[Cody Dawg]

Then don't defend THEM the way that you do, Glenn. Maybe I'm interpreting this the wrong way, but you seem like you go out of your way to spout that "innocent until proven guilty" nonsense over and over as regards those soldiers in Iraq who have committed moral and legal crimes. Frankly, a lot of us are sick of hearing how "great" the military is - while at the same time reading THOUSANDS of posts and blogs where THOUSANDS of soldiers post pictures of dead Iraqis that they ridicule and laugh about. Disgusting.

Listen, I have a history of military in my family also. I'm proud of them.

If YOU want to ASSUME that I was including YOU then that's your bag of nonsense. I was talking specifically about those losers in Iraq who commit crimes.

[Cody Dawg]

Oh, here it is to remind you of how noble SOME of our "soldiers" are:

U.S. Soldiers Trade Pictures of Dead Iraqis for Porn.

The Pentagon, in its inimitable fashion, has issued a memorandum warning that soldiers compromise “opsec,” or operational security, when they post photos from Iraq on the Web. The memo didn’t say anything, however, about photos showing bits and pieces of dead human beings—or the propriety of trading them for the chance to see naked pictures of somebody else’s former girlfriend.

Doesn't seem to me that the U.S. government is REALLY going after these people, now does it? Who is going to crawl out of the woodwork here to defend this nonsense and tell me that I am slandering them because I call something what it is? I repeat, it's disgusting and the Pentagon - whatever that is - doesn't give a damn.

The site is still up, the soldiers are still posting their disgusting pictures, and here you are, Glenn, telling me that I offended you because you assumed that I was including you?

Why don't you get on the horn and call your superior officers and tell THEM how vile and disgusting and how offended you are by the way your fellow soldiers/military is/are behaving?



DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.

I have. Anyone else?

I'm a conservative but I won't stand by and turn a blind eye towards things that are just WRONG. It's wrong to treat people this way, no matter how, when, where, or why.

[Cody Dawg]

Tel me why these pictures of dead Iraqi children are here?

Why are there so many dead Iraqi children anyway? Why so many old men and women shot? Why so many people shot in their beds as they slept?

THAT is who I am most offended for: The dead children and those who were defenseless. No one will ever convince me that the military is not behind some of these deaths and that some of these deaths are blood on our country's hands. That is offensive to ME as a U.S. citizen.

Like the little girl who pretended to be dead when the U.S. marines or soldiers or whomever they were blasted into that Iraqi household and killed 24 members of a family - she was the only one to survive and only survived because she pretended to be dead.

Horrible.

[Kevin]

I'd love to have say, a percentages of good and civil things the Armed Forces has done since we have been there compared to the bad things.

It seems some people are taking that VERY SMALL percentage of bad happenings, which is GONNA HAPPEN (humans suck sometimes) and exaggerating it to look like the norm.

You'd be surprised what some of you would do under similar circumstances.

Hey, you don't know me!
You don't know me
But you just keep on looking at me down low.
Oh no!
Digging something up...
Digging something up...
Always digging something up...
Oh no!
Hey you! I don't know you.
I don't even want to,
But you just keep looking at me down low.
Oh no!
Digging something up...
Digging something up...
Always digging something up...
Oh no!
And you make it so...
Make it so obvious...
Hey you! Fools don't fit in
The boots that I tread in,
But you just keep on looking at me down low.
Oh no!
Digging something up...
Digging something up...
Always digging something up...
Oh no!
And you make it so...
But do you get it?
Make it so...
You never get it.
You got to owe me something
Before you know what is joke and what is up.
I worked my fingers to the bone
And I won't let you stop me going up.
Why do you have to make it
So-so-so-so-so obvious
Oh no... Oh no... Oh no... Oh no...

[Cody Dawg]

Glenn/GHPorter:

I have to go for the day, but I wanted to say THANK YOU to you and to all of the courageous and brave and ethical men and women who have given themselves in service to our country. You are the people that makes America what it is today and we are all proud of you.

I do not, for one minute, think you are of the same cloth as those monsters who have lost their ways and are bloodthirsty and evil.

So, for your service to our country I, and others I know, give our thanks.

I just think it is terrible that a few of the many who are evil and corrupt are casting dispersion on fellow military men and women and on the citizens of this country. I am enraged by their actions.

to you, GHPorter.

[ghporter]

Those soldiers that post pictures are divided into two groups: those who are sick and those who are using it as a defense against what they must do to survive. The sick ones are a minority-a very small one. The Army is working very hard on getting enough shrinks to counsel all the troops that are in combat, but they're way behind, and the VA is even farther behind.

Defense mechanism (dehumanizing your enemy) of just plain ghoulishness, it's not good and there are a number of rules against it. Every time the Army finds such a site, they try to block it throughout their network, but they can't control private connections to the Internet.

