Marines war criminals?

[Martlet]

``They had finished mopping up in Fallujah and they went back to double-check on some insurgents. From what we gathered, somebody playing possum jumped up and shot him,'' said his father, Joel Ailes, who learned of his death Monday evening. ``It's extremely hard.''

MercuryNews


That's what can happen if you don't.  That would make anyone overly cautious.

[TweetyBird]

>>The marine who noticed him moving shot. That's his job.<<

No , thats *not *what happened. The marine who noticed him moving anouced it, and went through a 15 second monologue.  If the guy was a threat, was he giving him warning to detonate something?? I doubt it. He was deciding to kill the guy.
And then he played God, because he could  He didn't notice the guy moving and shot on instinct, he didn't defend his party (why annouce it???). He decided to kill the guy while others didn't.

But I'm sure you thugish people have no qualms about murder. I do. But don't take that as fear of you thugs in here who would defend murder.

[Crumpp]

No , thats *not *what happened. The marine who noticed him moving anouced it, and went through a 15 second monologue.

No he shouted it twice and shot.  No pause, no delay.  

Crumpp

[Martlet]

Originally posted by TweetyBird
>>The marine who noticed him moving shot. That's his job.<<

No , thats *not *what happened. The marine who noticed him moving anouced it, and went through a 15 second monologue.
And then killed the guy. He didn't notice the guy moving and shot on instinct. He decided to kill the guy while others didn't.

But I'm sure you thugish people have no qualms about murder. I do. But don't take that as fear of you thugs in here who would defend murder.

It wasn't a 15 second dialogue.  He noticed, he announced, he acted.

Had the person in the link I posted noticed and acted, he'd be alive today.

[TweetyBird]

As I stated, the thuggish mentality that is common in here, wont be in the trial. Under duress of course, but murder. You all are not under duress and your support of murder speaks volumes.

[DREDIOCK]

First. Thank God the Naysayers have no relevance in what will be the final determination as to if he was justified or not.
Interesting to see how they automatically place themselves on such a  high and mighty pedestal that they feel qualified they can pass condemnation and label this marine a  "war criminal" on this matter when ALL the facts aren't in except what has been reported to date by the media

  Even more interesting is how you never see these same people condemning the many actions of the insurgents for which there is overwhelming evidence and even admission by way of proclamation by the insurgents themselves of their actions.
  Yet when its even remotely suggested that someone on our side allegedly did something wrong. These same exact people are the very first to jump in with their condemnation and claims of war crimes without having all the facts.

Pretty pathetic.

That being said. If after ALL the facts are in it is found the Marine did something wrong he will be punished accordingly.
Which is just a tad bit more then what the insurgents/comatants do when their people conduct war crimes.

 In reflection of all this it is quite obvious to me that the if these naysayers had their heads any farther up their prettythanges they'd be able to perform their own tonsillectomy from the inside out

[Crumpp]

You all are not under duress and your support of murder speaks volumes.

No Tweety.  Some of us understand the realities of the situation and recognize the correct action.  Also we recognize those who would jump to conclusions and fry the poor guy without a fair shake.

Until all the facts come out we are just speculating.  Contrary to what many have posted on this board, it looks like the guy took the correct action.

I wonder how many would have condemned the US if the Headlines read:

"BBC Reporter Killed in Falluja by explosion"

Crumpp

[TweetyBird]

Don't cloud the issue - NO ONE has defended the insurgents.

Thats an outright lie. Deciding to murder someone is a thug thing to do. Its playing God. Its unjustifialble. Was the marine in his right mind? I hope not. If he was, he is a sociopath and would do it again, in war time or not. Was the guy acting as a marine ?HELL NO. He broke.

And thats if everything is like the video depicts. You're right - due process. I speaking as if the video depicts events as they actually were. Sometimes thats not the case, I know, and that will come out in the investigation.

[TweetyBird]

>>No Tweety. Some of us understand the realities of the situation and recognize the correct action. Also we recognize those who would jump to conclusions and fry the poor guy without a fair shake.
<<

Well isn't THAT a contradiction. You  talk about jumping to conclusions but are defending what appears to be a murder. It might not be, but its going to take a lot of extenuating circumstances to not be a murder. Who is jumping to conclusions?

