bodies are, so I won't pass judgment on the guy.

But put the shoe on the other foot and imagine if the wounded man was a US marine and the shooter an Iraqi, how many people would be yelling about presumption of innocence and the stress of combat?

[Zorra]

32. It's not every day people see actual footage of someone shooting

another human being to death in cold blood.

You'll have to forgive us, it really upsets Democrats when we see things like this.

[Cuban_Liberal]

55. I thought Democrats believed in due process of law, not lynch mobs.

I must have been wrong, huh?

:eyes:

[RapidCreek]

135. Why is it you show no compassion for the man he executed?

Do you know if this man had a wife or children? What are thier names? I'm sure he had a mother and father....what about them? Are they still alive? Who are his brothers and sisters, how many of them did he have? What did the murdered man do for a living before your marine came to bring Democracy to his country? Was he a teacher, a construction worker, a carpenter or a shop owner? Who were his friends? Do you suppose any of these people witnessed the same film you did?

Is he just another sand nigger, another pesky insurgant, a terrorist? Was he less important than your marine? Less human? Less deserving of the same rights you so stridently you insist upon for the man who executed him?

RC

[knowbody0]

37. i agree with you

the realities of war and its effect on the warrior can only be imagined by those who have never been there.
to judge him from those two minutes is ridiculous. however,the concept of shooting an elderly unarmed wounded man violates virtue. that the footage is played, replayed, critiqued, again and again actually desensitizes the audience. it is psyop perfected once again.

the enemy wears civilian clothing,therefore civilians are the enemy.the enemy resorts to suicide bombing, therefore the dead and wounded are the enemy.

these marines were stoked three weeks before the assault on falluja.steady combat for one week, snippets of sleep,walking over the dead and dying, comrades killed and wounded. safe to say, this man was reacting to the environment-kill or be killed. i do not judge him, i condemn his commander and the collateral carnage of this illegal non-winnable invasion/occupation. one must realize, this incident was caught on film but no doubt not uncommon.

[Name removed]

60. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Forkboy]

74. Dont agree

but like your web page.

[moobu2]

66. He and several of his Marine buddies

would be guilty of murder unless they are cleared due to rules of engagement but then they would still be guilty of war crimes because of international law.

We know the guy walked up to am unarmed wounded prisoner of war and shot and killed him (because it can be plainly seen on the video) but his buddies also murdered the other wounded unarmed POWs in the other room (off camera). The POW's were taken the day before and had received field medical aid and were bandaged wounded and defenseless.

If this gives Osama some propaganda tool it's those marines fault and their superiors who laid out the ROE not reasonable people who object to revenge Murder of the wounded unarmed.

On the other hand most people understand the Marines position of being in hostile fire and seeing the friends killed and so forth but that can not justify what apparently happened.

[Cuban_Liberal]

69. it's unclear what they did or did not know about those people.

His unit was not the same unit that had put those people in the mosque, and it's not yet clear what they had been told about them.

On edit: If I had a dollar for every time some ell-tee said, "Oh, I thought you'd been told...", I'd be living fat and happy in a condo in Costa Rica.

[mike_c]

126. wrong-- you can clearly hear one marine say "these are..."

"...the wounded left by the other guys yesterday" (quoted from memory) both BEFORE the shooting and again afterward (might not have been on the tape shown on U.S. media(?)). They KNEW these were unarmed wounded POWs determined to no longer present a threat and left for later removal to the rear. They knew that the previous squad had considered the situation secure. This is completely unambiguous-- you can hear the marines discussing it before and after the shooting.

[willysnout]

79. I Agree

The Marine Corps will deal with this. They don't take kindly to their people executing wounded prisoners lying on the ground. There will be an investigation and the appropriate action will be taken.

[Forkboy]

70. I find the irony amusing in this

We're here talking about giving a marine the presumption of innocence when he couldn't be bothered to do the same for the guy he murdered.

Ah,democrats....maybe there's hope for us after all :)

[Cuban_Liberal]

72. You don't give an someone you think may be armed that presumption.

It's war, and you shoot first and ask questions later if there is ANY doubt in your mind, or you go home in a body bag.