And please don't think I'm defending anyone involved in abusing anyone else. I am NOT. I do believe in the system though, and I urge everyone to be patient as it works its slow, almost glacial way through its processes.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by ghporter

Those soldiers that post pictures are divided into two groups:

The law puts them in one single group: war criminals. If the Army was serious about stopping this, they'd start putting people in jail. These soldiers are supposed to be professionals. This is their job. Lots of people have tough jobs. I don't see websites for paramedics contributing photos of accident victims - and there are many millions more paramedics than US soldiers. There's no excuse for this behaviour. It wouldn't be happening if the Army was serious about stopping it.

The problem is related to the macho boy's network attitude that the US Army (and perhaps others too) has ingrained into all aspects of the way it operates. That attitude creates an environment within which it's cool to brag about killing but most importantly an environment within which no one speaks up about the despicable things that happen and everyone tries to cover up to protect their brothers in arms. Movies praise this comaradery, platoon mottos praise it - it's supposed to be part of what make soldiers great.

Until Time Magazine put pressure on the Army, the official story about Haditha was that 15 civilians had died in the IED blast! Not one of the soldiers that were there contradicted that story. After the photos came out showing the civilians had been shot, only then were they forced to admit that in fact NONE of the civilians were killed in the blast. You expect us to presume innocence in this case? I'm all for due process but logic tells me people who haven't done anything wrong don't lie like that.

[Cody Dawg]

There is more evidence just being released this morning via photos shown exclusively to CNN:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Pentagon sources say some of the most incriminating evidence against Marines under investigation in the deaths of civilians at Haditha is a set of photographs taken by another group of Marines who came along afterward and helped clean up the scene.

CNN is the first news organization to examine those images. They were snapped before an aspiring Iraq journalist videotaped the aftermath of the November 19 deaths. That video convinced Time magazine to pursue the story earlier this year.

Pentagon sources say the 30 images of men, women and children are some of the strongest evidence that, in some cases, the victims were shot inside their homes and at close range -- not killed by shrapnel from a roadside bomb or by stray bullets from a distant firefight, as Marines had claimed. (Watch what the new images show about the civilian deaths -- 2:51)

Senior Pentagon officials have said a probe into the November deaths tends to support allegations that Marines carried out an unprovoked massacre after one of their comrades was killed by a roadside bomb. The military is investigating both the deaths and a possible cover-up.

The Marines originally reported that Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas and 15 Iraqi civilians were killed by a roadside bomb in Haditha, a town on the Euphrates River in northwestern Iraq that was the scene of heavy fighting in 2005. They later added that eight insurgents were killed in an ensuing gun battle.

The Marine photographs are evidence in a criminal probe, and only investigators and a few very senior officials have access to them.

"I have seen the photographs, but they are part of the investigation and I'm not going to talk about those photographs," Marine commandant Gen. Michael Hagee told reporters Wednesday.

But a source allowed CNN to examine copies of the photographs, which a military official said match in both number and description the pictures in the possession of investigators.

The source would not allow CNN to have copies of the images out of concern over personal repercussions.

There are images of 24 bodies, each marked with red numbers. Some of numbers are written on foreheads, others on the victim's backs. A senior military official told CNN that in some cases the numbers may denote the location of bullet wounds.

Among the images:

-A woman and child leaning against the wall, heads slumped forward.

-Another woman and child shot in bed.

-A man sprawled face down with his legs behind him.

-An elderly woman slumped over, her neck possibly snapped by the force of gunfire.

-All of the victims were wearing casual attire. Some had been shot in the head. Some were face down, others face up.

The pictures appear to show the locations of the bodies in the houses before a Marine unit loaded them into a truck and brought them to a morgue.

Pentagon officials said there are no plans to release the gruesome images, even after the criminal investigation is complete.

The Haditha photos, like the images of detainee abuse at Abu Ghraib prison, would incite anti-American fervor and therefore constitute a threat to national security, they said.

In a separate incident, seven Marines and a Navy medical corpsman are being held in a brig at Camp Pendleton, California, to face possible murder charges in connection with the April killing of an Iraqi man in Hamandiya, a military officer with direct knowledge of the investigation said.

Briefing reporters Wednesday, Hagee was tight-lipped about the investigations but said Marines "absolutely know right from wrong."

Hagee flew to Iraq two weeks ago on a trip the Marine Corps said was already scheduled. But he used the time to lecture his Marines on what he called "the American way of war" amid the two probes.

Hagee said he is "gravely concerned" by the allegations and promised that the investigations now under way will be thorough and complete.

The U.S. command in Baghdad ordered an investigation into the Haditha killings in February, after Time magazine reporters presented video of the scene to American commanders.

Link

[Taliesin]

What these marines have done is actually mild compared to what France did while colonising Algeria: For every single killed french soldier or french civilian colonist during the independence war, they killed hundreds of algerian civilians as a direct retaliation, and it was official policy back then.

