Bush: If Marines killed civilians, they'll be punished

[Apeman81]

Quote by: PatrickHenry No way, Apeman! As long as Halli gets that oil going, who cares about a few dead Iraqi babies! M-16 bullets through the head? Well, SOMEBODY killed that Marine and maybe one of their fathers knew him, so they had to be executed, see? :eek:

A rather amusing leap into the realm of inanity.

Nothing in my post addressed the idea of the purposeful killing of unarmed civilians as being an acceptable course of action. Indeed, it is most certainly not. However, that this has occurred is still in question. You may recall the ideal of innocent until proven guilty.

If the worst of the assertions is true, does that speak for all American troops serving in Iraq? Is this single act the defining one?

[Apeman81]

Quote by: bishop um... in what war have u.s. soldiers haven't been treated humanely by their captors? let's not let our empire bashing overshadow rationality here... did the red cross have access to tortured pow's in vietnam? not that i'm aware.. how many u.s. pow's have been returned alive from iraq? can't think of ever encountering any article about something like that. i know they like to chop peoples' heads off though...

SHHH! None of that matters. America is guilty. Bush is the Criminal. Our troops are the cowards.

Didn't you get the memo?

[dreamer]

update The BBC has uncovered new video evidence that US forces may have been responsible for the deliberate killing of 11 innocent Iraqi civilians.
The video appears to challenge the US military's account of events that took place in the town of Ishaqi in March.
The US said at the time four people died during a military operation, but Iraqi police claimed that US troops had deliberately shot the 11 people.
A spokesman for US forces in Iraq told the BBC an inquiry was under way.
The new evidence comes in the wake of the alleged massacre in Haditha, where US marines are suspected of massacring up to 24 Iraqi civilians in November 2005.
'Massacre'
The video pictures obtained by the BBC appear to contradict the US account of the events in Ishaqi, about 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, on 15 March 2006 link if needed http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5039420.stm.
Dreamer.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Tony Clifton If this was being covered up why do we know so much about it? Especially enough to charge, convict & sentence?

This is a question I have asked myself as well. Considering the fact that the Bush administration is reportedly the most secretive in modern history, WHY can Time or anyone else find out about this?

But then again, since this administration has botched almost everything else it has been involved in...

[RickSp]

Quote by: Apeman81 Whether you believe the ousting of Saddam from power in Iraq was justified or not, can you truly thereby justify and embolden the actions of the terrorist forces that are striving to topple the fledgling government elected to replace the demonstrably despotic Baathists?

This is too bizarre even by your sorry standards Ape.

While the US was covering up the massacre, the insurgency was publicizing it all across Iraq, so your concerns about the word getting out are about six months too late. And then you blame Americans who might not feel comfortable supporting the murder of children calling us "the "America is always guilty" crowd is thumping and storming about, mindlessly furthering the enemy's cause by first automatically assigning guilt to the soldiers".

What unmitigated idiocy. Dishonest to boot. The only ones who are "mindlessly furthering the the enemy's cause" are the Marines who saw fit to butcher children and old men.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Scribbler1 This is a question I have asked myself as well. Considering the fact that the Bush administration is reportedly the most secretive in modern history, WHY can Time or anyone else find out about this? But then again, since this administration has botched almost everything else it has been involved in...

It doesn't seem so mysterious to me. I won't claim to know any more than what I read in the papers or see on the news, but the facts seem pretty clear. The bodies were all brough to an Iraqi hospital where the death certificates were issued. The victims had all died of gunshots to the head or body, not from an IED blast. There are apparently digital photos of the scene and eye witnesses who reported the massacre to local police.

What is unclear to me is how the Marines could be so arrogant as to blame all the deaths on an IED when the wounds and buildings apparently clearly show otherwise.

[Sonart]

.

Quote by: Apeman Whether you believe the ousting of Saddam from power in Iraq was justified or not, can you truly thereby justify and embolden the actions of the terrorist forces that are striving to topple the fledgling government elected to replace the demonstrably despotic Baathists?

It's not a matter of 'justifying' the actions of terrorists, Apeman. It's a matter of understanding that this is what a guerilla war is. It's what we faced in Vietnam, what the Soviets faced in Afghanistan. And Bush was warned by his own intel and senior military that this is what we were likely to be facing and that the goal of an insurgency is not necessarily to win but just to make sure we can't win, to remain trapped in an endless quagmire until we exhaust ourselves, no matter how many Iraqis die in the process.

When the Pentagon reported this past January that "The Army and Marine Corps ground units are stretched to the breaking point by the prolonged commitment of troops to Iraq and Afghanistan and cannot sustain the current pace of deployments "without doing real damage to their forces,", this, what happened in Haditha, is exactly what they were talking about.

