Posted on 11/17/2004 3:54:24 AM PST by notkerry
A WOUNDED US soldier seen on TV shooting dead an Iraqi prisoner was defended last night by SAS hero Andy McNab.
The US marine — shot in the cheek earlier — machine-gunned the man in the head as he lay bleeding in a mosque in Fallujah.
The soldier feared the Iraqi was pretending to be dead to draw him into a trap.
Just before the killing, a fellow GI yells: “He’s f***ing faking he’s dead!”
Walking away ... victim is obscured by fellow captive after burst of gunfire
The marine faces a murder probe.
But McNab — who has stared death in the face — said: “It’s easy for people sitting comfortably in their armchairs in front of the TV to take the moral high ground.
“They are not there in Fallujah, in that killing environment.
“We don’t know what is going through that marine’s head. The Iraqi could have been hiding a weapon or explosives.
Grisly ... the shot prisoner - on the left - lies dead in Fallujah mosque
“Troops are fighting an enemy that doesn’t stick to any rules.
“The insurgents use mosques to launch attacks. They come out under cover of a white flag, then attack the Americans. They plant booby-trap bombs on dead bodies.
“Every soldier has a right to defend himself, and if that is a grey area — then so be it.”
That last pic is color enhanced, probably by the "news media."
Sorry, I don't have any links. This has been all over the news, so multiple sources, combined with deduction.
The Iraqui who got "re-shot" was not in captivity at the time of the incident. He had been wounded the day before when Marines stormed the mosque/sniper bunker and cleaned out the bad guys. He was treated on the spot by US medics, then left where he was in the mosque when the Marines moved on.
The next day, insurgents sneaked back into the mosque and resumed sniping, so the Marines had to go back in and re-take the mosque. It was during this mission that he was re-shot.
The mere fact that the Marines had him in their control long enough to treat him and move on, does not make him a prisoner. When the insurgents came back the next day, the mosque was back in their control until the Marines went back in.
At that point, the dead perp was a wounded enemy combatant in an unsecured fire zone, meaning he was still "in the game" until he could physically be secured in a way where he was a guaranteed non-threat. That means dead, or secured captive.
War's tough. Our guy lived. That's my take on it, anyway...
Thanks. So far, my impression is that the terrorist was not in captivity.
Damn right.
>"Don't you think that blaming the guy who just happened to be there with a camera is a little bit crazy?"<
Sites had an agenda:
Chemist_Geek is a known Muhammadan sympathizer...fwiw.
-Perhaps I misunderstood you, when you said; "Blame the Bush admin. for allowing these guys there in the first place."
-Were you speaking of blaming bush for allowing reporters into the war zone?
If so, you may have a point, but cameramen have always been allowed into battles.
Bush's mistake was thinking that these guys were all LOYAL Americans, and that they would have our soldiers best interest in their filming, especially since the soldiers watch out for the camermen, and protect their ASSES.
Can you imaagine our WWII soldiers being trerated like this?
I guaren-damn-tee you, our WWII guys shot wounded soldiers all the time. It happened with the Germans, and it happened with the Japanese.
It's been known throughout the history of warfare, that a mortally wounded combatant is the most dangerous of all.
The only person that doesn't seem to know that is Kevin Sites, and the rest of the leftie-rats who don't give a rip about our guys in combat.
If this terrorist had been booby-trapped, as his buddies were the day before, then we wouldn't be talking about this would we? No, we would be hearing the report of another dead soldier in Iraq, and this a-hole Kevin Sites would be filming his dead body.
Screw that, and screw camermen who aren't loyal to THIS country, and OUR soldiers.
regards
thanks for the warning about chemist geek.
Regards
Hear, Hear!
Damn, that was spot on...
Sure, cover the truth up. That's the Bush way!
Do you two realize that the day before, this same Marine was shot in the face, and his friend in the same unit was KILLED by a terrorist who BOOOBY TRAPPED his body???
Yes. So, if an Iraqi sees his family killed, he's got a free ticket to off an American? No, of course not. You hold Iraqis and Americans to different standards; incredibly, the Americans to the lower standard. And here I thought we were superior.
Blame the Bush administration for what; Islamo-Fascism?
Blame the Bush administration for launching an unconstitutional war against a nation that did not attack us.
It's an unfortunate truth that this sort of thing is going to happen in this kind of war. That's something that should be considered BEFORE the invasion, not after.
I know that discussing the moral element of the war is not popular at FR. (So much for Republicans being for "values"! I guess nowadays "values" only apply to sex.) But in the end the moral level is where the war will be won or lost. Bush is taking us down the road to defeat. Not that he gives a shit, but we should.
