[sinkspur]

The initial event was an IED. That's a provocation, even if the response turns out to have been disproportionate, or even unlawful.

I want to make sure I understand.

You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a one block area can be shot and killed, even if they had nothing to do with the IED. Right?

[SevenMinusOne]

I want to make sure I understand. You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a one block area can be shot and killed, even if they had nothing to do with the IED. Right?

Stop your lying. We now know for certain that the people within these homes (at the very least one of them) knew exactly of this IED! - The young 10 year old girl clearly states on video that she was aware of the IED (didn't leave for school because her family was waiting for it) and she knew the exact moment it was going to go off (and covered her ears!).

No, this family is far from innocent (and clearly had much more then "nothing" to do with this IED).

We know the "civilians" of Haditha were asked to leave several times as this city was going to be fully engaged (thousands did leave) those that didn't too a large degree were in support of the insurgents. Especially those who happen to know where IED's are planted and watch as they kill Americans -

Why are you constantly wanting to give these people the benefit of the doubt and not our soldiers?? - Who are on the ground in that specific region and have plenty of ways to know who is supporting insurgents and who isn't.

This very same Marine unit just weeks earlier with an embedded CNN reporter (for over a month) claims how these men risked their lives saving Iraqi's....how they showed unbelievable restraint, etc, etc.

Yet you still want to think the worst of them...and even worse then that..think the best of these families who we now know clearly were directly or indirectly involved with the placed IED. In that at the very least they were completely aware of it.

You're unbelievable.

[Boundless]

>> The initial event was an IED. That's a provocation,
>> even if the response turns out to have been
>> disproportionate, or even unlawful.

With their "... Killings Unprovoked", Reuters wants weak-
minded readers to think the Marines arbitrarily jumped out
of their vehicles somewhere and began killing civilians.
What did happen, it wasn't that.

> You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a
> one block area can be shot and killed, even if they
> had nothing to do with the IED. Right?

Where did you get that? I have no opinion on the response
to the initial IED and/or any subsequent events, because
we don't have all the facts before us. We do know enough
to call the Reuters headline a lie.

[MNJohnnie]

Hey Sink,

Let me understand this. You are accusing US Marines of killing everyone with a square block of where the IED went off? Maybe you better try actually reading the article since you seem to have NO idea about what we are talking about and merely are posting inflammatory statements

[Future Snake Eater]

You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a one block area can be shot and killed, even if they had nothing to do with the IED. Right?

If only you knew...

[Scotsman will be Free]

I thought that his post was quite clear. He said it was a provocation, not a justification. In other words, if I slapped your face you would be provoked into doing something. Your response may be appropriate(slap me back) or it may not be(whip out a gun and shoot me).

[Jezebelle]

That's not what the poster said at all.

[VRWCmember]

You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a one block area can be shot and killed, even if they had nothing to do with the IED. Right?

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.

[Steve_Seattle]

"You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a one block area can be shot and killed, even if they had nothing to do with the IED. Right?"

Belated comment - That is NOT at all what he said. Your inaccuracy rivals that of Reuters. He said that whatever happened - even if it was in fact an excessive response - was triggered by the initial IED explosion. There is a difference between troops overreacting after an IED - which may have been what happened - and a truly "unprovoked" attack, in which troops randomly kill civilians apart from the stress and confusion of a combat situation. Moreover, it is highly likely that a good percentage of those killed - including women and children - were in fact acting on behalf of the insurgents, or were aware of and sympathetic to their activities. The difference between "insurgent" and "civilian" is extremely blurry - deliberately so, in fact. It is part of the insurgents' M.O.

[GVnana]

You believe that if an IED goes off, anybody within a one block area can be shot and killed, even if they had nothing to do with the IED. Right?

Hmmm. If someone in my neighborhood used an IED to attack Marines would I stand around and watch?