Recruitment is way down, but re-enlistments are way up. That means multiple tours. Eventually the troops get worn down, physically and emotionally, from multiple tours and the endless grind of fighting a war in which the enemy is nowhere and everywhere, who you can't tell from the civilians, seeing your buddies killed day in and day by an enemy they can't see. Just like in Vietnam, after a while a soldier just stops caring about anything except getting himself and his buddies home.

It doesn't matter one whit how you or I judge the enemy. They are exactly what they are, and we have no choice but to deal with it. Yet our hands are tied... we cannot simply turn our troops loose to "Kill'em all and let God sort'em out" just because the enemy are such bad people. The Iraqis would become so angry that we'd be facing more enemy than we could possibly deal with.

What's my point? Bush's intelligence services, his senior military, and those of us here who opposed the war from the beginning TOLD YOU that occupying a hostile country in the middle of a hostile muslim world was an invitation to quagmire, that it was a really BAD IDEA. And now we're seeing exactly why it was a BAD IDEA, and sitting there whining that 'gosh, our guys are only human' and the 'bad guys don't play fair' only reinforces that. Our people have been put in a no-win situation by an arrogantly incompetent president, and now it's our finest who are paying the price.

.

[Marilyn Monroe]

Far as I know civilians all know they are not to come too close to US soldiers. They know the rules. We've been there a while.

I don't know why the US would want to publicize this, but the insurgents certainly would and have. It's possible this was a set up. The people involved could have purposely gotten too close, and were suicide bombers.

I think it's probably got a twinge of propaganda to it, and of course even if it is true, the guys will have their day in court.

You can go back to any war and find attrocities. That's war, and unfortunately we are in one. I don't like it that we are there, but we need to quit fueling the fire over everything, and have some trust in our government. We aren't some little know nothing, do nothing country. We are huge, and the military does know what they are doing. They have to fight the best way they can. The insurgents are causing all this, not us. This would have been an easy deal if all these insurgents hadn't cropped up. They are determined for us to fail, and even though we may not agree with why we are there, we need to be behind winning this thing in MHO. It's the best way to keep the death rate down. Our own propaganda machines need to turn totally positive about this war, and I would bet the insurgents would lose steam. Reporting is always negative cause that's what sells, not positive. When have the Times, or any of the big newspapers said anything positive on the front pages about this war? I haven't seen anything, and maybe it is tough to find something positive, but it has to be positive if we are going to win. WWII was positive. It was all positive, and we won.

[Scribbler1]

Quote by: Marilyn Monroe Far as I know civilians all know they are not to come too close to US soldiers. They know the rules. We've been there a while.

And it's THEIR country.

I think it's probably got a twinge of propaganda to it, and of course even if it is true, the guys will have their day in court.

If it was propaganda why did we cover it up?

You can go back to any war and find attrocities. That's war, and unfortunately we are in one.

No we are not. This is an occupation and NOT a war. If you are right, who are we fighting in Iraq? Global terrorists who were not even THERE before we invaded? We are fighting people who want us out of their country as far as I can see. Where are the international bands of Iraqi terror groups?

. Our own propaganda machines need to turn totally positive about this war, and I would bet the insurgents would lose steam.

Would you like US to "lose steam" if the US were occupied by foreign invaders?

Reporting is always negative cause that's what sells, not positive. When have the Times, or any of the big newspapers said anything positive on the front pages about this war? I haven't seen anything, and maybe it is tough to find something positive, but it has to be positive if we are going to win. WWII was positive. It was all positive, and we won.

If you haven't seen anything have you counted the possibility that there is NOTHING positive to REPORT?? If you now about these positive things this is the time to say something. If you DON'T know about any positives why do you fault the media for not reporting something you know nothing about?

[RickSp]

Iraqi Accuses U.S. of 'Daily' Attacks Against Civilians

Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki lashed out at the American military on Thursday, denouncing what he characterized as habitual attacks by troops against Iraqi civilians. As outrage over reports that American marines killed 24 Iraqis in the town of Haditha last year continued to shake the new government, the country's senior leaders said that they would demand that American officials turn over their investigative files on the killings and that the Iraqi government would conduct its own inquiry. In his comments, Mr. Maliki said violence against civilians had become a "daily phenomenon" by many troops in the American-led coalition who "do not respect the Iraqi people." "They crush them with their vehicles and kill them just on suspicion," he said. "This is completely unacceptable." Attacks on civilians will play a role in future decisions on how long to ask American forces to remain in Iraq, the prime minister added. The denunciation was an unusual declaration for a government that remains desperately dependent on American forces to keep some form of order in the country amid a resilient Sunni Arab insurgency in the west, widespread sectarian violence in Baghdad, and deadly feuding among Shiite militias that increasingly control the south.

There are now two other ongoing investigations regarding the killing of civilians by US troops.

