Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Dos Equis on June 21, 2006, 04:35:18 PM
-
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060621/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/marines_iraq_shooting
I'm sure my detractors will be lining up. But before you think I don't have any skin in this game, I have two nephews in the 101st. Both in Iraq.
This is a railroad job. Plain and simple. Court martials and murder charges? For killing Iraqis that stood by knowing full well where an IED was, and doing nothing as they went past it. Maybe even helping signal the guy doing the detonation.
I'm sorry, but the only atrocity here is the USMC brass not protecting these guys. A few years ago an Israeli soldier drilled a little PLO kid about to throw a molotov cocktail at his unit. All he got was a re-assignment.
For the record, if I was there I would have done the exact same thing. No hesitation whatsoever. What did Bush say, that we would stand down when they stand up? Alright Iraqis, start standing up to the insurgency.
And the other thing that burns me, is that if this were another allied country besides the US that did this - they'd get a pass.
-
Not flaming you, just observing that the link you posted does not support your post. No indication about standing by, or an IED in this particular article. Did you link to the wrong story?
-
No, sorry. The charges are related to what happened in Haditha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings
I should have also included this link.
-
Thanks for the second link.
I can't agree with your premise at this time. I have to say that an investigation needed to have been done and if the team violated the ROE and more importantly rules of war they should be held accountable. If there is any credence to the allegations then there was a serious breach of law. I did say IF.
I think a trial, even a court martial with it's limitation on coverage, is essential to get the info out. It will also likely be the only way anyone outside of the US would accept the veracity of the information released. Anything else would be seen as a cover up.
Until the evidence is presented I'm not going to hold any judgement on it. Let the system do it's work. If they screwed the pooch they will be held accountable, if not they should be released of responsibility.
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
I'm sorry, but the only atrocity here is the USMC brass not protecting these guys.
Can I get an Amen?
-
Hmm, I think I predicted this one rather well, if I do say so myself. I'd rather have been wrong.
Btw, just as a caution, I wouldnt use Wiki's as backup for your posts. While most of the time they are very accurate, its too easy for people to slip their own biased opinions into them and sometimes they have been known to "stretch" the truth a bit (and even more than a bit) to try to make their point. Just sayin.
-
Just a nitpick, but the charges are against individual Marines, not the Marine Corp.
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
Court martials and murder charges? For killing Iraqis that stood by knowing full well where an IED was, and doing nothing as they went past it. Maybe even helping signal the guy doing the detonation.
The Marines are getting a freaking trial, which is a hell of alot more than the people that they tried, convicted and executed. Dispicable.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
The Marines are getting a freaking trial, which is a hell of alot more than the people that they tried, convicted and executed. Dispicable.
Sounds like you already convicted them. Dispicable.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Sounds like you already convicted them. Dispicable.
Touche.
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
[url]This is a railroad job. Plain and simple. Court martials and murder charges? For killing Iraqis that stood by knowing full well where an IED was, and doing nothing as they went past it. Maybe even helping signal the guy doing the detonation.
Same could be sent of French civilians in WW2. If they did anything to warn the germans the Resistance would make sure to make an example of them.
Civi's are neutral, if they signal someone and are observed doing it fair enough, but you can't blame em for just standing by when if they act they are guaranteed a painful death.
-
Originally posted by Vulcan
Same could be sent of French civilians in WW2. If they did anything to warn the germans the Resistance would make sure to make an example of them.
Civi's are neutral, if they signal someone and are observed doing it fair enough, but you can't blame em for just standing by when if they act they are guaranteed a painful death.
well if their inaction helped cause the death of one american, then good riddence to the lot of them
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
[url]
I'm sorry, but the only atrocity here is the USMC brass not protecting these guys.
They'll get their day in court. If they've done nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
They'll get their day in court. If they've done nothing wrong, they have nothing to fear.
Sure. No one has ever been wrongfully convicted in a dog and pony show put on for the benefit of certain observers.
-
So the alternative is to let them walk?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
So the alternative is to let them walk?
I don't recall saying that. I do recall you saying they'll have their day in court, as if that were some sort of guarantee they'll get a fair trial, as opposed to a dog and pony show with a pre-determined outcome. All I'm saying is that there is no guarantee.
-
Virgil,
There is only one guarantee in life. That doesn't mean everything else is a sham.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
I don't recall saying that. I do recall you saying they'll have their day in court, as if that were some sort of guarantee they'll get a fair trial, as opposed to a dog and pony show with a pre-determined outcome. All I'm saying is that there is no guarantee.
There is a guarantee. The 5th and 6th Amendments to the Constitution of the United States.