To increase international and domestic French attention to their struggle, the FLN decided to bring the conflict to the cities and to call a nationwide general strike. The most notable manifestation of the new urban campaign was the Battle of Algiers, which began on September 30, 1956, when three women placed bombs at three sites including the downtown office of Air France. The ALN carried out an average of 800 shootings and bombings per month through the spring of 1957, resulting in many civilian casualties and inviting a crushing response from the authorities. The 1957 general strike, timed to coincide with the UN debate on Algeria, was imposed on Muslim workers and businesses. General Jacques Massu, who was instructed to use whatever methods were necessary to restore order in the city, frequently fought terrorism with acts of terrorism. Using paratroopers, he broke the strike and systematically destroyed the FLN infrastructure there. But the FLN had succeeded in showing its ability to strike at the heart of French Algeria and in rallying a mass response to its appeals among urban Muslims. Massu's troops punished villages that were suspected of harboring rebels by attacking them by mobile troops or aerial bombardment (reminiscent of Nazi tactics against French Resistance) and gathered 2 million of rural population to concentration camps. Moreover, the publicity given the brutal methods used by the army to win the Battle of Algiers, including the widespread use of torture, cast doubt in France about its role in Algeria. Pacification had turned into a colonial war.

Despite complaints from the military command in Algiers, the French government was reluctant for many months to admit that the Algerian situation was out of control and that what was viewed officially as a pacification operation had developed into a major colonial war. By 1956 France had committed more than 400,000 troops to Algeria. Although the elite airborne units and the Foreign Legion received particular notoriety, approximately 170,000 of the regular French army troops in Algeria were Muslim Algerians, most of them volunteers. France also sent air force and naval units to the Algerian theater.

The French army resumed an important role in local Algerian administration through the Special Administration Section (Section Administrative Spécialisée, SAS), created in 1955. The SAS's mission was to establish contact with the Muslim population and weaken nationalist influence in the rural areas by asserting the "French presence" there. SAS officers — called képis bleus (blue caps) — also recruited and trained bands of loyal Muslim irregulars, known as harkis. Armed with shotguns and using guerrilla tactics similar to those of the ALN, the harkis, who eventually numbered about 150,000 volunteers, were an ideal instrument of counterinsurgency warfare.

Late in 1957, General Raoul Salan, commanding the French army in Algeria, instituted a system of quadrillage, dividing the country into sectors, each permanently garrisoned by troops responsible for suppressing rebel operations in their assigned territory. Salan's methods sharply reduced the instances of FLN terrorism but tied down a large number of troops in static defense. Salan also constructed a heavily patrolled system of barriers to limit infiltration from Tunisia and Morocco. The best known of these was the Morice Line (named for the French defense minister, André Morice), which consisted of an electrified fence, barbed wire, and mines over a 320-kilometer stretch of the Tunisian border.

The French military command ruthlessly applied the principle of collective responsibility to villages suspected of sheltering, supplying, or in any way cooperating with the guerrillas. Villages that could not be reached by mobile units were subject to aerial bombardment. The French also initiated a program of concentrating large segments of the rural population, including whole villages, in camps under military supervision to prevent them from aiding the rebels — or, according to the official explanation, to protect them from FLN extortion. In the three years (1957–60) during which the regroupement program was followed, more than 2 million Algerians were removed from their villages, mostly in the mountainous areas, and resettled in the plains, where many found it impossible to reestablish their accustomed economic or social situations. Living conditions in the camps were poor. Hundreds of empty villages were devastated, and in hundreds of others orchards and croplands were destroyed. These population transfers apparently had little strategic effect on the outcome of the war, but the disruptive social and economic effects of this massive program continued to be felt a generation later.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algeria...f_Independence

Not related, but interesting, France conducted 17 nuclear tests, 4 atmospheric and 13 underground, in Algeria.

Taliesin

[Sky Captain]

Insurgents caught trying to stage massacre.

Just as I figured.
I'll lay odds ALL were staged.
And the "press" and "news media" will run with it.

Terrorist's greatest weapon:
The gullible news and gullible public that watches it.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Just as I figured.
I'll lay odds ALL were staged.
And the "press" and "news media" will run with it.

The Marines first said that all of the civilians had been killed on the side of the road by the IED. Then they said that 7 of them had been shot. Finally, after Time pushed the issue, they admitted that none of the civilians had been killed by the IED.

Tell me why you think the soldiers change their story because I don't get it.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Troll

The Marines first said that all of the civilians had been killed on the side of the road by the IED. Then they said that 7 of them had been shot. Finally, after Time pushed the issue, they admitted that none of the civilians had been killed by the IED.

Tell me why you think the soldiers change their story because I don't get it.

