[von Wrangell]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4827424.stm

Let the blaming of victims commence.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Rule #8 violation. Well done, well done. NYC Farmboy was getting lonely. Now you two can perhaps form a club?

cheers

W-Y

[Kevin]

If they did something purposably wrong, may they also be responsible for their actions.
I have NO PROBLEMS with these guys getting punished in a severe way .

[ghporter]

The U.S. military has very strict rules (with the force of law on military members) that forbid targeting civilians. In situations where it's hard to tell who's a civilian and who isn't, things get really difficult to sort out. The BBC article does not say WHO originally reported the civilian deaths were due to the roadside bomb, nor who passed it on. If it was a news person, who did he or she talk to to get that information? And has anyone looked for evidence that there might have been gunfire coming from those houses? Finding just ONE AK cartridge case inside would indicate there was some firing from inside the house going on.

I should also point out that the people investigating are going to be under the auspices of the Inspector General of the Marines, and that office has NO qualms about nailing a Marine who's in the wrong. The apparent assumption that this investigation will be a cover up is unwarranted and unnecessary.

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by ghporter

The U.S. military has very strict rules (with the force of law on military members) that forbid targeting civilians. In situations where it's hard to tell who's a civilian and who isn't, things get really difficult to sort out. The BBC article does not say WHO originally reported the civilian deaths were due to the roadside bomb, nor who passed it on. If it was a news person, who did he or she talk to to get that information? And has anyone looked for evidence that there might have been gunfire coming from those houses? Finding just ONE AK cartridge case inside would indicate there was some firing from inside the house going on.

I should also point out that the people investigating are going to be under the auspices of the Inspector General of the Marines, and that office has NO qualms about nailing a Marine who's in the wrong. The apparent assumption that this investigation will be a cover up is unwarranted and unnecessary.

Unfortunately the difference between civilian and enemy target is hard to tell, it's just like Viet Nam. Often the enemy will hide in civilian homes or mosques. Unfortunately for both sides, it's often after someone is dead that we find out if they were friendly or hostile.

I think there are some isolated incidents where some troubled troops have done some horrible things, but at the same time, I think the far-left liberals are bundling all the deaths into one camp; which isn't fair. When you're fighting for your life and you see someone who might have a gun, do you take the chance?

This isn't just in warfare, good law enforcement officers face those decisions on a daily basis.

[von Wrangell]

ghporter and olepigeon:

US military investigators have flown to Iraq to study reports that marines shot dead at least 15 civilians, including seven women and three children.

from the article above.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

Rule #8 violation.

No. It's not. Reread the post.

Harping on rule #8 is irritating enough when it's justified. It's really irritating when it's not.

[Kevin]

"Let the blaming of victims commence." isn't him giving his opinion on the matter.

But I agree it's annoying.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Kevin

"Let the blaming of victims commence." isn't him giving his opinion on the matter.

It's not?

What is it then?

[ghporter]

I read the article, and I can imagine a number of ways an assault on a house being used for cover to fire on Americans could result in women and kids inside getting killed. They all feature the bad guys victimizing the residents by using their home in the first place. This is known as agitprop or agitating propaganda. The shooter gets his virgins and martyrdom, and the Americans get a black eye in world opinion.

It's just as wrong to automatically assume all American troops are barbarous as to assume that all Muslims are jihadists.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by subego

No. It's not. Reread the post.

Harping on rule #8 is irritating enough when it's justified. It's really irritating when it's not.

Oh yes it is. Let's recap rule #8 shall we?

Eighth rule of the Political Lounge: No posting and running. Give an opinion, your slant, anything in regards to what you're posting. Simply posting a news story and no context or direction is not conducive to fostering discussion. Avoid it.

No opinion given, no slant, no nothing given in regards what was posted.

A news story was posted, no context or direction conductive to fostering discussion. Just a cryptic innuendo.

This was a textbook example of a rule #8 violation.

cheers

W-Y

[subego]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

No opinion given, no slant, no nothing given in regards what was posted.

Well, as I asked Kevin, what was the phrase "let the blaming of victims commence"?

Seems all slanty to me.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by ghporter

I read the article, and I can imagine a number of ways an assault on a house being used for cover to fire on Americans could result in women and kids inside getting killed. They all feature the bad guys victimizing the residents by using their home in the first place. This is known as agitprop or agitating propaganda. The shooter gets his virgins and martyrdom, and the Americans get a black eye in world opinion.

