Envoy: We'll Deal With Marine

NY News ^ | NY News

[McGavin999]

I think one of the first things to do is to identify the "insurgent". Hopefully, he'll turn out to be someone that most Iraqis know of, someone who was particularly evil.

[oceanview]

you are missing my point - I'm agreeing with you. I'm saying that Bush will lose support from his base if he folds on this, and doesn't support this guy.

[Just Lori]

all I am saying is, the MSM is behaving as we expect - we aren't listening to them, but the important thing is - is the administration? because what happens to this marine is in their hands. Rumsfeld should already have voiced "benefit of the doubt" support for him.


Ok, I'm with you....sorry. Just remember one thing..... a great deal DOES happen behind the scenes that even the MSM doesn't have access to. Just because Rumsfeld hasn't made a public statement doesn't mean this Marine is going to "fry" as I saw in an earlier post.

[Just Lori]

I'm saying that Bush will lose support from his base if he folds on this, and doesn't support this guy.


I disagree. Whether or not Bush says anything about this does not mean "he folds on this". IT DOESN'T HAVE TO HAPPEN ON THE EVENING NEWS IN ORDER FOR IT TO COUNT! I'm done. I give up.

[watchmenradio_dot_net]

traitors email

kevin@kevinsites.net

[traviskicks]

I mostly agree. I think most media bias is most often done not by lying or untruths, but by ommissions.

However, I don't believe this reporter wrote a story on this incident did he?

I may be wrong, but I believe it is just his video footage that got out.

If thats the case, then those writing the stories are at fault, not the original reporter. And every story I've seen had the part about the marine getting shot in the face in it.

And I thought the part about hte buddies being killed by a booby trapped explosive was from a different unit? or? (of course this is still relevent)

[John Lenin]

This isn't going to have any effect on GW whatsoever, it's a military matter, if anyone takes any heat it will be Rummy.

[Steel Wolf]

And they do NOT legally have the Geneva Convention behind them. If they are there, and not part of an organized fighting force, they are there to be killed. Period. Their choice, they made it.

They don't need the Geneva Conventions. Our own rules of engagement are more generous. We (the U.S. government) don't exercise our rights under international law when dealing with these guys. So, it doesn't matter if the Marine has international law on his side. The U.S. military is the entity that's going after him, and those rules are stricter.

[montag813]

A Marine who killed an unarmed wounded Iraqi in a Fallujah mosque "will be dealt with," the U.S. ambassador in Iraq said yesterday

IF THIS ADMINISTRATION DOES A DAMN THING TO THIS BRAVE YOUNG MARINE, THERE WILL BE A ROAR OF ANGER FROM THE HEARTLAND SUCH AS THIS NATION HAS NEVER SEEN. AND MR BUSH CAN KISS HIS "POLITICAL CAPITAL" GOODBYE.

YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED, MR RUMSFELD...TELL THEM TO DROP IT RIGHT NOW. STOP THIS "INVESTIGATION" ON BEHALF OF OUR ENEMIES...NOW!

CLEAR THIS YOUNG MAN'S NAME AND DEMAND A U.N. INVESTIGATION OF REALWAR CRIMES---THE FRENCH MURDER OF CIVILIANS IN THE IVORY COAST.

[4woodenboats]

What good would it do to have Rumsfield, Negroponte or anyone else in the administration start a running dialogue with the press over this? They know full well that any statement they make will be re written wildly out of context. I got 10 bucks that says we'll hear of a story by year's end tying this incident with our dissing the International Court for Persecuting American Leaders and Armed Service Personnel, twisting this Marine's heroic (yeah I spelled that right) actions into Bush's ""protection"" of a ""War Criminal"" as reasons to assemble the kangaroos for duty. The RATS gotta be peeing all over themselves with glee anticipating this. Ya know F'n is speed dialing all his positions to see where he stands on this, and I can hear Big Al the People's Pal gargling from here!

Negroponte's "We're dealing with it" should be the last word on it for a very long time, as it should have been with abu grabass. There's nothing wrong with whatever military body is appropriate looking at the facts regarding the shooting, and absolutely no purpose can be served by making it public. The very least said the better IMO.

[oceanview]

exactly right.

Bush won the election, in the face of pure hatred from the MSM. Why fear the MSM now? Take it to them.

Just a simple declaration of support, giving this Marine the benefit of the doubt, that's what I expect from Rumsfeld, especially in light of the losses in Fallujah.

[Syncro]

So, it doesn't matter if the Marine has international law on his side

Not my point. I guess my post wasn't as clear as I thought it was.

The terrorists become targets by coming into a sovereign country and fighting its military forces.

Fair game, no limit.

Our rules of engagement are generous, you are right. If they don't come into Iraq they will not be killed by Iraqi or Coalition Forces. If they do, they will be.

The Marine did his job and he should be allowed to keep on doing it.

[TheCrusader]

"However, I don't believe this reporter wrote a story on this incident did he?"

He's been talking about it to everybody, and speaking his opinions. Several FReepers have posted that his photos are used on an anti-war website. But yes, I'm quite sure the media in general have taken this video and run with it, but I'm equally sure that Mr Sites is pleased with his 'work'.

Food for thought:

if you're an embed with the Marines and you've captured a potentially explosive video like this that could have major world-wide ramifications, including but not limited to an Islamic uprising against Americans, do you simply release it to the media and watch the fireworks, or do you carefully consider the terrible consequences first and just give the video clip to the Marines and let them deal with it?

I know what I'd do, but then again I consider myself to be a responsible individual.