You might do better if you unpacked your ambiguous word "they" to make it reflect the real world a bit more. The handful of Marines (not soldiers, soldiers are Army) who are at the center of this Navy (the Navy is the parent of the U.S. Marine Corps) investigation are a small unit at the bottom of a very long chain of command. Marine Corps platoons are the operational unit that goes around the streets carrying out missions. They do so spread out, and under local command. Their commander, and the only officer likely to have been on the scene to see what happened, is a second or first lieutenant. Most second lieutenants are aged about 22. First Lieutenants are a little older, but most platoons are commanded by 2LTs.

Every other commander above the second lieutentant is unlikely to have any first hand knowledge of what happened. In fact, it may not even be the case that the 2LT would have been in the direct area. Platoons are broken down into squads that oftern work separately. Each squad is commanded by a sergeant, or a corporal. That could quite easily be the highest ranking person who was on the scene at the time. That is the reality that is likely the case. So that is whose official report the rest of the Marine Corps receives.

You seem to believe that the entire U.S. Marine Corps operates like a robot, where every tiny decision is made by higher commanders and that higher commanders know exactly what is going on at every second. That is a typical attitude of someone who has never worn a uniform in a modern western armed force. In fact, modern western armed forces are very decentralized. They have to be. That is part of what makes them so effective. It gives individual units the ability to use initiative.

Higher commanders rely on reports sent up through the chain of command. That is the other "they" that you use so casually. The problem is that the one "they" (the Marines in the platoon or squad on the ground) and the other "they" (the higher chain of command) are not the same people, and are not similarly placed to find out what may or may not have happened. So what you find so mysterious -- that the higher chain of command might not be in a position to know what the Marines on the ground saw or did -- is in fact just the reality of how the organization operates.

What is happening now is that the chain of command is investigating allegations that the Marines on the ground did something, and that they also covered up what they did by submitting false reports. Both the alleged war crimes, and the alleged cover up are very serious allegations, and if proven, very serious crimes. But an allegation is not proof that anything untoward in fact happened. Your conviction is based on nothing more than supposition and bias. It may in the end also turn out to be correct. But that is not for you to say at this point of time. It is for the investigation by the chain of command to determine, and if there is grounds, it is for the military justice system to determine. That investigation should not be rushed just to fit a news cycle, and guilt should not be presumed. Nor should people's glee at the chance to smear all those who serve with honor be used to paint a careful and appropriate investigation as some kind of cover up.

The military justice system has over two hundred years of experience, and since at least the Lieber Code, the US Military has been at the forefront of investigating and where necessary, punishing their own for violations of the laws of war. If the allegations are true, then an Article 32 hearing will be convened to indict the suspects so they can face trial by a courts martial. That is where justice is done, not in the media.

[Jawbone54]

Simey, I love you.

[Cody Dawg]

Simey, I love your posts.

Now, would you please point out the instances that Marines (or any other military men and women) received the DEATH penalty for having killed innocent people?

???

Yes, they may be locked up, but I never hear about them being given the death penalty the way, say, someone here in Florida would been.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally Posted by Cody Dawg

Simey, I love your posts.

Now, would you please point out the instances that Marines (or any other military men and women) received the DEATH penalty for having killed innocent people?

???

Yes, they may be locked up, but I never hear about them being given the death penalty the way, say, someone here in Florida would been.

I don't have the resources to look up the cases. When I was a law student I had free access to Westlaw. I can't use my firm account to satisfy your question.

Off the top of my head I will say that the military has the death penalty for murder and it can apply in these kinds of cases. I don't know when the last time was when it was used or for what crime. I do know that the federal government in general uses the death penalty much less frequently than do certain individual states (including my state of Virginia). AFAIR, the last person executed by the federal government was Timothy McVeigh and he was the first in many years (maybe since the Supreme Court reversed itself and allowed the death penalty again, but I am not sure).

How about we let the courts handle this one? Hmm? The media is handling this with all the intellectual sophistication of Katie Couric. That is not how you operate a criminal justice system.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Wait until they shoot at you?

I didn't say that.

Originally Posted by Doofy

You're aware that something called "guerilla warfare" has existed for a while now, no?

Which by its very nature doesn't allow for procedure, and therefore, is not applicable to this discussion.

Originally Posted by Doofy

Show me the evidence that this was done by US soldiers. And no, that video of the aftermath doesn't show who did it.

I'm giving a clear-cut example of what people shouldn't do. As for the group of civilians that were killed, apparently the soldiers followed procedure and the result was unfortunate. They followed their guidelines, determined a threat, and elminiated it. It's unfortunate that these things happen. Even I was prejudgemental, but only that if they were guilty, their punishment would be next to nothing compared to a civilian.

Originally Posted by Kevin

So? They are mistaken. We need to re-educate.

Good luck re-educating Abe and Spliffdaddy, it's hard for them to see anything after being mummified in American Flags and "W'04" bumper stickers.