It's just as wrong to automatically assume all American troops are barbarous as to assume that all Muslims are jihadists.

Did I say all American troops are barbarous? No.

But you (and others) automatically assume these were justified kills.

And W-Y. Hvað er að? Einhver sérstök ástæða fyrir þessum stælum? Kom nokkuð vel fram hvað ég meinti með þessu og þú veist það vel.

[subego]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

Did I say all American troops are barbarous? No.

Not that I agree, but the consensus seems to be that you haven't said jack.

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by subego

Not that I agree, but the consensus seems to be that you haven't said jack.

Well, I'd say the consensus would be wrong then. And you right.

What I said in the OP is what I think both happened and will happen. The victims who died will be blamed.

It seems like I was correct.

[placebo1969]

I said this in another thread and will repeat here: If the Marines did do what has been accused, then I hope they received the strictest penalty available.

I have a little experience of war crimes through my father. In the late sixties, he was a military investigator who looked into allegations in Vietnam. He did his job. Some people were cleared, some went to prison for a long time.
[proud son]I even found a book on Lt. Caley and My Lai then had his name in it. He almost had the case, but it was assigned to one of his buddies.[/proud son]

[von Wrangell]

Originally Posted by placebo1969

I said this in another thread and will repeat here: If the Marines did do what has been accused, then I hope they received the strictest penalty available.

I have a little experience of war crimes through my father. In the late sixties, he was a military investigator who looked into allegations in Vietnam. He did his job. Some people were cleared, some went to prison for a long time.
[proud son]I even found a book on Lt. Caley and My Lai then had his name in it. He almost had the case, but it was assigned to one of his buddies.[/proud son]

ps. does anyone know what the strictest penalty available would be in a case like this?

[isao bered]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell

ps. does anyone know what the strictest penalty available would be in a case like this?

reading all your posts?

be well.

laeth

[isao bered]

sorry. it was right in the zone and i had to swing. ;-)

be well.

laeth

[Taliesin]

Didn't want to create a new thread for it, so I brought up this old one dealing with the Haditha-massacre, because there are some news to report. Not too surprising to me, the US-military and US-military-courts are whitewashing the case:

Against four of the eight US-soldiers accused of having gone on a rampage massacring civilians the charges were dismissed!

Now the investigating officer recommended the military judge not to charge the ringleader with murder but instead with negligent homicide, reducing the maximum-penalty from lifetime to 3 years per count.

The investigating officer also recommended that the charges against the ringleader of having made a false official statement be dropped, too.

Source: BBC NEWS | Americas | Marine may escape Haditha charge

Taliesin

[subego]

Here's an excerpt of the analysis from the NYT article on this as to why things are going down this way:

The cases also reflect the particular views of Lt. Col. Paul J. Ware, who presided over the hearings and concluded that all three cases lacked sufficient evidence...

Perhaps nothing handicapped military prosecutors more than the delay in investigating the killings, on Nov. 19, 2005, because battalion officers initially decided the case did not require an inquiry...

“When you have an investigating officer like Ware, who says ‘don’t go there if you can’t prove,’” your case, Mr. Solis said, “we’re left with what appear to be very reduced charges.” He added: “He’s aggressive, and he seems to make his judgments without regard for anything but the law. He must know that people — civilians, primarily — are going to howl about this, but that doesn’t seem to be a concern.”

So, let's take this at face value for the sake of argument (as problematic as that may be). Wouldn't the lack of evidence have something to do with the false statements made by Wuterich?

[Kevin]

He said Iraqi insurgents routinely "put civilians in the cross-hairs" in order to turn public opinion against the US military.

Noticed that they differentiated between the INSURGENTS and the PUBLIC.

I wish more people in here would.

A spokeswoman for the US military, Lt Col Michelle Martin-Hing, told the BBC News website the video presented by Time magazine "doesn't tell the whole story".

Not surprised. If you can't beat an army by MIGHT, you attack their character. Honestly or not.

five hours they spent tracking insurgents, who were "moving through the town amongst homes, civilian residents, other structures and palm groves".

Yeah the insurgents really care about the people of Iraq..

[subego]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

A spokeswoman for the US military, Lt Col Michelle Martin-Hing, told the BBC News website the video presented by Time magazine "doesn't tell the whole story".

Not surprised. If you can't beat an army by MIGHT, you attack their character. Honestly or not.