[mike_c]

127. CL-- you're either not very well informed about what happened...

...or you're in deep denial. Watch the entire video if you haven't. Those marines knew precisely what they were dealing with-- they discussed it openly on tape before and after the shooting. They knew that the Iraqis were unarmed, gravely wounded POWs left for later pickup, that they were not a threat, and that the mosque had been secured.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

76. Sure. Give him his day in court. How about an Iraqi court?

Or an international tribunal, rather than the "Aw Gee, poor kid.." military court.

[Cuban_Liberal]

77. How about the court the LAW says he's entitled to?

:shrug:

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

80. How about giving him a trial where justice will be done.

An unlikely prospect in a court run by the military. He will get his "day in court". For what it's worth.

And, yes I was in the military. Even assigned officers to Summary Courts-martial and saw "Military Justice" in action.

[Cuban_Liberal]

82. I find the disconnect interesting here.

Everyone screams 'War crime!', which is defined under a treaty, which is a LAW, yet they want to throw the law AWAY when it comes to this kid, and his rights. Surely you see the disconnect there, don't you?

[Florida_Geek]

84. man watch the video then talk

there is

no excuse

for what he did. Sure give him a trial the shot him....

[Cuban_Liberal]

85. I have watched it.

In fact, I have it saved to my HD. Whether or not there is an excuse/defense for what he did should be determined in a court of law, following the rules which govern due process.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

86. Actually, he's small potatoes compared to the other war crimes.

He shot and killed an unarmed, wounded, defenseless man. His defense includes the usual litany of justifications. Stress, heat of battle, self defense, etc. He will get tried and acquited, or "punished" as lightly as the law allows.

But, what about the guys who are dropping the "smart" bombs on civilians. The artillerists blowing up houses. The snipers blowing people's heads off because they look suspicious. The politicians and generals engineering the whole thing? They will be proclaimed heroes, given medals, become "expert commentators", or run for office claiming they're "tough on defense". All because they participated in or authorized murder.

Justice and "the law" are seldom synonymous.

IMO, he should stand trial and be sentenced to explaining his actions to the family of the man he murdered.

[RapidCreek]

136. I don't want to throw away the law.....I just don't want to listen to you

whining about "this poor kid".....I don't want to listen to you rolling this fucker up with all the soldiers who witness the same shit he did...get shot and watch their buddies get shot...just like he did....and DON'T feel that's reason to execute unarmed, wounded prisoners...just like he did.

I don't want to have you tell me that I cannot express my opinion, as I see fit.

OJ Simpson got his day in court....and was found innocent. Frankly I don't give a shit. As far as I'm concerned the fucker is a murderer. I'll give my opinion to that effect....and frankly I don't give a rats ass what you or anyone else thinks about it. You see, my opinion didn't and doesn't have any effect on the verdict rendered in the Simpson trial....It doesn't and won't in regards to this Marine Executioners trial either.

If I were on his jury, I would dispose of my biases and render a verdict based solely on the evidence. I am not on a jury though...and I am not bound by the rules of trial. I am a private citizen, with a private opinion and I'll express it.

RC

[Voltaire99]

88. Cuban_Liberal: moral quietude makes you an accessory after the fact...

...to this war crime.

Offering sentimental reasoning ("this Kid, for God's sake"), seeking to quash outrage against atrocity, counseling that we let the invading force in a war based on lies judge its own actions...

Yes, your finger was on that trigger, too.

[Cuban_Liberal]

90. No sale!

'Moral quietude' is one of those squishy, feel-good phrases that doesn't really mean much. I'm not an accesory-after-the-fact because I'm urging people to let the investigators and the legal-justice system do their jobs.

[Leilani]

89. Cuban Liberal, You are a Mighty Brave Man!!!

And again, thank you for your service!

I applaud your bravery, not because of your combat experience, but because you are a calm, rational voice wading into a lynch mob.

Of course, everyone should have the presumption of innocence.

DUH!

But, many here would make an exception for this Marine; why? because he's a Marine. Simple as that.

I see this attitude repeatedly at DU. Outraged computer warriors who spew hatred towards our military, & I'm tired of it.

When all of you have walked a mile in this kid's shoes, then you can be outraged.

Why not take the rage you all feel, & direct it where it's deserved:
at the current administration that lied us into this war. What about your Senators & representatives, who voted aye, & sanctioned this abomination of a war?