Originally Posted by Kevin

There is the difference.

Yes, one has money and political influence, everyone else doesn't.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Not mixing anything. Just not spinning like you are. Esp since a great many of these terrorists aren't even from Iraq.

You're grouping opposition and terrorists together. There is a difference between the two.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yes, they want a tyrannical rule under Islamic law. These however are not the majority.

Wrong. They (as in not the terrorists) are fighting for the same reasons why I don't want a Wal-Mart where I live. I'm not a bloody terrorist, but I don't want a Wal-Mart here killing off our local businesses puting in a giant parking lot over a once-forrested area.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Hyperbole

No, it's called Foreign Policey. You think the U.S. is going to leave with out taking advantage of all the market possibilities? The Bush Administration projected the war would pay for itself from a new economy and relationship with Iraq. WTO steps in, now Iraq has Wal-Marts.

Originally Posted by Kevin

It's not ours to do. However if the Iraq gov decides it wants to, it should be able to do so.

Right, the U.S. is going to stand on the side and tell them they can do whatever they want.

Originally Posted by Kevin

That's a bunch of politically correct nonsense. Yes when their beliefs tell them to murder kids than it IS less than mine. Much so.

It doesn't. Again, you're mixing opposition with terrorism. I'm not talking about the terrorists.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Cept I don't personally hurt anyone with my beliefs.

Just as many Muslims don't hurt people with theirs.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Excuses to hold one human in a higher standard than any other human. Again, we are all human.

Obviously, you're an exception. It would seem that the majority of the conservitives in this forum, the stories they link to, the talk shows, all seem to think that "people like them" are less than "us," whether it's about Iraqis or Mexicans.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

The military justice system has over two hundred years of experience, and since at least the Lieber Code, the US Military has been at the forefront of investigating and where necessary, punishing their own for violations of the laws of war. If the allegations are true, then an Article 32 hearing will be convened to indict the suspects so they can face trial by a courts martial. That is where justice is done, not in the media.

Hmm, if that is so, then let's put that to the test. I remember a case where US-military-forces committed a severe warcrime by killing about 500 unarmed civilians. It's one of the most famous US-massacres, it was called I think "My Lai" or something similar.

Tell me, how many US-soldiers involved in that massacre were put before court, how many received a punishing sentence, and how many years were they sentenced with, and how many years did they actually remain behind bars?

Taliesin

[Troll]

Originally Posted by SimeyTheLimey

You might do better if you unpacked your ambiguous word "they" to make it reflect the real world a bit more.

I don't know why you assumed that "they" referred to anyone other than the subject of the first sentece - i.e. the Marine platoon that was involved. I was not attributing any knowledge to anyone other than the platoon that was actually on the ground.

Those troops on the ground lied and my question was - if they did not do anything wrong, then why did they (referring to the Marine platoon obviously) lie? Why did the Marine platoon say first that none of the Iraqis were shot, then change their story after Time started asking questions and say 7 were shot and then finally change their story again and say 23 were shot? Why didn't a single one of them say, right at the start, that some or all of the Iraqis had been shot rather than killed by a bomb? I'm all for a presumption of innocene in a court room, but when it comes to my opinion, I go with my gut. And my gut tells me that they must have done something they weren't supposed to.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Good luck re-educating Abe and Spliffdaddy, it's hard for them to see anything after being mummified in American Flags and "W'04" bumper stickers.

Ad-hominem silliness.

Yes, one has money and political influence, everyone else doesn't.

No, that isn't what I meant, and thanks for taking that out of context.

You're grouping opposition and terrorists together. There is a difference between the two.

Not when a good percentage of the opposition aren't even Iraqi, and the opposition use terrorist tactics. These people are indeed terrorists.

Wrong. They (as in not the terrorists) are fighting for the same reasons why I don't want a Wal-Mart where I live. I'm not a bloody terrorist, but I don't want a Wal-Mart here killing off our local businesses puting in a giant parking lot over a once-forrested area.

Oh bullcrap. We all know why these terrorists don't want us there. And it has nothing to do with Wal-Mart. It's the SAME REASON they don't want "Jews on their land" They have said as much. So stop pretending otherwise to suit your horribly though out argument.

No, it's called Foreign Policey. You think the U.S. is going to leave with out taking advantage of all the market possibilities? The Bush Administration projected the war would pay for itself from a new economy and relationship with Iraq. WTO steps in, now Iraq has Wal-Marts.

Again, hyperbole.

Right, the U.S. is going to stand on the side and tell them they can do whatever they want.

Hyperbole.

Just as many Muslims don't hurt people with theirs.

Right many don't. But the ones I was referring to do indeed do. So your point is irrelevant.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Kevin

*snip*

So you're convinced they're all terrorists. Fine, ad hominem indeed. But if you're also convinced that we went into this war with no plans of getting money out of it, you're a fool.