[bishop]

Quote by: m&m Far as I know civilians all know they are not to come too close to US soldiers. They know the rules. We've been there a while.

yeah... they (families, men, women and children) were in their own homes. they aren't allowed to do that now?

[RickSp]

Bill O'Reilly is at it again.

In a bizarre attempt to somehow justify the American massacre of civilians in Iraq he has twice referred to the American slaughter of members of a German SS Panzer brigade in Malmedy, Belgium in World War II. What makes this so idiotic is that he has the story completely backwards. The Germans massacred the Americans, 84 in all, who had just surrendered.

From Capitol Hill Blue

Like most of the verbal diarrhea that spills out of O'Reilly's mouth, his claim insults the intelligence of anyone with an IQ above that of the average plant but a demographic survey of O'Reilly's constantly shrinking cable TV audience would no doubt show that a vegetable intellect is normal for his viewers. Even worse, Fox News - a joke if there ever was one in the annals of journalism - compounded the lie by rewriting the transcript of O'Reilly's show to make it look like he said "Normandy," not "Malmedy." To put it in polite, social conversational terms: Fox News blowhard Bill O'Reilly is a lying sack of shit. Yet he is all-too-typical of the conservative loudmouths and blowhards who feed the misinformation channels of the rabid right-wing, fueling their misguided passions with misstatements and inaccuracy to further their extremist causes. Whether it is a phone-sex freak like O'Reilly, a pill-popping junkie like Rush Limbaugh, a homophobe like Mike Savage or an egomaniacal hothead like Sean Hannity, the conservatives flock to these charlatans like flies to shit - and shit is just what they are. They are extremist demagogues, peddling hate, bigotry and intolerance to the ignorant - the same cadre of the uninformed that gave us George W. Bush and the GOP "leadership" of Congress. They represent the worst that society can dredge up from the depths of a system rotting from within from the cancer of corruption, the infection of greed and the psychosis of control. They must be stopped but they will not be stopped until those who use their brains as more than a receptacle of propaganda step forward to return control of this nation to the people.

[Boetie]

Marilyn Monroe posts: Far as I know civilians all know they are not to come too close to US soldiers. They know the rules... It's possible this was a set up. The people involved could have purposely gotten too close, and were suicide bombers.

The reason the Marine's story fell apart was because, they at first claimed there was an enchange of gunfire. It might have washed except for one problem, which is, there were no bullet holes outside of the homes of the civilians whom were slaughtered.

The bullet holes were inside the homes. What this means is that the Marines broke into the homes and fired from inside the house. The bullet holes are shown on the walls inside the house, but not outside the house.

As far as your comment about not getting to close to the soldiers and they know the rules, in this case your comment doesn't apply.

Why don't you try and imagine aiming a gun at a three year old that had nothing to do with blowing up your buddy with a roadside bomb. Try and imagine yourself pulling the trigger. Try and imagine yourself not giving a shit that you shot a three year old in the brains at close range.

I hope these sick puppies that are hiding behind their Marine uniform, hiding behind the excuse of war, hiding like the chicken shit cowards that they are, get hung. I hope those whom tried to cover this up get hung too.

[bishop]

i don't understand why fox keeps him on the payroll - especially since he's the media's equivalent to pat robertson.. when it comes to pundits that babble complete nonsense, nobody does it better than o'reilly.

on some "conservative" boards (eg. bushbot boards), i've seen people choose to focus on defaming murtha and claiming that nobody should've said anything since the "official" report hasn't been filed as of yet. anything to hide their heads in the sand as atrocities are committed in our name.

personally, i have lost all trust in the military's/administration's ability to police themselves, rather than looking for ways to whitewash every atrocity undertaken by u.s. troops. it seems that some of the grunts will most likely be punished, but as others here have already said, don't hold your breath looking to see those who conspired to cover this up being punished.

going door to door killing men, women and children... how honorable. just another stain on our already horribly stained national image.

[Jack]

abcnews.com is reporting that senior officers may be charged as well;

June 2, 2006 — Military sources told ABC News that there are likely to be charges filed against officers up the chain of command in connection with the killing of 24 civilians by U.S. Marines in Haditha, Iraq, in November 2005. Those who could be charged include senior officers who were not on the scene at the time of the killing but should have known something wrong had happened and done something about it. On Thursday, the White House confirmed that it was nearly three months after the Haditha killings that an investigation began, only after Time Magazine showed a video to a military spokesman. Until then, the military insisted the civilians in Haditha had been killed by a roadside bomb. But the video showed a bloody scene that suggested otherwise and prompted officials to launch a preliminary investigation into what happened. The investigation quickly uncovered evidence the civilians were killed by the Marines, not a roadside bomb. From that point interest in the case quickly reached the highest levels. "This is just a reminder for troops either in Iraq or throughout our military that there are high standards expected of them and there are strong rules of engagement," Bush said. "The Haditha incident is under investigation. Obviously, the allegations are very troubling for me and equally troubling for our military." Bush was first told about what happened on March 11, one week before Time Magazine first reported the story. Since then, the president has received regular updates on the investigation from the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Sources familiar with the investigations told ABC News that the initial report claiming the civilians were killed by a bomb was filed by Sgt. Frank Wuterich. Wuterich was the top ranking Marine on the team that went into the houses where the civilians were killed. The question now, though, is where were his superiors?