Don't you see, this Marine is a victim, same as all those other people over there fighting, & all those Iraqis, who are suffering & dying, & fighting.

[Forkboy]

91. not buying this

When all of you have walked a mile in this kid's shoes, then you can be outraged.

One doesn't have to walk in anothers shoes to be outraged.By this logic none of us should be outraged at Bush.After all,none of us have been president...maybe it really is hard work doing all that hard working work.

this Marine is a victim,

True,but unlike HIS victim this marine is still alive :shrug:

[ElectroPrincess]

93. As an Army veteran, I'm not buying it :(

"Outraged computer warriors who spew hatred towards our military, & I'm tired of it."

You are also generalizing to all of DU on the basis of a *few* posters. Our membership is a continuum like any other large group.

Please employ some critical thinking skills and review "all" of the above posts. Then you will find that they run the sphere of sentiment from: Absolute Support to Absolute Condemnation.

I can't get inside the individual Marine's head so I will refrain from passing judgment. Whether he acted in a moment of shock and confusion or with malice - that's one for the jury to decide.

[Cuban_Liberal]

95. "...that's one for the jury to decide."

That's all I'm saying.

:hi:

[Cuban_Liberal]

94. Thank you!

:hi:

[Plaid Adder]

92. Look, we are not in a position to convict this person of anything.

We can talk about it or speculate about it but at the end of the day we have no power over what happens to him one way or another. What happens on DU is not going to have any impact on his life. If you want to stand up for him you'd be better off trying to find out who's handling this for the army and taking it up with him.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[Pithlet]

96. He should have his day in court.

But, I don't think that I personally have to presume anything either way, since I won't be directly involved in anything that decides his fate, so what I think doesn't matter one bit.

I will defend his right to due process. I will acknowledge that war does awful things to people, and that those are mitigating circumstances. But, I will not defend what he did. And I will be outraged and sickened by it and don't feel like I have to wait until the outcome of his trial to do so.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

98. Wow........

you have posted an interesting thread friend. My response is not directed towards any one else here, merely offering my thoughts.

What I get from all this stuff is the idea that we can have rules for war.

Deep down in my heart there is nothing that speaks to our inhumanity towards one another like war.

We cannot truly ever hope to move away from things like this, if as a species, we continue to find and make excuses for war.

When we decide war is ok, if we follow the rules, what have we really decided?

What we have here is a situation where many seem to think they would never do what this Marine did. I challenge that thinking. If any one of us is in this situation, you cannot tell me you know what your reaction would be.

The very nature of war is de-sensitizing. It robs us of the ability to have feelings for the 'enemy'. By its very nature the participants are driven to do two things, 1) preserve their own life, 2) take the life of the enemy.

For thousands of years the majority has been influenced and persuaded by the minority that war is unavoidable, needed,legal, neccessary and glorious.

It will only change when all of us, American and Iraqi, Muslim and Jew, Protestant and Catholic, agree that war benefits only those who actively lobby for it.

A year or two ago that Marine was probably worried about finding a girlfriend or getting a job. Perhaps the dead Iraqi had the same worries.

What we are being exposed to is the real nature of combat and war. A nature that tells us survival in a chaotic, crazy, upside down environment is the only way to way to behave.

There are no rules. There are no heroes. There are no winners.

Prosecuting the Marine probably feels right to many of us. But what will it change? If you are in the 'shit', you cannot promise me that you would not do the same thing.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

106. thanks, good post

i was having the same kind of thoughts about the situation. it could have easily been me or anyone else. i am pretty sure that different situations would change my perception a great deal.

i think it is a bit presumptious to say that in the face of extreme danger one could overcome one's more permordial/animalistic tendencies.

[LoneDriver]

100. I'm with you, man

After a week or so in combat, most are psychotic from stress, no sleep, etc., etc. It's too easy to judge from here.

[ElectroPrincess]

105. Yes that's clearly understood ...

However, if or when you cross the line OR it's possible that you acted in a way that breeches military law and the UCMJ, the military has the responsibility to find out "the truth" if at all possible.

Don't condone immoral behavior. The soldier who's exhausted and mistakenly believes he killed military only, to his horror, discovers that it is civilians CAN be understood because he did NOT have malice in his heart.