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

So you're convinced they're all terrorists. Fine, ad hominem indeed. But if you're also convinced that we went into this war with no plans of getting money out of it, you're a fool.

They need to make back the 400 billion+ spent so far.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Socially Awkward Solo

They need to make back the 400 billion+ spent so far.

Oh, no. Kevin's right. We're just in it for being nice to people. The U.S. has absolutely no financial interest in Iraq what-so-ever. (post Dilbert comic)

[Y3a]

CNN??? But they're the bad guys! haven't you learned ANYTHING YET!

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

Hmm, if that is so, then let's put that to the test. I remember a case where US-military-forces committed a severe warcrime by killing about 500 unarmed civilians. It's one of the most famous US-massacres, it was called I think "My Lai" or something similar.

Tell me, how many US-soldiers involved in that massacre were put before court, how many received a punishing sentence, and how many years were they sentenced with, and how many years did they actually remain behind bars?

Taliesin

I don't know the totals, but Lt. William Calley was convicted of 22 counts of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Calley was by far the most infamous of those involved in the Mai Lai massacre.

It's funny that this comes up. Earlier in the thread I mentioned that I had done a paper on an American Hero, and had chosen a man named Hugh Thompson Jr as the subject of that paper. No one commented on who Thompson was (he's since passed away), or why it was relevant to some people's blanket characterizations of American soldiers based on the actions of other American soldiers.

Hugh Thompson was a 24 year old Army Warrant Officer flying Hunter/killer missions over Song Lai (Called My Lai or Mai Lai in the media). When he realized what was going on, he put his chopper down between the U.S. Soldiers and the Vietnamese civilians and ordered his gunners to open fire on the American troops if they didn't stand down. He then loaded wounded civilians onto his bird, ordered down his sharks and had them do the same, and started ferrying the injured to an aid station. Men like Thompson, and those that exposed the massacre (it wasn't the media in this case, it was American grunts that forced an inquiry) are what the majority of the men I served with strive to emulate, and the small bands of out of control thugs are a rarity. Sadly, they don't make the news and the good don't gain the recognition of the infamous.

I ask again, how many of you know the name Hugh Thompson? I'm guessing not many, but many remember Mai Lai and Lt. Calley.

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by ThinkInsane

I don't know the totals, but Lt. William Calley was convicted of 22 counts of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Calley was by far the most infamous of those involved in the Mai Lai massacre.

He only served 3.5 years of house arrest and was released by Pres. Nixon in November, 1974.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by Spliff

He only served 3.5 years of house arrest and was released by Pres. Nixon in November, 1974.

I said he was sentenced to life in prison, this is correct, is it not? Keep in mind that I wrote that from memory, something I haven't read anything about since 1988 or so, so please forgive me if I don't recall all the details. I'm sure what you posted is correct, but I never had much interest in a POS like Calley. Not my kind of guy.

EDIT: A quick google shows that you are absolutely correct.

[Spliff]

Originally Posted by ThinkInsane

I said he was sentenced to life in prison, this is correct, is it not? Keep in mind that I wrote that from memory, something I haven't read anything about since 1988 or so, so please forgive me if I don't recall all the details. I'm sure what you posted is correct.

It wasn't a criticism. I just googled it and added the info.

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by Spliff

It wasn't a criticism. I just googled it and added the info.

No worries, I didn't take it as a criticism. Like I said, it's not something I've studied up on in a long long time. I actually appreciate getting corrected if I have something wrong or don't have all the information.

[Socially Awkward Solo]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

Oh, no. Kevin's right. We're just in it for being nice to people. The U.S. has absolutely no financial interest in Iraq what-so-ever. (post Dilbert comic)

Ha ya. When is the US government ever concerned about being nice to other countries?

[davesimondotcom]

Originally Posted by Socially Awkward Solo

Ha ya. When is the US government ever concerned about being nice to other countries?

I'm just waiting until we take over Mexico and turn it into America's Vacationland™.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by ThinkInsane

I don't know the totals, but Lt. William Calley was convicted of 22 counts of murder and sentenced to life in prison. Calley was by far the most infamous of those involved in the Mai Lai massacre.

It's funny that this comes up. Earlier in the thread I mentioned that I had done a paper on an American Hero, and had chosen a man named Hugh Thompson Jr as the subject of that paper. No one commented on who Thompson was (he's since passed away), or why it was relevant to some people's blanket characterizations of American soldiers based on the actions of other American soldiers.

Hugh Thompson was a 24 year old Army Warrant Officer flying Hunter/killer missions over Song Lai (Called My Lai or Mai Lai in the media). When he realized what was going on, he put his chopper down between the U.S. Soldiers and the Vietnamese civilians and ordered his gunners to open fire on the American troops if they didn't stand down. He then loaded wounded civilians onto his bird, ordered down his sharks and had them do the same, and started ferrying the injured to an aid station. Men like Thompson, and those that exposed the massacre (it wasn't the media in this case, it was American grunts that forced an inquiry) are what the majority of the men I served with strive to emulate, and the small bands of out of control thugs are a rarity. Sadly, they don't make the news and the good don't gain the recognition of the infamous.

