A couple thoughts on Fallujah,

[Spector]

It is not the norm for troops to kill wounded enemy fighters out of hand. There are procedures that we use to protect ourselves when rendering aid to wounded enemy fighters. I wish I could show you all the acts of compassion, mercy and selflessness that I have seen over there by our troops.

The biggest problem I see over there is that a few of our guys have lost their humanity because of the brutal actions committed by a number of our enemies and they don't always have the mature and experienced leaders that they need to keep them from crossing the line. It is imperative in combat that our troops are led by strong leaders at the squad level. Most NCO's are professional, honorable and have a strong sense of duty. Unfortunately, some soldiers are put in leadership positions beyond their capabilities or for some reason are just bad people. It's a no-win situation for some of our guys.

Two of my troops were gunned down as they approached a 'wounded' enemy fighter in order to render first aid. The rest of the squad was covering them. My guys were using proper tactics, but the whole setup was an ambush. The 'wounded' fighter produced a hidden weapon and attempted to fire, while two of his buddies fired from concealed positions. The 'wounded' fighter never got a shot off, but my guys were caught in the open and were hit. Our enemy uses our humanity against us.

I have also seen a wounded enemy fighter blow himself up when we approached him to render aid. Thankfully, he detonated himself too soon (we were able to see what he was doing) and we were able to hit the dirt (just a few minor wounds). You just can't truly understand these situations until you live through them.

Now, does this mean I put a couple of rounds in every 'body' I see? No, most assuredly not. It means we treat all wounded enemy fighters with compassion, but protect ourselves in the process. It means I make sure my troops are well trained to handle these kind of situations. Obviously the Marine in the video was not, nor were his NCO's.

Look, many horrible things are done in war. How would you like to be a grunt over there being second-guessed by news watchers back home that have no idea what war is like, esp. this one? I have personally observed our enemies commit a number of atrocities. I don't believe this justifies a response in kind, nor do the majority of my fellow soldiers.

Many in the military will condemn this Marine's actions (in the video), because we feel that we should be honorable on the battlefield, even when our enemies are not.

Condemn the situation, condemn specific actions, but please try and understand the situation our guys are in...

Keep the Faith...

[knowbody0]

1. the effect of killing on the killer

the effect of walking on an earth of the dead and dying
boot camp is genocide
war is madness
my 94 year old grandfather in his last days, cried out, searching for his buddies, "so many bodies. everyone is dead" (WWI)

[northernsoul]

2. Focus the blame on the politicians

If I'd been in this soldier's boots, I can't honestly say the outcome would necessarily any different (I would hope so, no one can say for sure). I have no anger for this young man, my rage is reserved for the lying cowards sitting in comfortable offices in D.C. who put him in this situation.

[Spector]

3. Have to agree with you,

Why is it that the chickenhawks are always the first to call for war? A good leader will never order those under him to perform a task that he will not or cannot do himself.

Those leaders that have been to war, understand its' nature, thus are reluctant to seek it...

Keep the Faith...

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

5. Your comment about those leaders who have

been to war understanding its nature and thus being more reluctant to seek it is one of the biggest reasons I voted for Kerry.

Normally a candidates' experience in war or lack of is not a big criteria for me, but considering the fact we are IN a war now, it was this time. I wanted someone who had BEEN in war, who knew its TRUE costs, not someone who stayed safe stateside or who got five deferments (Cheney) or SEVEN (Rumsfeld).

[LittleClarkie]

11. Amen

And all those tin soldiers over at notsorryeverybody.com only reinforces that. The only ones who are gung ho for this sort of thing are the ones who have never seen it.

I suppose that's why there were so many generals for Kerry, and why this administration disrespects the counsel of any veteran voice. We're being led in war by a bunch of civilians.

I've yet to see this footage, but it was discribed to me as the soldier freaking out thinking that the wounded Iraqi was faking being dead. Kid sounds scared more than anything else if that's the case.

I'll go with Kerry's assessment every time: it's the war, not the warrior. A criminal war makes criminals out of all who touch it, whether they wanted to be or not. All we can do is try to stop it as soon as we can.

I wonder if I could scrape enough together to donate to the IVAW (Iraqi Veterans Against the War). The campaign sorta tapped me out, and with Xmas coming and all...

I think it's important to help the veterans of this war have a voice.

[ArkDem]

16. FDR did a pretty decent job in WWII.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

4. As a veteran's wife I have to say

I didn't find much I could disagree with in your post.

I think of the military as a tool, like a hammer. The government that puts them to use is the arm that decides how to use that tool. It's the government I hold much more accountable (though of course every uniformed service member is held accountable for their own actions, or should be, that's why we have things like UCMJ and the Geneva Conventions, etc.).