However, DAMN those who completely lose their humanity like that larger than life a**hole pseudo Marine Drill Sergeant on the History Channel ... milking off his role in full metal jacket. Newsflash: His persona is NOT real. Drill Sergeants are AS tough, but they stress "the team" angle MUCH MORE and keep it at that level from the middle to the end of Boot camp. That man and his nasty ignoramus and highly profane is an embarrassment to the many Outstanding Americans who have honorably served the Marine Corps.

Wake up folks, even Apocalypse Now was not all that accurate in depicting true combat personas. LTC Commanders like that freeper lauded Kilgore would have bit the dust during their first tour.

Combat Marines and Soldiers don't want a Psycho-MAD Sergeant or Officer leading them into death. They want level headed, intelligent leaders that will help their patrol, etc. complete the mission and come back in one piece. Humm ... does that conger up anyone we all know like say John Kerry?

These, "what the hell, I want to be in the shit!" troops are few and far between. Most combat troops are exhausted, afraid, searching for quality leadership from their squad leader and LT, and most of all want to return to the USA in one piece. They may become desensitized but the majority do NOT lose their sense of humanity.

On edit: Grammar correction ... "Piece" um I mean "Peace" ;)

[Cuban_Liberal]

108. Yes, that's it EXACTLY

I've been sleep-deprived, nervous as a whore in church from 48 hours of non-stop gunfire, cold, wet, half-starved, half-sick, dirty, etc., and it's just WAYYYYYYYYYYY too easy to sit here warm, dry, clean and well-fed in front of the ol' computer and make a judgment about this case based on a 3-minute videotape.

Hinckley shot Reagan on national TV, but he was subsequently found not guilty by reason of mental illness. I think this soldier deserves no less of a chance to defend himself than John Hinckley received.

[RapidCreek]

137. How many unarmed wounded prisoners did you execute?

RC

[Qanisqineq]

103. I'm with you Cuban Liberal

a couple hours sleep a night, one small meal a day, the constant sound of gunfire, seeing friends die, having to kill or be killed, never seeing your family...

I've never been through it but my husband went through it June 2003-April 2004 in Iraq. I've heard enough about it to have some compassion. I don't like what the marine did (and many of my husband's fellow soldiers are sickened by the video), but I can't put myself in his shoes and I refuse to prematurely call him a murderer.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

104. it is important to consider someone's reasoning and environment in regard

to situations like this. it is easy to judge the guy and say "he's evil that's why he did it, he is a no good, hateful killer!", but you know that that sounds a lot like? "they hate us for our freedom!"

it is nice to have these nice neat definitions of what is going on, but it doesn't not really explain the situation.... the "whys" of it. if you want to overcome/transcend something you need to try and understand it.

this guy had reasons for what he did. if we were to sit down and chat, i might find that i could understand why he would take such a course of action or i might find him to completely incoherent and unfounded in his thinking. either way, i would gain a bit more insight into what causes such situations and that can't be bad eh?

i guess all i am trying to say is that it is easy to sum someone up in a few words but i think situations like this warrant a bit more thought about the whys and hows.

maybe i am just sick of all the "he's bad"....."he's good" from both sides? i don't find it to be much of an argument. it sucks, i wish they (iraqi's/U.S. soldieres) were never in the situation in the first place. i hope W is proud of the trigger he pulled on hundreds of thousands of heads.

[Duncan Grant]

107. Any space here for a hypothetical question?

Consider the following:

An American was wounded 2 days ago. He lies flat on the floor of a Christian place of worship (or fellowship hall); perhaps he's at a Synagogue. His whereabouts are know to an Arab liberation force who engaged him in battle the day before.

Arab soldiers enter the Christian/Jewish sacred space amped on adrenaline (lack of sleep, horrors of war, etc.etc.etc.). An Arab soldier says our wounded American is faking death and then shoots to kill him. Arab soldier says, "He's dead now."

Do the same standards apply to the Arab soldier?

Now C_U, I appreciate your appeal to DU not to rush to judgment. So in that spirit let's do a full 360 here and think about it in many different ways. It's friggin' horrible any way we stack it and most Americans have no frame of reference to process the visual images present in the video. We all need to extend a little empathy to each other; no matter what side you may find yourself in this situation.
:kick:

[ElectroPrincess]

109. I would first want to know who is this troop's (Arab or American)

squad leader and what were the specific orders given to the troop that shot the wounded man BEFORE they went on that patrol.