[DREDIOCK]

Originally posted by TweetyBird
Don't cloud the issue - NO ONE has defended the insurgents.

 

Dont see much in the way of outrage or condemnation of them either.

Certainly not to the extent this marine has

[TweetyBird]

This isn't about the insurgents beheading someone. God knows - everyone on this board has expressed disires to have those tortured till they die from pain. Murder is friggin murder no matter what uniform you're wearing or not wearing. I don't for a second believe the marine was acting in his right mind. He shouldn't have even been there. More people than him made a mistake in having him there. But the act appears to be a murder. It has to be accounted for if we are an army and not a band of thugs. I am not for a second claiming the marine is responsible for his actions and, God, I hope he isn't. But it just plain WRONG to defend the act.

[Crumpp]

You talk about jumping to conclusions but are defending what appears to be a murder.

It's not Murder if the terrorist were faking dead and killing soldiers Tweety.  It's self defense and he would have been within the ROE.  

Now that is provided the insurgent moved.  If he even flinched or moved a hair it is a justified shooting acording the Staff Judge Advocate who is investigating the incident.

When you decide to use your wounded as a ruse to attack then don't be surprised when all procautions are taken.  What is sad is that you, Tweety, are proving just how effective this approach is for the terrorist.  The US is damned if they do help the terrorist by loosing soldiers to terrorist commiting war crimes or damned if they don't by world opinion.

If the US fries this guy for erroring on the side of caution then the terrorist will win as well because US casualties will rise as the soldiers become afraid to shoot.

Where is the outrage and indignity over the Terrorist violating non-combatant status?  It's not there, why?  

Difference is the we will police are own.  If he did violate the ROE then he will be punished.  

Tweety why don't you raise your right hand, take the oath, and put yourself in a position to make a difference instead of yipping at the sidelines from a position of safety at those in the arena.

Crumpp

[TweetyBird]

>>When you decide to use your wounded as a ruse to attack then don't be surprised when all procautions are taken. What is sad is that you, Tweety, are proving just how effective this approach is for the terrorist. The US is damned if they do help the terrorist by loosing soldiers to terrorist commiting war crimes or damned if they don't by world opinion.
<<

If the marine thought it was a ruse, he has a very strange way of showing it - announcing it. The worse thing to do when you are about to defend yourself is tell your attacker you're about to shoot. Actually its a ridiculous thing to do.

I think its much more likely that he was not right from being shot in the face a day before. I think he was pissed (and justifiably so).
I think he acted out of passion and not training.

99% of the population might have scewed up in his circumstance. But that doesn't relieve the US of the responsibility of accounting for it. It appears to be a screwup.

With so many fanatics defending murder for the "right" cause - are we going to start doing it too?

[Crumpp]

If the marine thought it was a ruse, he has a very strange way of showing it - announcing it.

And you would use what? Telepathy to warn the other occupants of the room?

The worse thing to do when you are about to defend yourself is tell your attacker you're about to shoot. Actually its a ridiculous thing to do.

BS.  Ask any cop about verbilization. As a soldier I definately verbalize especially in the house where things can get confusing fast.  Again, he warned his buddies and the insurgent that knew the guy was faking.  Only a problem for armchair quarterbacks.

99% of the population might have scewed up in his circumstance. But that doesn't relieve the US of the responsibility of accounting for it.

Funny, I don't see the US relieving itself of responsibility.  We are investigating the incident and will take appropriate action.  We will not take action based on world opinion.

With so many fanatics defending murder for the "right" cause - are we going to start doing it too?

I don't see anybody defending murder.  I do see folks defending due process.

Crumpp

[TweetyBird]

No I wouldn't warn the room, I'd remove the threat if I thought it was a threat that could be quickly removed.

And snipers dont warn anyone before they take them out if they have a deathgrip on someone. They remove the threat. They act in a trained manner.

If you don't see something broke in that video tape, you are choosing not to see. That was not training. That was something else.