For this cameraman, there was nothing to "get". He has an anti-war agenda and was waiting for the opportunity to photo something "irregular" to further this agenda. As an "imbed", he had an obligation to send a copy of the video to the marine commander to proceed up the chain-of-command. Instead, what he did was espionage, and I hope he is so charged.
"We happy few. We Band of Brothers".
Chemist_Geek is a Muzzy lover? Euwww!
Why do you blame the cameraman? He recorded an event that happened. It is not his business to judge the legality of the situation, any more than it is your business to do so. Has the cameraman made any statements about the event? After all, he was there and you were not.
That's already been denied.
UPDATE at 11/17/04 8:36:56 am:
Correction: the person who produces Kevin Sites’ blog, Xeni Jardin, emailed to tell me that “Images Against War” used the photos linked above without permission....
Thanks to former SAS McNab, covering the back of a fellow warrior fighting to protect civilization.
"Sure, cover the truth up. That's the Bush way!"
I'm not talking cover-up, I'm talking using dicretion to protect our soldiers in harms way.
What do you think would have happened in WWII, if films were turned over in the heat of the battle, to the Germans or the Japanese?
That is in effect, what Sites did. If Sites thought a crime was committed, he could have turned this over to the commanders, or to the DOD. But no, he wanted to make a buck, and get some fame. My son is a Marine, FRiend, and he has told me how these embeds just wait to catch them in a screw-up, or an accident. I have talked to guys that have been over there, and these camermen and journalists, (unlike the cameramen of WWII,) are not LOYAL to America. A sad comment on American journalists.
" And here I thought we were superior."
WE are superior. I want to see the soldiers who don't obey the rules, punished; (IE the Abu Graibe prison scandal)
But I'm also willing to give them the benefit of the doubt, especially in the midst of a battle,(as this Marine was), in the event that an enemy comabatant might have a grenade or a detonator hidden under his clothes.
"You hold Iraqis and Americans to different standards; incredibly, the Americans to the lower standard."
- REALLY??? You think any of us who supports the war on Islamo-Fascism, and their dictators, wants our soldiers to act like THIS??? (below)
These terrorists who were using this mosque as an ammo dump, and who were the same guys who had been in a firefight with our Marines, a half hour ealier.
Read the report! This was the second time the Marines had been in this mosque. The first time, they left the wounded alone. A day earlier, one of the Marines in this same battalion, checked one of the terrorists, and was blown to smithereens, because the guy was booby trapped with explosives. This was this same Marines buddy. Do YOU think he wanted to take the chance of going home in a body bag, as well?
ANYONE who is HONEST, would have done the EXACT same thing in this situation, especially given that his friend was just killed in a similar situation, the day before.
View the footage, in it's totality, which is available online.
Note that the Marine did not fire a round into the other man, who showed his hands. He was not viewed as a threat, and so he did not fire his weapon.
"Blame the Bush administration for launching an unconstitutional war against a nation that did not attack us."
- Nazi Germany didn't attack us either. Was that an unconstitutional war in your view, as well?
We had a cease fire agreement with Saddam, of which 17 U.N. resolutions, allowing the use of force did not faze Saddam. The use of force, was authorized by Congress, and signed by 98 Senators made this war VERY Constitutional, my FRiend.
And as for Saddam not attacking us, I could give you a dozen instances, where he directly was responsible for the deaths of Americans, including an attempted assassination on Bush 42. Abu Nidel lived in Baghdad, at the pleasure of Saddam, and he was the terrorist who pushed wheelchair bound AMERICAN citizen Leon Klinghoffer off of the hijacked Achille Lauro. Not to mention Abu Abas, and on, and on ,and on...
Also, Saddam gave $25,000 to every family of Hamas homicide bombers some who killed American citizens whose only crime was to be in Israel on vacation. But I guess that doesn't account for an attack on Americans, because they were stupid enough to leave the U.S.
So, I could go on, but I'm sure it would be a waste of time, You appear to be convinced that we are the bad guys, and Saddam and his terrorist buddies were no threat to us.
Oh...For the record, Winston Churhill warned Europe about Hitler almost 7 years before he started killing millions of people.
By the way...Churchill was also called a "Warmonger", by liberals both here and abroad.
HUH... The more things change, the more they remain the same, with Pacifist Appeasors of Fascism.
(sigh)
...Take care
Man, you got to learn a few things about this place if you're to survive.
Namely how to separate the wheat from the chaff.
And the dog food breathed bitch?
...that moron's *chaff*.
BTT
>"Man, you got to learn a few things about this place if you're to survive."<
It wasn't an excersise in futilty, Lan...I was merely sharpening my own argument.
After all...how would car manufacturers know how well their cars hold up in crash tests, Lan...if not for a *DUmmy*?
;^D
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.