-
Never said they WOULDN'T get a fair trial, they probably will. I just said it wasn't a sure thing. Don't read too much into it. As you are doing now.
-
I'm sorry, but I must have missed the optimism of this statment, "Sure. No one has ever been wrongfully convicted in a dog and pony show put on for the benefit of certain observers."
-
Look, let me make this very simple. It means there is the off chance that this could be a dog and pony show. It does not mean that it is a dog and pony show, only that the possibility exists. I'm a cynic for the most part, don't expect optimism. I expect it will be a fair trial, but to find out it is a witch hunt would not surprise me either. If they're guilty, then they should pay the fiddler, they called the tune.
-
Alrighty then.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
If they're guilty, then they should pay the fiddler, they called the tune.
Can't argue with that at all but I have to ask...guilty of what?
Guilty of summary execution of completely innocent non-combatants.
OR...
Guilty of eliminating a group of terrorits sympathizers who helped cause the death of their squadmate.
OR...
Guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and guilty of being chosen to take a fall in order to keep some officer/politician's arse outta the fire.
-
Originally posted by Pooh21
well if their inaction helped cause the death of one american, then good riddence to the lot of them
...with the 'Horst Wessel Lied' as background music...
-
Hearts and Minds
WTG
-
I will wait to see how it plays out.
If I were in charge and It was said that one of my men shot an unarmed prisoner who was not a threat then I would investigate. I would hope with all my heart that the charges were false and help in any way that I could.
If any American soldiers who were POW's were shot for no reason I would want justice.
lazs
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/22_1150986217_slogan.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
The Marines are getting a freaking trial, which is a hell of alot more than the people that they tried, convicted and executed. Dispicable.
Where's the outrage towards those planting the roadside bombs? How about a little indignation directed toward those who brutally tortured and murdered two American soldiers? How about we wait and get the facts before judging those marines?
-
Originally posted by lukster
Where's the outrage towards those planting the roadside bombs? How about a little indignation directed toward those who brutally tortured and murdered two American soldiers? How about we wait and get the facts before judging those marines?
A little indignation? I don't think that there is a single person these boards that does not completely loathe these terrorists and their acts. The thing is that any misconduct by coalition forces will cause a public outcry because we expect them to be above it, from terrorists otoh it is expected that they perpetrate these atrocities.
It may be unfair but it is what separates terrorists from others...
-
Originally posted by Thud
A little indignation? I don't think that there is a single person these boards that does not completely loathe these terrorists and their acts. The thing is that any misconduct by coalition forces will cause a public outcry because we expect them to be above it, from terrorists otoh it is expected that they perpetrate these atrocities.
It may be unfair but it is what separates terrorists from others...
I'd like to think what you say is true. That some take every opportunity to jump on any seeming misstep made by the US leads me to believe otherwise.
-
Originally posted by Dos Equis
No, sorry. The charges are related to what happened in Haditha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings
I should have also included this link.
These are known as the "camp pendleton 8" and it is NOT related to haditha.
These 8 have been kept in solitary confinement for the past couple of months WITHOUT being charged at all. The only reason they are probably being charged now is the fact that a bunch of news outlets ran the story on how these men where confined so severly without being charged with any crime. I hope they get a fair trial.
-
Originally posted by Edbert1
Can I get an Amen?
ick. no. do right. phooey on protection.
hap
-
Originally posted by lukster
Where's the outrage towards those planting the roadside bombs? How about a little indignation directed toward those who brutally tortured and murdered two American soldiers?
Gosh darn, but for some reason I expect a higher standard of behaviour from a US Marine than I do with a terrorist. But feel free to continue to equate the two.
-
Originally posted by lukster
I'd like to think what you say is true. That some take every opportunity to jump on any seeming misstep made by the US leads me to believe otherwise.
Hmm. Perhaps your right after all, there may be some individuals who see screw-ups as a justification of their disapproval of the war.
I think that such actions (as despicable as they are if true) have nothing to do with the original righteousness (or lack thereof) of the initial decision to go to war...
If frequent they can and will destroy the credibility of it, though...
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Gosh darn, but for some reason I expect a higher standard of behaviour from a US Marine than I do with a terrorist. But feel free to continue to equate the two.
:aok
hap
-
Originally posted by Edbert1
Can't argue with that at all but I have to ask...guilty of what?
Guilty of summary execution of completely innocent non-combatants.
OR...
Guilty of eliminating a group of terrorits sympathizers who helped cause the death of their squadmate.
OR...
Guilty of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and guilty of being chosen to take a fall in order to keep some officer/politician's arse outta the fire.
I'm not going to go through this point by point, I'm just using your post as it has some nice points regarding feelings some, or many, on the board are posting.