We are not quering the leadership. Even tired combat soldiers have leaders as far down as fire teams (3 men).

[Cuban_Liberal]

111. if I had a dollar for every time I heard some ell-tee say...

"Oh, didn't you get the order to....?", I'd have a condo in Costa Rica. Someone was told that these guys were prisoners, but I want to know if the Marine who shot the guy was told that. Right now, I'd say it's 50/50.

[mike_c]

130. Good lord, listen to the video-- it's in the first minute...

...right after they enter the room-- "these are the wounded left by those guys yesterday." They say it again after the shooting. The marines KNEW the Iraqis were disarmed, gravely wounded POWs determined to present no further threat and left in a secured postion for later retrieval. They discussed it openly before killing them.

[VOX]

112. I hear you, CL, and I stand with you...

I do not judge or blame this one Marine -- but I will hold those at the top accountable for creating this outrageous situation.

I was never in a combat situation, but my father was, and I have read extensively on the subject.

To all DUers, I strongly recommend the late Stephen Ambrose's "Citizen Soldiers," an account of the WWII GIs -- just everyday American kids -- who were dipped down into the hell that was the campaign from Normandy to Berlin. There are many eyewitness accounts of GIs shooting surrendering, unarmed Germans, and worse -- and in no way does this make the killing right, by any means -- it is a terrible fact of the incredibly stressful, confusing and God-awful situation that is combat.

[Cuban_Liberal]

113. "...just everyday American kids -- who were dipped down into the hell...."

That's EXACTLY what it is, too.

[ElectroPrincess]

114. OK CL and boys, let's with hold our final judgment until the facts

surrounding this case are brought out. My point was that good leaders provide clear orders and monitor their potentially "psycho" people closely. Sure 50/50.

However, it IS very appropriate that this Marine is CHARGED under the UCMJ because let's just say that, if he shot this man out of malice and not because he was afraid for his life, he's guilty of a war crime and his actions are a disgrace to his person and his Country.

I don't condone outright immoral behavior. Y'all can rah rah all you like but I don't believe that the majority of people at DU will concur with, "oh what the hell they're all tired and psycho, whad du ya expect."

That's seriously lame of any military veteran. No matter how difficult and sleep deprived, a troop should represent his country as best he/she can ... the "tired avenging angel scenario" doesn't play with me.

Again, he should be CHARGED and the JURY will decide.

[Cuban_Liberal]

117. I'm actually on your page.

let's wait for the facts, and let the jury decide. I'm not condoning his actions, at all.

[ElectroPrincess]

118. Excellent! Then I can fully empathize with the intense stress

of combat. My point is that if these troops had good leadership, the opportunities for this to happen would be rare. Sure there's rogue troops but it's their leaders who set the tone. Thanks for clarifying CL. We do agree after all.

[Vasmosn]

140. The thing that scares me...

...about "waiting for the facts" is that it often means waiting for someone to have the chance to spin reality. I don't think anyone is implying that the man should not have his day in court. However, as far as I'm concerned, the video is all the evidence needed to convict him. Any attempt to say otherwise seems to me a denial of reality. It reminds me of the Rodney King case. I saw a crime but it was spun to a degree that, hey, maybe I didn't. Maybe it is ok to beat a man after he's obviously incapable of doing you any harm as long as he's been speeding and he's black. Maybe in Iraq it is ok to shoot a defenseless man if he's been labeled a part of the insurgency and he's Iraqi. I don't agree. The Geneva Convention says that even conscious opponents are to be given the opportunity to surrender. Poke the man, splash water on the man, even shoot him in the leg but kill him? If you're going to do things like that then just level the playing field and SAY that the Geneva Convention no longer applies and anything goes! At least you won't be hypocritical.

[Jim__]

115. It's our country that launched a totally unprovoked invasion of another

country. It's our country that may have killed 100,000 innocent civilians in that country they invaded. It's our country that continues to use our tax dollars to kill and maim the innocent, including innocent children and infants, in Iraq. It's our tax dollars that our country is using to do this. We're all heroes when its not our ass on the line. But, maybe, those of us who continue to pay taxes for this slaughter, who continue to go to work everyday to help support it, who sit and pass the time over the Internet while the slaughter goes on, maybe we're not in a position to sit in judgement of anyone.