Huh?

I mean, I understand what you are saying, but I don't see how this relates to the quote above it

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by von Wrangell 

And W-Y. Hvað er að? Einhver sérstök ástæða fyrir þessum stælum? Kom nokkuð vel fram hvað ég meinti með þessu og þú veist það vel.

I never understood why you did this in an English speaking forum. It's rather rude.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by subego 

Huh?

I mean, I understand what you are saying, but I don't see how this relates to the quote above it

That the video they were using to try to slam the troops didn't tell the whole story.

Anyhow, I like the fact that the media are finally distinguishing between Iraqi citizens, and the INSURGENTS.

Some in this part of the forum paint them as the same people. While there may be Iraqi citizens in the Insurgency, they are also not the majority.

The majority of Iraqi citizens don't want the US to take control of Iraq permanently, but they also don't want another Saddam. They want their own say as to who governs them.

That is why so many of them turned out to vote.

[nonhuman]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

Against four of the eight US-soldiers accused of having gone on a rampage massacring civilians the charges were dismissed!

That doesn't necessarily mean that there's 'white-washing' involved. Maybe there just wasn't any evidence to support the charges. Occassionally people accused of crimes are actually innocent, hard as that may be for many to believe. The fact that the charges weren't dropped against the other four would suggest that this is the case.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Kevin 

That the video they were using to try to slam the troops didn't tell the whole story.

AFAICT, no one claimed the video told the whole story. The point is that the parts the video did address told a different story than what the initial investigation found.

Initial investigation:
Explosion also kills 15 Iraqi civilians
Eight insurgents killed in fire-fight following blast


Second investigation (prompted by the videotape):
Fifteen civilians accidentally killed by US fire amid battle with insurgents

Originally Posted by Kevin 

Anyhow, I like the fact that the media are finally distinguishing between Iraqi citizens, and the INSURGENTS.

Wrong on two counts. There's nothing finally about an 18 month old article, and it wasn't the media saying it, they were quoting a US military spokesman.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by subego 

Wrong on two counts. There's nothing finally about an 18 month old article, and it wasn't the media saying it, they were quoting a US military spokesman.

Oh sorry, my bad. And here I had hope for the media.

I should have known better. But anyhow, there is a difference.

The media doesn't always portray it that way though. Either do a lot of people in this forum.

The painting that Iraq is mostly filled with people that aren't happy that we got rid of Saddam is a false one.

The resistance isn't the majority. And it is filled with people other than Iraqis as well.

We went down there for people like her.



Not people like



The latter doesn't really care about Iraq. Or it's people. Or it wouldn't hide itself within the populace. How cowardly.

[Taliesin]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

That doesn't necessarily mean that there's 'white-washing' involved. Maybe there just wasn't any evidence to support the charges. Occassionally people accused of crimes are actually innocent, hard as that may be for many to believe. The fact that the charges weren't dropped against the other four would suggest that this is the case.

Actually there was whitewashing going on from the start. The US-soldiers involved in the Haditha-massacre made wrong statements that were designed to delay investigations.

The innocent soldiers could have said the truth but they kept silent, and so they are complicitly involved.

Even right now the innocent soldiers could come out with the truth and act as crownwitnesses against the guilty ones, but they remain silent and so ether they are as guilty as the others or they hope that the delayed investigations wouldn't come up with enough evidence.

The military court, the judge and the investigating officer are deliberately helping these US-soldiers in their whitewashing as they don't put enough pressure on them to come out with the truth, and because they deliberatey don't want to condemn US-soldiers for murder since they calculate that it might demoralise the US-army operating in Iraq.

So instead of seeking and pressing for truth and justice, the authorities are more interested in achieving a convenient result for strategic reasons.

Taliesin

[Sherman Homan]

Let the blaming of victims commence.

I think the OP makes a good point. The US soldiers involved were ambushed by cowardly punks who hide behind women's skirts and children's toys. Now, the military tribunal will not go forward and the soldiers will forever have their names smeared by the likes of the NY Times. They will not be able to fight back against this enemy and so, the victims will be blamed.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Sherman Homan 

I think the OP makes a good point. The US soldiers involved were ambushed by cowardly punks who hide behind women's skirts and children's toys. Now, the military tribunal will not go forward and the soldiers will forever have their names smeared by the likes of the NY Times. They will not be able to fight back against this enemy and so, the victims will be blamed.

