Posted on 11/15/2004 3:56:58 PM PST by Kaslin
Nothing new there.
"Soldiers have a sense of duty and honor in defending their country. Terrorists have no duty, no honor, and no country to defend."
I agree. Although, there are prob. some misguided souls who go along with the terrorist movement, who would have been ok in another time and place. But they would not feel that way about an American soldier or Marine, if they are indoctrinated enough to follow the terrorist line of thought and anti-human-conscience actions. So they cannot be trusted to react as a soldier would.
I don't know for sure if the Marine is in the wrong. I'll withhold judgement on the Marine until all the facts are in.
However, one thing I *do* know is that the media are dying to turn this into another Abu-Ghraib. Now that the election is over, they don't have to pretend to support our troops in order to get votes from middle America. They are back into default "Hate the Military" mode until the next election season.
I think the troll is attempting to discredit FR by getting the posters to endorse the execution of unarmed, wounded enemies.
I have confidence in the military's abililty to investigate the facts of this case. We should not dismiss the possibility that the soldier committed a war crime; likewise, it is possible he was justified in this partiucular shooting. That should be established by an investigation - not by MSM hysteria, or hysterical posters here.
One poster cited the killing of SS soldiers. Let me go on the record as suggesting that the shooting of unarmed Waffen SS soldiers, despite the reputation of those units, would rightly be considered a war crime. Absent justification in a specific instance, I would feel the same about the Jihadist enemy.
I believe our armed forces expects a higher standard of behavior than our enemies. I hope an investigation of this incident adheres to that standard, and protects the rights of our soldiers, even if accused.
I suppose he could have been thinking, "These "insurgents"
have a thing for booby trapping themselves, then blowing up
about the time a group of good men get close enough to be
killed, too."
Funny how our MSM always gives the benefit of the doubt to our enemies.
"Good movie"
Sounds like it!
Even Stalingrad, as horrific as it was. There was the refusal to rape the woman. There was some honor left. Even facing certain death.
As kids, we saw submarine movies about every week. There must have been a slew of them. I sweated out each depth charge!
Das Boot -- has to now define the genre, however.
Did not work. The fifth column is alive and well...
This is the risk you take as a terrorist. This Marine did his job, another terrorist is forever deterred from committing any further terrorist acts in this World.
When they are all dead, which I understand to be our goal in this thing, the World will be free of terrorists and a much safer place, peaceful place.
My data shows a strong correlation between dead terrorists and a reduction in terrorist acts Worldwide...let the Peace Train keep on movin'...
Semper Fi
Traitor NBC photographer email address:
kevin@kevinsites.net
http://www.kevinsites.net/
NBC- Nothing But Crap.
It does and it will. And that is the only place judgement should be passed. People like Chris Mathews aren't worthy of licking the sweat off the feet of any of our Marines or soldiers in Fallujah. I loath the worthless scum who decide they know the facts in all these cases before investigations even start. Our military heroes are professionals doing one of the most challanging jobs on earth. They, and the military they belong to deserve nothing less than then our utmost respect. More than any other institution in the world, our military admits fault and prosecutes those who commit criminal acts. Until this case is investigated and conclusions drawn, everyone else in the world can and should STFU.
Hope ya don't mind Tex, but I thought that this bears repeating.
Monitoring FNC now.
| 8 | “The 'insurgents' are terrorists and therefore not bound [protected?] by the Geneva Conventions.” |
Based on what we know so far, I think the Marine did the right thing, BUT...
It is incorrect to state that the Geneva Conventions do not apply to a non-signatory (the "insurgents"). Since the U.S. is a signatory, the GC's bind us to observe them during a conflict with a non-signatory.
However, it can be reasonably argued that there are other reasons the GC does not apply to these illegal combatants.
--Boot Hill
The media, by bringing up Abu-Ghraib, is trying to turn one incident into a "scandal". Then, they ask the question about what "the world" and the "arabs" will think, and will this be bad PR?
I don't think that we could get much worse PR than the AMERICAN media is doing to our soldiers. If our media just reported it mixed in with a report about, OH SAY, the dead Marines that were killed by booby traps, hiding in schools and mosques. In that instance, the Marines could do their job and check the situation out and deal with it. (Hopefully, standing by a good Marine)
But NO, the MSM hates the military and this war so they have made it their mission to turn it into a Vietnam and report every "atrocity" as if WE are the enemy to the peaceful people of the world.
think of it as pre-emption!!!
Good job marine
--Boot
I see no problem with this!!
Haven't read the thread, but it takes no time to see what is right.
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.