But the problem is, war kills more than just those who are mortally wounded. You CANNOT expect soldiers to kill in a situation like this and have it not do perverse things to them. They are in a situation of kill or be killed. Soldiers are trained to fight, to kill when necessary. Period.

That's why I believe Iraq now needs different tactics. I don't see where we are going with further engagements except more and more and more death and destruction.

[Spector]

6. Moonbeam,

"That's why I believe Iraq now needs different tactics. I don't see where we are going with further engagements except more and more and more death and destruction."

I agree. Our current course is just going to up the body count. I think Kerry had the right idea; put a large force of international peacekeepers in Iraq to secure it and rebuild the infrastructure... then hold elections. International peacekeepers will diffuse the situation; helping to assure the Iraqi's that we aren't out to subjugate them. Neutral troops won't seem like an occupying force and will be easier to work with.

I think at this point, the U.S. has blown our one chance to gain the trust of the Iraqi's. If we had put another 100k troops into Iraq right after Saddam lost power we would have stopped a lot of death and destruction. The country would have been secure enough to rebuild the infrastructure quickly, thus gaining the trust of most of the Iraqi's. We could have then had a quick turn over of power with elections soon to follow. I think it's too late to do this on our own.

I keep hoping that bush will see the writing on the wall and bring in international peacekeepers someway / somehow. But alas, he seems to want to maintain the status quo and not solve the problem, meanwhile more troops die... more Iraqi civilians die, making the situation much worse.

Keep the Faith...

[LittleClarkie]

12. Bush did eventually start heading toward Kerry's point of view

though he would never admit it, and almost no one pointed it out. I have an article from the spring, I think it was, that pointed out how Kerry had been right about seeking help, and that the Bush admin was quietly trying to do that. But they have little credibility at the UN. So Kerry's strategy won't work for Bush if he can't figure out that diplomacy thingie.

And so we get to watch a giant game of whack-a-mole. As we whack one city of insurgents, several more will pop up as the insurgents beat feet from on city to the next.

Oh, for what might have been...

[bemildred]

7. Well, yes.

But the problem is you should not be there, and nothing is going to fix
it except leaving. FWIW. I don't blame anybody but the political leaders
that initiated this mess for their own self-serving reasons. The proper
role of the US military is to defend America; and that is, unfortunately,
not what this mess in Iraq is about.

My regards to you, and I hope you get home safe.

[Spector]

8. Bemildred,

Thank you for your remarks. Just to set the record straight; I am already home. I was medically retired (100%) not too long ago. It could have been worse, a few of my troops and a number of my friends were killed.

While I appreciate your position that we shouldn't be there and should come home, it just isn't that simple.

If we were to leave without a steady government in place, Iraq would turn into post U.S.S.R. Afghanistan, or worse. We abandoned Afghanistan after the Soviets left, in that sense we set the stage for 9/11. Had we helped them to create a stable government and country back then, I don't think we would be in the mess we are in today.

Regardless of why we invaded Iraq, we cannot abandon it now. To do so would send a message far and wide that we will run when the going gets tough. From my experience in the region, that is a very bad precedent to make in the Middle East. I would agree that we should bring in international peacekeepers (as stated above) and break the cycle of violence so a viable government can be established.

I further agree that we cannot continue on the path we are on. We must do something to bring real peace to the whole region.

Keep the Faith...

[bemildred]

9. We disagree.

While I understand your arguement, it is premised in the notion that
we CAN fix it, and I do not believe that is so, I believe it will only
get worse as long as we remain.

I doubt we can settle that question here, but I would point to the fact
that SE Asia managed to right itself when we were kicked out of VietNam,
despite all the dire warnings about the consequences that we were given
then.

I remember VietNam well, and had many friends and relations and coworkers
that were involved in various ways, any way you could name actually, and
I never blamed any of them for doing what they thought was right at the
time, or what was wrong sometimes, but I blamed Kennedy and Johnson and
Nixon and their minions and still do. And this looks like more of the
same to me.

I'm glad you are home and safe.

[tinkerbellnorth]

13. Cover Story U.S. News and World Reports 11/22/04

Anybody seen this cover? The IRAN Connection: The Baghdad files: A trove of secret intelligence reports spells out in chilling detail how Iraq's dangerous next-door neighbor is aiding the anti-U.S. insurgency there.

It's obvious that "the powers that be" are preparing us for the next step.

[bemildred]

14. I always think it's hilarious when they splash "secret" files

all over the news for the tubeheads.

[newyawker99]

15. Hi tinkerbellnorth!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Vickers]

10. Yup, you never know what you're going to see in combat

All the more reason to use it for situations that require it and not on a whim. George Bush and his administration of fuckups have sure put military folks in quite a situation, eh?

Welcome back, sorry you got injured for that idiot's mistake.