The violations, if there are ones would be this. Violating the rules of war. There are set guidelines for the treatment of non combatants, sympathizers, insurgents and active combatants. Once located and detained there are strict guidelines that have to be followed. Failure to do so violates international agreements and the UCMJ as those who do not follow procedures will have violated standing orders.
This also comes under the "following illegal orders" bit that many have posted. If an Officer or NCO orders the summary execution, not only is the act illegal under the UCMJ (murder) the following of an illegal order is also illegal as they are obligated to disobey said order.
In this case so far, the troops are alleged to have entered a building without due cause (breaking and entering), removed an occupant without reasonable suspician or probable cause (kidnapping), killed said individual (murder), attempted as a group to cover up the act (conspiracy related to murder and false statements writen and oral), steal a shovel and an AK47 (theft), and attempted to use said items to mislead an investigation (interferrance in an official investigation tampering with evidence and planting false evidence also related to the cover up if any).
All of these acts would be in violation of the UCMJ and certainly punishable under it. The preceding list is also not complete as I am not privy to all the evidence and information.
The natural desire to believe that these troops did not do these things is understandable. The "big picture" is that we as a nation expect and demand more that this performance from those under arms in service to this nation. To do less, places us on the exact same level as the barbarians that behead captives in front of a camera.
Those troops DID recieve training on the conduct of war and the treatment of non combatants, treatment of non uniformed combatants active at the time and otherwise as well as the ROE (rules of engagement) for the area. At times it is an almost impossible task but it is a part of the job they accepted, swore an oath to do and were trained in. We can sympathize for the conditions and mental strain but we cannot excuse acts like this IF those act happened as alleged.
The investigation is still ongoing and the evidence will be brought forth in court as it stands now. This is proper and we owe it to those troops who DO perform as expected that we hold those who fail, particularly fail intentionally, responsible for their actions.
It is not a case of not supporting the alleged perpetrators, it is a case of supporting the troops who perform as trained and in an exemplorary manner. If these troops did indeed commit these acts, they let down every other troop who performed properly or who will soon be in harms way. Every act like this only reinforces the will and dedication of the enemy. We HAVE to be better or we have no justification to impose our will on any part of the planet.
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
Gosh darn, but for some reason I expect a higher standard of behaviour from a US Marine than I do with a terrorist. But feel free to continue to equate the two.
You automatically assumed those marines weren't killing terrorists but rather civilians whose defense you jumped to in a hurry. If these people were aiding or otherwise in cahoots with the terrorists that you just denounced doesn't that make them terrorists worthy of extermination? Why is everyone so quick to judge a situation they know so little about?
These marines and soldiers are not police. They are trained to fight and kill. If someone shot at them from a house I would expect them to return overwhelming fire without regard to who might be in it. If we try to use these forces as police, civilians will be killed, some might even be innocent. The sooner we can get Iraqi's to take control of their country the better. I suspect we'll agree on that.
-
Seems there are just as many that conclude before hearing any evidence that there is no justification for charges, than there are those who are assuming their guilt.
I will say that in a conflict that has lasted 3 years now, with the # of troops involved, especially a counter-insurgency, that the likelyhood of *some* soldiers coming before military courts is almost a guarantee. Misconduct does occur, lets not be so naive as to think it does not.
That being said, they have been convicted of nothing, are presumed innocent, and the prosecutors will have to come to court with some hard evidence to get a conviction.
The US and its Allies expect a high standard from its soldiers, which is what all this is about, we don't just kill anybody we don't like the look of and call it a day. If we lose sight of that then we are in trouble.
I say that with no opinion of wether either of the incidents currently being discussed in the media will bring convictions, I guess we will see how the process plays out. It could very well be they will be cleared of any wrong doing.
"And the other thing that burns me, is that if this were another allied country besides the US that did this - they'd get a pass."
I have to ask what possible proof you have for that statement?
-
why does one side have to fight by "rules of war" but the other side does not? maybe the mighty UN should investigate, send in hans blick. lol
-
Originally posted by lukster
These marines and soldiers are not police. They are trained to fight and kill. If someone shot at them from a house I would expect them to return overwhelming fire without regard to who might be in it. If we try to use these forces as police, civilians will be killed, some might even be innocent. The sooner we can get Iraqi's to take control of their country the better. I suspect we'll agree on that. [/B]
I'm definately no expert on the matter but one would expect that Marines as well as other military are trained intensively in peace-keeping/policing missions since so many deployments are entirely or mostly of this nature...
The last sentence is as true as it an be though. This will lend so much credibility to the war on terror since it becomes somewhat more obvious that the coalition forces are not out on some imperialist mission of conquest, a prevailing thought among many people throughout the world.