[R. Scott]

The word "should" is used and it says there is limited and specific mil necessities where they "should not" be.

It’s obvious that you don’t know the difference between “should” and “shall”.

" The Secretary of Defense said it? And you offer the article 15 report as proof?"

Yep. In fact both Rumsfeld and Bush are at the Pentagon this morning discussing the damage caused by all of those that have an inabilty to understand and follow simple English word usage.

Yes, they are trying to repair the damage caused by young troops obeying orders, and the immense damage caused by our media.
Please explain to me how the use of the Article 15 document shows that Mr. Rumsfeld said what you claim.

[spunkets]

"the difference between “should” and “shall”."

You're being obtuse.

" Please explain to me how the use of the Article 15 document shows that Mr. Rumsfeld said what you claim."

Not only Rumsfeld, but Bush too, because they have said nothing to the contrary. It's trivial that if they had, the Article 15 would be dropped.

[spunkets]

" Yes, they are trying to repair the damage caused by young troops obeying orders, and the immense damage caused by our media."

Military regs are the orders. They were disobeyed, and IMO, it was not mostly by young recruits, but senior noncoms and officers that failed to do their duty. The damage Bush is looking at this morning is more criminal than what is out already.

The media would have nothing to work with if the incidents never occurred. The cause and responsibility for these actions belongs to the ones that were charged with seeing that this "lord of the Flies" stuff never happens. None of the group Bush, Rumsfeld, or the Pentagon condoned, would condone, or authorized this stuff.