This seems SOOO WRONG

[Cthulhu]

Hey Vortex, not about to get into this discussion, but I do have to say one thing. For a second language, your command of English is most impressive. You express yourself far better than many "natives" over here.

[Anaxogoras]

if he did wrong, am i not right in believing he should be recalled, and then tried in a military court? that seems fairest, as then the people judging him will have been in his shoes at one point or another.

I agree.

However, they'll have to acquit for lack of evidence.

[33Vortex]

Thankyou Cthulhu &

[hlbly]

Should military courts have jurisdiction to prosecute after discharge?  Right now they don't.  That's why the Federal Government is using this tactic.

The simple solution and one used before , is to recall him to active duty .

[hlbly]

WAR is nothing but sanctioned murder. Before going to war it is wise to know the limits of these sanctions, to know what you can and can not do. If you can't accept the fact you're going to die you have no business being a soldier, it comes with the job. Some people deal with it better than others and some can't even handle it. Bottom line is all front line soldiers need support in order to maintain their mental healt (assuming they were mentally healthy before combat duty), something I sense is clearly lacking in the US armed forces. Everyone have a breaking point, military training is supposed to find that breaking point to assess the individual's capacity. Something is not adding up when stuff like this happens.

After all, this is the 21st century and not WW2. We do know a great deal more about the human mind, and how combat stress affect us, than we did back then.

We should use the example set by the germans perhaps ?


The simple fact is you hear the few examples of the ones who don't cope .

[1pLUs44]

Screw DumbF@#$istan...

He can be court marshaled or brought to trial by the Iraqi government.

[MORAY37]

According to a Naval Criminal Investigative Service criminal complaint, several Marines allege Nazario shot two Iraqi men who had been detained while his squad searched a house. The complaint claims four Iraqi men were killed during the action.

The complaint states the squad had been taking fire from the house. After the troops entered the building and captured the insurgents, Nazario placed a call on his radio.

"Nazario said that he was asked, 'Are they dead yet?"' the complaint states. When Nazario responded that that the captives were still alive, he was allegedly told by the Marine on the radio to "make it happen."

Are you kidding?  They were captured....ostensibly disarmed ( the report makes no mention they were even armed to start with).... then killed?

Are you bozos really that dumb?  If this was a story about the Waffen SS you'd be calling them godless heathens and want them strung up from the rafters. 

Anyone who cannot see this as a clear cut crime is seriously in need of psych eval.  I do believe that it is not a civilian matter, that the DoD needs to address this.  But to stand there and condone the killing of anyone after they've been captured....... it goes against everything that is American, what makes us great.  Jurisprudence.  Writ of Law.  Anyone who doesn't realize this.... I feel incredibly sorry for you.

[33Vortex]

We should use the example set by the germans perhaps ?


The simple fact is you hear the few examples of the ones who don't cope .

What do the germans have to do with this?

Everyone hear about it, that's the problem. If you have personnel who can't cope with the conditions, you either have the wrong people deployed or don't take care of them well enough.

[hlbly]

Are you kidding?  They were captured....ostensibly disarmed ( the report makes no mention they were even armed to start with).... then killed?

Are you bozos really that dumb?  If this was a story about the Waffen SS you'd be calling them godless heathens and want them strung up from the rafters. 

Anyone who cannot see this as a clear cut crime is seriously in need of psych eval.  I do believe that it is not a civilian matter, that the DoD needs to address this.  But to stand there and condone the killing of anyone after they've been captured....... it goes against everything that is American, what makes us great.  Jurisprudence.  Writ of Law.  Anyone who doesn't realize this.... I feel incredibly sorry for you.

I agree and if these are the facts he needs to be burned . Also who ever issued that order does as well .

[hlbly]

What do the germans have to do with this?

Everyone hear about it, that's the problem. If you have personnel who can't cope with the conditions, you either have the wrong people deployed or don't take care of them well enough.