I ask again, how many of you know the name Hugh Thompson? I'm guessing not many, but many remember Mai Lai and Lt. Calley.

That's actually very interesting, and that Hugh Thompson's action just shows that there are still decent and courageous people in the world.

But the point of discussion was Simey's claim that the system of law-enforcement would work in the US and soldiers committing warcrimes would be punished accordingly.

Exactly that though hasn't happened in one of the most famous massacres that some US-forces committed in Vietnam: 500 unarmed civilians were murdered and I'm not convinced that it was just that one Lt. Calley who killed them all! But not only was he the only one "punished", he also merely received a 3.5 year housearrest, which shows that the system doesn't work at all when it comes to prosecuting US-soldiers, that commit massacres.

Taliesin

[ThinkInsane]

Originally Posted by Taliesin

That's actually very interesting, and that Hugh Thompson's action just shows that there are still decent and courageous people in the world.

But the point of discussion was Simey's claim that the system of law-enforcement would work in the US and soldiers committing warcrimes would be punished accordingly.

Exactly that though hasn't happened in one of the most famous massacres that some US-forces committed in Vietnam: 500 unarmed civilians were murdered and I'm not convinced that it was just that one Lt. Calley who killed them all! But not only was he the only one "punished", he also merely received a 3.5 year housearrest, which shows that the system doesn't work at all when it comes to prosecuting US-soldiers, that commit massacres.

Taliesin

It shows that it didn't work then. Actually, it did, at least in Calley's case. He received a sentence of life in prison for killing 22 people, so at least the Courts Martial did what it should have done, until as Spliff pointed out, the politicians (Nixon) got involved. Of course, I don't really remember the details, so I'll have to do some research this weekend to read up on what actually happened with that. I don't recall if anyone else was ever convicted of participating in the Mai Lai massacre, Calley was just the name I remember.

It's now 30+ years later, and time will tell if it works this time.

And Murtha needs to brush up on his history as well. When I saw him on CNN last week and he mentioned Mai Lai, he stated 120 civilians killed, a number which if I remember correctly was used in an initial report that was later proven to be part of a then cover-up made to minimize the issue. But like I said, I have a lot of reading to do to refresh my memory.

Just a side note, Thompson's reward for showing such courage and moral fortitude? He was transferred to another squadron flying much more dangerous missions and was subsequently shot down four or five times over enemy territory. I don't think anyone thought then or now that was just a coincidence. But he came home alive and became my personal hero. The world lost a great man the day he died.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by ThinkInsane

It shows that it didn't work then. Actually, it did, at least in Calley's case. He received a sentence of life in prison for killing 22 people, so at least the Courts Martial did what it should have done, until as Spliff pointed out, the politicians (Nixon) got involved. Of course, I don't really remember the details, so I'll have to do some research this weekend to read up on what actually happened with that. I don't recall if anyone else was ever convicted of participating in the Mai Lai massacre, Calley was just the name I remember.

It's now 30+ years later, and time will tell if it works this time.

And Murtha needs to brush up on his history as well. When I saw him on CNN last week and he mentioned Mai Lai, he stated 120 civilians killed, a number which if I remember correctly was used in an initial report that was later proven to be part of a then cover-up made to minimize the issue. But like I said, I have a lot of reading to do to refresh my memory.

Just a side note, Thompson's reward for showing such courage and moral fortitude? He was transferred to another squadron flying much more dangerous missions and was subsequently shot down four or five times over enemy territory. I don't think anyone thought then or now that was just a coincidence. But he came home alive and became my personal hero. The world lost a great man the day he died.

I just googled a wikipedia-article about it, and here is a quote:

On March 17, 1970, the United States Army charged 14 officers with suppressing information related to the incident. Most of these charges were dropped.

U.S. Army Lt. William Calley was convicted in 1971 of premeditated murder in ordering the shootings and initially sentenced to life in prison; two days later, however, President Richard Nixon ordered him released from prison, pending appeal of his sentence. Calley served 3½ years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning, Georgia, and was then ordered freed by Federal Judge J. Robert Elliot. Calley claimed that he was following orders from his captain, Ernest Medina; Medina denied giving the orders and was acquitted at a separate trial. Most of the soldiers involved in the My Lai incident were no longer enlisted. Of the 26 men initially charged, Lt. Calley's was the only conviction. The entire episode inspired what is known today as the Medina standard.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_massacre

You should read the whole page, it's fascinating and Colin Powell is also mentioned there (not as one killing civilians).

