Replies

But the winner has to be frostbit, who actually suggests that it was Iraqis who shot the civilians, Iraqis in US uniforms driving US Humvees. Just can't get his head around scared, trigger happy troops who have been in the field too long. Can't imagine any US tropps perpetuating such an atrocity, so it must be those crafty Iraqis shooting their own people again.
_____________

Thanks, clamboat. I'm glad that someone like you has an omniscient source to tell us all what really happened, or perhaps it was divine guidance on your part.

I based my opinions on my own limited experience actually leading troops in combat in GW1. Let's see if I can be more precise for you, in order to assuage your abject disbelief of my remarks.

Have there been Iraqis killed wearing coalition uniforms, right down to the shoulder patches? Yes, as reported by several news sources. Have there been additional caches of these uniforms recovered? Again, yes. Have the US/UK forces recovered training manuals describing how to carry out just these types of attacks? Absolutely. Are there insurgents actively carrying out sabotage attacks on infrastructure in order to engender anti coalition forces? Yep.

The author of the article has apparently pieced together 'witness' accounts from several incidents that occurred in the same vicinity over several days. Is it possible that events occurred exactly as described? Anything is possible, but I find it highly unlikely if the troops are the same high caliber I am familiar with. There are certainly some psychotic troops willing to roll grenades under their commanders tent, but they are thankfully the very rare exception.

Contrary to your grand military-cover-up-in-the-making assertion, the military did comment. The Lt General (that's THREE stars) said he was not aware of the incidents, which leads to several possiblities: (1) It didn't happen; (2) It happened, but the US military wasn't involved; (3) It happened as described, and the three star general is ignorant or a liar.

So, my choices, given the limited information provided, are thus: I can believe that the military personnel conducted themselves professionally and according to their training, whatever actually happened, OR, I can believe that US soldiers murdered innocent civilians either intentionally or because they were 'in the field too long' as you asserted. The soldiers abandoned the dead bodies and the victims in some cases, or torched the car with the victim still inside in another. To believe this, I would have to think the witnesses here are credible. Of course, the Iraqis have NEVER been known to fabricate or exaggerate stories to the media, and someone who wants to drink Bush's blood HAS to be truthful.

Believing this tripe as reported flies in the face of everything I've experienced about the military folks. Until proven otherwise, I know which side I'm willing to believe. Of course, everyone has bias based on their life experiences, and the black helicopter crowd may fall on a different side of the fence.

From the tone and tenor of your post, it's pretty clear where you stand. With limited facts, it's just as improbable to you that the soldiers acted honorably, as it is to me that they did not. And that's fine, we're just going to have to disagree. Vehemently, in my case.