Sorry bud but there is no psychological test to determine if you will be able to hack it in combat. The only test is to find out in combat . This doesn't sound like a psych. breakdown anyways . The best judges are actual vets . How ever they make mistakes too . Ever hear of a guy named audie murphy ? Any kind of test will be no better than a WAG .

[CAP1]

Are you kidding?  They were captured....ostensibly disarmed ( the report makes no mention they were even armed to start with).... then killed?

Are you bozos really that dumb?  If this was a story about the Waffen SS you'd be calling them godless heathens and want them strung up from the rafters. 

Anyone who cannot see this as a clear cut crime is seriously in need of psych eval.  I do believe that it is not a civilian matter, that the DoD needs to address this.  But to stand there and condone the killing of anyone after they've been captured....... it goes against everything that is American, what makes us great.  Jurisprudence.  Writ of Law.  Anyone who doesn't realize this.... I feel incredibly sorry for you.

first off..most of us never said it wasn't a crime.

second off, only his peers have a right to judge him. military. so they could/should recall him, then let him get a fair trial.

third off....none of us were there, so there is no way to know that they were really disarmed, and no longer a threat. only he and his squad know that. 

fourth.....although i've never been in combat(and a BIG to those of you that have been) i do believe in never turn your back on your enemy....no matter what.

 something caused him to feel the need to do that, whether it was an order from higher up(not a good excuse) one of them moved too fast(with all of the soldiers still wound up from the action), or he just snapped.


 like i've said, i've never seen combat, so there is NO WAY that i can judge this man. same for i think at least 80% of the rest on these boards.

 just let the military handle it. it's their jurisdiction, not the govt's, not kalifornia's, not yours, not mine.........

[CAP1]

I agree and if these are the facts he needs to be burned . Also who ever issued that order does as well .

yes, very true..no one is mentioning that though.......

i wonder if somehow their communications are recorded?

[33Vortex]

This doesn't sound like a psych. breakdown anyways.

Then you have the wrong people deployed. If there was a crime involved without a mental breakdown he's got no excuse, the wrong man in the wrong place.

Psych evaluations in combination with military training can come very close in determining mental stability in combat conditions. As every situation is unique, no method is 100% accurate.

In all probability he was not acting alone, which makes it likely he was acting with consent of others or together with others. A incident like that should not happen with professionally trained soldiers, they should know what they are doing, what they are allowed and not allowed to do, and the consequenses of their actions. If they don't, or if they knowingly break rules and/or orders, they are not professional soldiers but criminals.

[hlbly]

Then you have the wrong people deployed. If there was a crime involved without a mental breakdown he's got no excuse, the wrong man in the wrong place.

Psych evaluations in combination with military training can come very close in determining mental stability in combat conditions. As every situation is unique, no method is 100% accurate.

In all probability he was not acting alone, which makes it likely he was acting with consent of others or together with others. A incident like that should not happen with professionally trained soldiers, they should know what they are doing, what they are allowed and not allowed to do, and the consequenses of their actions. If they don't, or if they knowingly break rules and/or orders, they are not professional soldiers but criminals.

You want a crystal ball . There is no way to tell who will commit a crime like this . Period . If there was there would be no crime ever . Just whistle up the psyche eval. and bust em before the commit it in any place in life . As for psyche eval + training coming close , pipe dream dude . You know not of what you speak .

[Tom5572]

"Nazario, of Riverside, is charged with one count of voluntary manslaughter on suspicion of killing or causing others to kill four unarmed detainees in November 2004 in Fallujah, during some of the fiercest fighting of the war. He also faces one count of assault with a deadly weapon and one count of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence."

I find this paragraph very disturbing to me.  The fact that the Californian Government wants to try a Marine, who was in combat, for assault with a deadly weapon (one the United States Government provided along with ammo), and discharging a firearm during a crime of violence seems insane to me.  If anyone has found a combat zone that is not violent, please let me know, I will gladly go there for my next deployment.  I do not know what to say here, wow.  I do not think we thought we would get charged by our state governments for doing the job the federal government told us to do.  This is a SAD day in the history of our great nation.