Taliesin

[ghporter]

Taliesin, that's pretty much what ThinkInsane said: unless the pols got involved, the system worked. Calley was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Had Nixon not gotten involved, he may have served 18 years. The only reason the others initially charged didn't get the same kind of sentence, or even a court martial was that the Medina issue (he said/he said) muddied the water, and the President had already stepped in.

The rest of the story is about what happened to the soldiers who were involved in the overall incident (the crime, the lame "investigation," the actual coverup, the assumed coverup, etc.). Many people with no culpability in the events at My Lai or the unjust attempts to hide what happened were painted with the "that unit" brush; they were assumed to be contemptable because they were assigned to that unit at that time, even if they were hundreds of miles away when the crimes were committed. That ended a lot of otherwise promising careers. Less clearly innocent people also had their careers impacted, of course-commanders at just about every level of that brigade got shaken up and reassigned. This is SOP; a breakdown of command means you need new commanders.

Think, I knew OF Mr. Thompson, but could not remember his name. He is truly a hero, all the moreso because he did THE right thing, right away, and in spite of knowing that there would be grave consequences.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by ghporter

Taliesin, that's pretty much what ThinkInsane said: unless the pols got involved, the system worked. Calley was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. Had Nixon not gotten involved, he may have served 18 years.

A system where pols can step in and change sentences to their liking is a system that does not work.

But I'm ready to wait and see what consequences the alleged massacre will bring for the supposed committers, if they are to be found guilty...

Taliesin

[Sky Captain]

I've now read 2 pieces that report the "massacre" might have been a staged hoax.

We'll see what comes to light.

Link to article

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I've now read 2 pieces that report the "massacre" might have been a staged hoax.

We'll see what comes to light.

Link to article

If so, that will suck. No one will believe it when it DOES happen.

Way to go.

[Sky Captain]

Kinda like the Israeli Gaza beach bombing.

More lies.

But the "news" reported the Israelis at fault as fact.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I've now read 2 pieces that report the "massacre" might have been a staged hoax.

We'll see what comes to light.

Link to article

Why did the Marines lie if they're innocent of any wrongdoing?

[Sky Captain]

I noticed it's the media (as usual) who determined the marines "lied".

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I noticed it's the media (as usual) who determined the marines "lied".

Okay, why did they change their story then (if you don't like the word lied)? Why did they initially say that all of the dead Iraqis had been killed by the IED, then say 7 were shot and then say that no, actually, all of them were shot? This is not a minor detail that you miss in the "fog of war".

[Sky Captain]

I wasn't there so I can't say for sure.

[Troll]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I wasn't there so I can't say for sure.

Yes, quite. We'll all have to wait to see what comes out in evidence to make any real judgements. However, as things stand (and as is always the case where multiple, contradictory versions of events are produced), the smell of rodent is rather pervasive.

[Sky Captain]

Dan, Peter, Cokie, and a Marine

Anchors Dan Rather and Peter Jennings, NPR Reporter Cokie Roberts, Along with a U..S. Marine assigned to protect them were hiking through the Iraq desert one day when they were captured by Iraqis.They were tied up, led to a village, and brought before the leader.

The leader said, "I am familiar with your western custom of granting
The condemned a last wish; so, before we kill and dismember you, do you
Have any last requests?"

Dan Rather said, "Well, I'm a Texan; so I'd like one last bowlful of
Hot spicy chili." The leader nodded to an underling who left and Returned with the chili. Rather ate it all and said, "Now I can die content."

Peter Jennings said, "I am Canadian, so I'd like to hear the song 'O
Canada' one last time." The leader nodded to a terrorist who had
Studied the Western world and knew the music. He returned with some rag-tag musicians and played the anthem. Jennings sighed and declared he could now die peacefully.

Cokie Roberts said, "I'm a reporter to the end. I want to take out my tape recorder and describe the scene here and what's about to happen.
Maybe someday someone will hear it and know that I was on the job
Till the end."

The leader directed an aide to hand over the tape recorder and
Roberts dictated some comments. She then said, "Now I can die happy."

The leader turned and said, "And now, Mr. U.S. Marine, what is your final wish?"

"Kick me in the ass," said the Marine. "What?" asked the leader. "Will you mock us in your last hour?" "No, I'm not kidding. I want you to kick me in the ass," insisted
The Marine. So the leader shoved him into the open, and kicked him in the ass.

The Marine went sprawling, but rolled to his knees, pulled a 9mm
Pistol from inside his cammies, and shot the leader dead. In the resulting confusion, he leapt to his knapsack, pulled out his M4 carbine, and sprayed the Iraqis with gunfire. In a flash, all the Iraqis were either dead or fleeing for their lives.

As the Marine was untying Rather, Jennings, and Roberts, they asked
him, "Why didn't you just shoot them? Why did you ask them to kick you in the ass?"

"What," replied the Marine, "and have you three assholes call me the aggressor?"