Legitimate question to be sure, but I’m not convinced that’s what we’re contemplating here.
Did the crew actually kill innocent people, or was there something else going on here that is being ignored to go after these guys?
I don’t want these guys to be able to essentially carry out an extermination due to anger or being out of control. If that were the case here, I’d be all for a guilty verdict.
I’m not certain it is. Seems to me I heard some reports that led me to believe there was something going on here other than what the government is trying to make us think there was.
Perhaps someone else will step in and clarify the issue.
“I don’t want these guys to be able to essentially carry out an extermination due to anger or being out of control.”
They believed they were under attack. A type of attack that had happened many times before.
Where they erred was the panicked shooting of anything that moved in the square, by some of them, until relief arrived.
It SHOULD have been considered a “Fog of War” incident, but the Iraqi Gov, and Liberals in the US Media wanted BLOOD.
I’m just saying that giving anyone, anywhere, the privileges/ROE that sworn soldiers have with regards the use of force might have set a very dangerous precedent.
Soldiers are one thing, and we should completely allow our troops to kill or break whatever they need to; private individuals- I am not sure.