[bishop]

very good to hear.. thanks ish.

[Apeman81]

RickSp "In a bizarre attempt to somehow justify the American massacre of civilians in Iraq..."

So, RickSp, it seems you know the allegations to be true. Where did you get your information?

[Apeman81]

http://heraldsun.news.com.au/common/...55E401,00.html

Here's a typical news story about the incident;

Marine 'massacre' caught on film
From correspondents in Baghdad and Washington
29may06

You'll note that anyone who bothers to skim over the story will find that the "film" the flashy headline refers to are a series of photographs of bodies. Evidence of death, certainly, but not evidence of who killed them.

The pictures were taken by a U.S. Military photographer "who is believed to have arrived on the scene moments after the shootings." Believed by whom? These photographs "which are being closely guarded by the US military criminal investigation service," are apparently not being guarded closely enough. Sloppy work when engaged in an active coverup. Couldn't they get Sandy Berger to slip away with the photos in his socks and underwear?

The automatic assumption of guilt is troubling. Why is it so easy for so many to believe the allegations about our troops? Worse yet, once they have accepted without question the allegations, why is it so easy to use this "incident" to generalize the more than 1 million men and women that have served in this conflict?

If the evidence bears out the allegations, punishment will follow. That's the difference. America will not let this stand. But let's at least wait for the facts.

[Jack]

Why is it so easy for so many to believe the allegations about our troops?

Probably for the same reason that the My Lai massacre colored American's perceptions of those of us who served in Southest Asia. I suggest it's not a left/right problem, it's a human failure to understand that the actions of the few are not always representative of the behavior of the many.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Apeman81 RickSp "In a bizarre attempt to somehow justify the American massacre of civilians in Iraq..." So, RickSp, it seems you know the allegations to be true. Where did you get your information?

The US military has acknowledged as much. The ongoing investigation is determining responsibility, not whether anything happened. I guess you don't believe the military either.

This is boring Ape. First you call those of us outraged by the massacre, traitors "justif[ing] and embolden[ing] the actions of the terrorist forces", and now you slip into full denial mode. Pretty lame.

Well at least you aren't claiming that Americans machine gunned Nazi prisoners in WWII like your buddy O'Reilly. Now that is really stupid.

Why Haditha Matters

Enough details have emerged from survivors and military personnel to conclude that in the town of Haditha last November, members of the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marine Regiment perpetrated a massacre. The killings may have been in retaliation for the death of a Marine lance corporal, but this was not the work of soldiers gone berserk. The targets (children from 3 to 14, an old man in a wheelchair, taxi passengers), the hours-long duration of killings, the number of Marines involved, the careful mop-up — all amount to willful, targeted brutality designed to send a message to Iraqis. As Representative John Murtha has pointed out, the patently false story floated afterward, blaming the killings on roadside bombs, and Marine payoffs to survivors imply a cover-up that may extend far up the chain of command. What matters about Haditha? After all, Iraq is a place where civilians die every day. Many of them die as a result of insurgent car bombs, or at the hands of Sunni or Shiite militias. Many thousands of others died in US air attacks early in the war (as civilians did recently in airstrikes in another US war zone, Kandahar). Even in this context there remains a distinctly sickening horror in close-up systematic killing of civilians that's at odds with the declared US mission in Iraq and is repugnant to our national ideals. Even under intense battlefield conditions, troops can instigate atrocities, or they can resist them. In the My Lai massacre, in 1968, Hugh Thompson Jr., an American helicopter pilot, saved many lives by putting himself between the guns of Charlie Company and the villagers whom those behind the guns — led by their officers — were wantonly killing. A generation of future US military officers were taught the details of the My Lai massacre as a particular lesson: What makes war crimes is criminal leadership. Whatever the responsibility of the unit commanders in Haditha, it is George W. Bush as Commander in Chief who has sent the clear message that human rights abuses and violations of international law are justified in the "war on terror." That the Marines institutionally covered up Haditha until Time magazine raised questions with the Corps suggests that the moral damage from the Iraq War is broader than a single debased unit. That is what so powerfully motivates Murtha, a Marine and Vietnam veteran. Another Marine, Senator John Warner, is promising hearings, but his Armed Services Committee's toothless investigation of Abu Ghraib offers scant hope of serious inquiry. As with My Lai a generation ago, it is participants in the Haditha killings or cover-up — some haunted by what they saw or heard about — who are bringing details to the press.