[stavka]

116. This Marine murdered somebody - and felt good about it.

You can hear it in his voice.

What he and the world do with it is for somebody else to deal with.

(This footage is better than the best stills from the '41 Einsatzgruppen) - let those revisionists defend this high-school failure turned "patriot" to the world

[RyomaSakamoto]

122. will the Iraqi kids get their day in court?

hell, NO.

the only thing they get is death.

this 'solider' is very fucking LUCKY he will get his day in COURT.

no need for you to BRAGG about it behind your computer thousands of miles away from the HORROR.

"He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself" - Thomas Paine

peace


(pilot rescue swimmer)

################# An Iraqi's PLEA for RESTRAINT #####################



Just three days ago soldiers attacked the home of Fatima Harouz. Her uncle was killed while the family claims there were no resistance in the area.

She lays dazed in the crowded hospital room, languidly waving her bruised arm at the flies. Her shins, shattered by bullets from US soldiers when they fired through the front door of her house, are both covered by casts. Small plastic drainage backs filled with red fluid sit upon her abdomen, where she took shrapnel from another bullet.

Fatima Harouz, 12 years old, lives in Latifiya, a city just south of Baghdad. Just three days ago soldiers attacked her home. Her mother, standing with us says, “They attacked our home and there weren’t even any resistance fighters in our area.” Her brother was shot and killed, and his wife was wounded as their home was ransacked by soldiers. “Before they left, they killed all of our chickens,” added Fatima’s mother, her eyes a mixture of fear, shock and rage.

A doctor standing with us, after listening to Fatima’s mother tell their story, looks at me and sternly asks, “This is the freedom…in their Disney Land are there kids just like this?”

Another young woman, Rana Obeidy, was walking home with her brother two nights ago. She assumes the soldiers shot her and her brother because he was carrying a bottle of soda. This happened in Baghdad. She has a chest wound where a bullet grazed her, unlike her little brother who is dead.

Laying in a bed near Rana is Hanna, 14 years old. She has a gash on her right leg from the bullet of a US soldier. Her family was in a taxi in Baghdad this morning which was driving near a US patrol when a soldier opened fire on the car.

Her father’s shirt is spotted with blood from his head which was wounded when the taxi crashed.

(more)
http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives/dispatches/000122.php

DU...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x999139

can you HEAR HER?

[Carl Brennan]

129. Or the same "presumption of innocence" the Iraqi

people recieved before their country was invaded and destroyed??? :eyes:


There can be no fairness, in a corrupt war.

I'm a veteran too.

[Deja Q]

131. Flight or fight in a highly tense situation... a coworker told me

that the soldier should pay his dues for this crime, but so should the commanding officers.

The war was wrong. But we are there now. We made the mistake. Do we either still look backwards and whine?

In war, no side plays fairly.

That kid, probably not the best trained, and even if he was, is still more-or-less a kid. He is not Luke Skywalker and may not be in utter control of his emotions. He is still human and prone to the basic flight-or-fight response, of which war is very noteworthy for inducing in those who have to fight it. Maybe he saw a part of the fallen that the camera did not see and felt he had to do what was necessary to save his life. We don't know. Maybe he imagined a movement, that can happen too.

I no longer know what to think, beyond the fact that the war was precipitated by misinformation and deception. We are there now, human nature is still at play, and we are intertwined in a very precipitious situation. We need to clean up our mistakes and work toward a better future and rebuild trust.

No. We must not look backwards. We need to look forward and act with rationality AND get the majority to do the same thing. Maybe, on some rudimentary level, I still know what to think. It's a matter of putting things right.

[Ardee]

133. This will be lost in the crowd

but I gotta say it....YOU ARE DEAD FUCKING WRONG!

edit as whatever I had to say would simply be ignored by one so blind as you.......

[RyomaSakamoto]

139. but what about us lurkers

damn it ;->

[Ardee]

144. Inquiring minds

wish to know....

[JSJ]

142. fuck that and you for another very weak defense of us-issue murderers