The Human Shield strategy. The PLO, Hamas, Hizballah, and others have been doing that to Israel for years. They launch attacks from schools, mosques, and civilian homes, knowing the Israelis will not attack them there.

[Taliesin]

Here's what seems to have happened, with the most prominent witness being the 9 year old Eman Waleed, a girl that survived the massacre by faking her death under her murdered brother:

Here's what all participants agree on: at around 7:15 a.m. on Nov. 19, a U.S. humvee was struck by a powerful improvised explosive device (ied) attached to a large propane canister, triggered by remote control. The bomb killed Terrazas, who was driving, and injured two other Marines. For U.S. troops, Haditha, set among date-palm groves along the Euphrates River, was inhospitable territory; every day the Marines found scores of bombs buried in the dirt roads near their base. Eman Waleed, 9, lived in a house 150 yards from the site of the blast, which was strong enough to shatter all the windows in her home. "We heard a big noise that woke us all up," she recalls two months later. "Then we did what we always do when there's an explosion: my father goes into his room with the Koran and prays that the family will be spared any harm." Eman says the rest of the family—her mother, grandfather, grandmother, two brothers, two aunts and two uncles—gathered in the living room. According to military officials familiar with the investigation, the Marines say they came under fire from the direction of the Waleed house immediately after being hit by the ied. A group of Marines headed toward the house. Eman says she "heard a lot of shooting, so none of us went outside. Besides, it was very early, and we were all wearing our nightclothes." When the Marines entered the house, they were shouting in English. "First, they went into my father's room, where he was reading the Koran," she claims, "and we heard shots." According to Eman, the Marines then entered the living room. "I couldn't see their faces very well—only their guns sticking into the doorway. I watched them shoot my grandfather, first in the chest and then in the head. Then they killed my granny." She claims the troops started firing toward the corner of the room where she and her younger brother Abdul Rahman, 8, were hiding; the other adults shielded the children from the bullets but died in the process. Eman says her leg was hit by a piece of metal and Abdul Rahman was shot near his shoulder. "We were lying there, bleeding, and it hurt so much. Afterward, some Iraqi soldiers came. They carried us in their arms. I was crying, shouting 'Why did you do this to our family?' And one Iraqi soldier tells me, 'We didn't do it. The Americans did.'" Time was unable to speak with the only other survivor of the raid, Eman's younger brother, who relatives say is traumatized by the experience. U.S. military officials familiar with the investigation say that after entering the house, the Marines walked into a corridor with closed doors on either side. They thought they heard the clack-clack sound of an AK-47 being racked and readied for fire. (Eman and relatives who were not in the house insist that no guns were there.) Believing they were about to be ambushed, the Marines broke down the two doors simultaneously and fired their weapons. The officials say the military has confirmed that seven people were killed inside the house--including two women and a child. The Marines also reported seeing a man and a woman run out of the house; they gave chase and shot and killed the man. Relatives say the woman, Hiba Abdullah, escaped with her baby.


According to military officials, the Marines say they then started taking fire from the direction of a second house, prompting them to break down the door of that house and throw in a grenade, blowing up a propane tank in the kitchen. The Marines then began firing, killing eight residents—including the owner, his wife, the owner's sister, a 2-year-old son and three young daughters.

The Marines raided a third house, which belongs to a man named Ahmed Ayed. One of Ahmed's five sons, Yousif, who lived in a house next door, told Time that after hearing a prolonged burst of gunfire from his father's house, he rushed over. Iraqi soldiers keeping watch in the garden prevented him from going in. "They told me, 'There's nothing you can do. Don't come closer, or the Americans will kill you too.' The Americans didn't let anybody into the house until 6:30 the next morning." Ayed says that by then the bodies were gone; all the dead had been zipped into U.S. body bags and taken by Marines to a local hospital morgue. "But we could tell from the blood tracks across the floor what happened," Ayed claims. "The Americans gathered my four brothers and took them inside my father's bedroom, to a closet. They killed them inside the closet."

Source: Collateral Damage or Civilian Massacre in Haditha? - TIME

Taliesin

[subego]

Originally Posted by Taliesin 

Here's what seems to have happened, with the most prominent witness being the 9 year old Eman Waleed, a girl that survived the massacre by faking her death under her murdered brother:

The story makes it seem like there were Iraqi soldiers around. I'd be interested in their testimony.