Posted on 04/15/2007 2:12:23 PM PDT by RedRover
Excellent article! Thanks for the ping.
How about massacres that are fabricated by our enemy to create more insurgents? There was no "kill 'em all" attitude in Haditha and I don't see evidence of one on the Afghan Highway. But I see evidence, in both cases, of extremely dubious testimony by individuals who do not wish us well. I would be very careful at jumping on the massacre bandwagon and accusing our troops of creating more insurgents.
What a bunch of ...
I’m glad I’m retired, or I’d be up on charges.
My Lai was an aberration, and as such, was not condoned in any way. It has nothing whatsoever to with Haditha.
Your reference to twenty-somethings with guns killing people is insulting.What age should a soldier be in your opinion, before they're allowed to defend themselves?
I'm using My Lai as a perfect, non-contraversial example. I could use Haditha, but the courts are still trying to figure out what happened there.
I maintain that there has never been a conviction of a soldier or Marine who responded to a direct attack and killed civilians. When all the emoting is swept away, Haditha and the Afghan Highway were responses to attacks And that's why they'll be nearly impossible to prosecute in court while prosecution in the media is a breeze.
Two points. First, I'm not sure we can state that with any certainty. We only know the cases with reported opinions (which is not an exhaustive list), and I haven't had time to do a complete search even of that. Second, the absence of a precedent isn't dispositive - they are easily enough created. Haditha or another similar prosecution could create just such a precedent.
I believe the DoD (or, more properly, influential individuals within that sprawling bureaucracy) are urging prosecution of cases that can't be won.
Entirely possible.
And I don't see this as having a salutory effect on the WOT.
If the Marines and soldiers are acquitted after a full, fair trial, it will be far better for then than if there were none at all. They will not linger under the cloud of allegations any longer - and, if you are correct and the case cannot be won, the Marines have little to fear.
“Sir, Before I comply with your order to attack, I’ll have to confer with my lawyer on the legality of that order. Would you kindly inform the enemy that they have to wait until my answer comes back?............”
That would be the GROE - the Gentelmen’s Rules of Engagement.
It shouldn't be. It's the nature of the problem - when you give guns to kids, don't be surprised when a few of them abuse them. In a situation when there are 150,000 troops in Iraq at any given time, it shouldn't be surprising if there are a few isolated incidents when someone goes overboard. It is, in fact, inevitable.
My Lai was an aberration, and as such, was not condoned in any way. It has nothing whatsoever to with Haditha.
My Lai is an example of one extreme. Haditha falls somewhere else on the continuum, and the courts are still trying to nail down just where.
More insult.Disgusting.
And I'm sick and tired of the media labeling a firefight excessive force, depending on how many shots were fired. Marines are specifically trained to throw AS MUCH LEAD at their enemy as possible, until they're beaten back, dead, or beating a hasty retreat. Often times, even then, Marines are told to hunt down and pursue those that flee. All of this is well documented, and the media keeps shying away from the truth.
It’s not an insult to anyone without a damned chip on their shoulder. Deal with it.
“when you give guns to kids” - Personally, I don’t look at these Marines as kids, they are young men who are willing to face their fears and perform the duties that the US has asked of them. They are men in my book, regardless of their age.
Re. your comments on the Army Counterinsurgency Manual,...” Commanders must ensure Soldiers and Marines understand the rules of engagement, which become more restrictive as peace and stability return.”....
Unfortunately, Haditha was nowhere near peace and stability at the time this incident occurred. The Marines were trying to bring stability in the midst of IED’s, entrenched terrorists, and all before the Iraqi elections.
Agreed that anyone who serves does so with honor. Even so, my point still stands that these are guys almost all just out of high school who have been given guns. A few bad apples are inevitable.
Unfortunately, Haditha was nowhere near peace and stability at the time this incident occurred. The Marines were trying to bring stability in the midst of IED’s, entrenched terrorists, and all before the Iraqi elections.
Certainly true. It would be helpful if we could get a copy of the actual ROE's, but they are, in fact, classified.
Every civilian death is not murder. I honestly don't know how collateral damage fits into COIN doctrine other than the Breaker Morant method.
I do understand that a counterinsurgency is, as they say, like learning to eat soup with a knife. But responsibility has to be taken for the training troops have received. They are trained to respond to threats so that the every men may end up back home. If this basic understanding of force protection is undermined, I seriously wonder about the consequences this will have for our military.
I'm getting the exact opposite read. You hear occasionally about checkpoint incursions, and so forth, but only Haditha and Hamadiya prosecutions. I haven't heard anything about Fallujah prosecutions, even though there were significant civilian casualties. I've heard estimates of hundreds of thousands of Iraq civilian deaths (although many of them must be attributed to insurgent activity too). In short, there are relatively few civilian death prosecutions, and those seem to be reserved for those that are most egregious, or at least are perceived as such.
I do understand that a counterinsurgency is, as they say, like learning to eat soup with a knife.
Important point.
. But responsibility has to be taken for the training troops have received. They are trained to respond to threats so that the every men may end up back home.
Another important point.
Wrong.
The subject of this thread is primarily about young men, United States Marines.
The next time you see a Marine, I would recommend not addressing him as "a kid with a gun", unless you're prepared to "deal with it".
That’s exactly why “excessive force” is a terrible argument to make in a military court. An order to wipe out a farming village is clearly illegal and should be disobeyed and reported. But if lance corporals start refusing orders to fire because they fear it may be deemed excessive, than we should just start painting our helmets blue.
Thanks for the links, Lancey.
What a load of crap.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.