Posted on 05/31/2006 4:01:53 PM PDT by Types_with_Fist
A preliminary military inquiry found evidence that U.S. Marines killed two dozen Iraqi civilians in an unprovoked attack in November, contradicting the troops’ account, U.S. officials said on Wednesday.
President George W. Bush said he was troubled by news stories on the November 19 killings of men, women and children in the town of Haditha, and a general at the Pentagon said the incident could complicate the job for the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq.
“Allegations such as this, regardless of how they are borne out by the facts, can have an effect on the ability of U.S. forces to continue to operate,” Army Brig. Gen. Carter Ham, deputy director for regional operations for the military’s Joint Staff, told a Pentagon briefing.
You said:
When is it illegal for a Marine to fight back to prevent himself or other members of his unit from being killed during an attack on them?
My reply:
When it goes beyond the parameters you described, which the guy I was responding to indicated was perfectly OK.
Kindly note what I said. There is a line between the legitimate application of deadly force and murder, even in a combat zone. (For example, you're not allowed to shoot that guy in 3rd squad during a firefight because he wouldn't lend you 20 bucks.) There are indications that this event may very well have crossed the line between legal and illegal, based on the amount of shutting up and lawyering up going on at Camp Pendleton.
My next comment:
If you really want the Marines to be as bad as Saddam's thugs with no adverse consequences
Note the conditional construction. IF you want Marines to be exempt from the laws governing the use of deadly force, then you're saying that there is no law whatsoever, and therefore anything goes, and at that point you're remaking the Marines into something out of the worst days of Saddam Hussein's Iraq. That isn't a good thing.
You know this part..."then you'd best be ready to have yourself a fun and excitingly short life when they get out and become cops in your hometown."
Bottom line these Marines were attacked, they struck back at where they being attacked from, these civilians died not because The Marines were there, but because those that attacked the Marines were there.
Is there some reason why you don't want these Marines to be proven innocent of the charges that haven't yet even been filed against them?
Source, please. Name names.
Barney told her,
if you had read this thread I wouldn't have to repeat myself.
That's the strategery and this is my last word today on the very few posts I did re: Laura last night.
Fregards, FV
The fact is the only possible reliable sources for the kind of information you put out there would be either George W. Bush or Laura Bush themselves, because your claim is of an extremely personal nature, and of course, only they know what goes on behind closed doors in their relationship.
Sometimes it's best to just admit that you had no idea what you were talking about and drop it. This would be one of those times.
"Why should we be troubled if they're found guilty beyond reasonable doubt?"
Apparently there is a difference between bombing a neighborhood from 10 thousand feet in hopes of killing terrorists, that results in killing civilians, and...
...killing civilians in hopes of killing terrorists.
"...the horror, the horror."
Was there or was there not an IED that killed an American Marine right prior to this incident?
They are not Rob and Laura Petry. They don't have to be.
Based on the other poster's comments, I don't see how anybody can be obtuse enough to infer that is what he is stating. If an IED goes off, that is obviously a provocation and an act of aggression. Based on the jihadi terrorists' MO, the perps are often still in the area. Also, though it wasn't reported in this article, other reports have come out that support the Marines account that they came under small arms fire after the explosion. Under those circumstances, returning fire is certainly understandable and accidental collateral damage happens.
I'm surprised our guys showed restraint as long as they did. You don't keep getting your guys blown to bits and look around to a bunch of males sheepishly holding their hands up. It would have been my modus from day one, you people police these aholes or we'll police you. Violently. The savage opposition will win because we can't match their ferocity without being thrown in jail.
I read a lot of threads yesterday and everything I read was basically just more of the same, got tired of just repeating and even stopped pinging. The only thing was that supposedly one defense attorney spoke out but seemed still no real new facts that I could pick up.
Best news of the day IMO was the new Vets4Irey site. Diana talked on the Colmes radio show last night. I have a short account of it I'll send FReepmail if you didn't hear it, let me know.
If that is the case, why file false reports?
I'm not sure there is, but my goodness, the spin in this one just about gives me whiplash. As of this morning, though, I'm hearing the same spin everywhere, including Fox. The fact of the matter is that all of the evidence has not been given to the newsies, so we have NO idea what happened there. Everyone in MSM seems to be salivating for another MyLai. Sickening.
This forum is no place for cheap gossip.
We are under spiritual attack as a nation, and millions of us are praying in spirit and in TRUTH.........not in sacreligious tones as you are.
It is not me whom you mock.
Yes, W04Man worked hard on his new site. I hope a lot of veterans join the team.
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.
