Marines Killed Four Wounded Iraqi Prisoners: US Reporter

[OutHouse]

he WAS NOT A PRISONER!!!! He was not cuffed, nor was there anybody in charge of them. they were left behind after another group of marines shot the hell out of them when the terrorist shot at them from the mosque. NOBODY was with them the 24 hours after the first group of Marines bitched slapped them.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Citrix

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Okay, if your worry is that a dead body is booby-trapped, how exactly is shooting a live body going to prevent you from being the victim of a booby trap? It sounds like the worry was alive Iraqis killing the marines. If that is the worry, why are you bringing up the dead-body booby traps?

His worry is that the "dead" body (read - wounded insurgent) is holding an explosive device and is waiting until enough Infidels get within range to ensure Allah's satisfaction and 5742 virgins in the Great Beyond.

- M4H

A guy bleeding to death is going to wait 24 hours to detonate himself?

Allah is a powerful motivator, I hear. But how do you know upon seeing the "body" that it's been 24 hours, that he actually is mortally wounded, and does or does not have a grenade?

- M4H

Because when this group of Marines entered the mosque, the reporter with them said the insurgents inside had been left behind by a another group of Marines the day before.

Has the reporter or a USMC squad been watching the insurgents nonstop since then?

Call me insensitive - probably because it's the truth - but I'm not going to drop my guard because some guy with a camera says "No, it's okay, these guys who are bent on killing you any way they can are totally harmless."

- M4H

If you WERE a soldier i would be worried about that attitude, POW's are more worth than dead enemies.

Which is why soldiers follow orders and not emotions, this soldier disobeyed orders and killed an incapacitated enemy, he will spend time in prison for that and he should.

What the FU*K is your problem! what is your rank? Spec somthing? The scumbag he shot was not a EPW, get that through your thick head. Second, What fricken orders did he disobey? How in the hell do you know what his orders were? You have no damn clue on the situation of this Marine. He saw a threat to him and his brother marines and took it out. He isnt a damn cop where he has to ask for the bad guy to drop his gun, or yell show my your hands. He is a Marine involved in a MOUNT operation, his only mission is to kill the enemy!

My problem, you fvcking piece of crap is that these actions puts me and my men in unneccesary jeopardy, the "scumbag" he sho was incapacitated, you can defend that as much as you want, but it is STILL the most stupid stance you can take.

I don't think there are ANY orders to kill the ones injured and incapacitated, this was personal initiative, you have to be REALLY daft not to realize that.

My rank is Captain and i would never issue an order that involved the killing of an injured soldier, neither would ANY officer of the US that i know of.

My fvcking problem is idiots like you who try to justify this, do you think the soldier would have been taken off active duty if he did what he was ordered to? FVCKING THINK MCFLY!!!!

Your idiotic stance is nothing but embarrasing for yourself.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: Infohawk
Okay, if your worry is that a dead body is booby-trapped, how exactly is shooting a live body going to prevent you from being the victim of a booby trap? It sounds like the worry was alive Iraqis killing the marines. If that is the worry, why are you bringing up the dead-body booby traps?

His worry is that the "dead" body (read - wounded insurgent) is holding an explosive device and is waiting until enough Infidels get within range to ensure Allah's satisfaction and 5742 virgins in the Great Beyond.

- M4H

A guy bleeding to death is going to wait 24 hours to detonate himself?

Allah is a powerful motivator, I hear. But how do you know upon seeing the "body" that it's been 24 hours, that he actually is mortally wounded, and does or does not have a grenade?

- M4H

Because when this group of Marines entered the mosque, the reporter with them said the insurgents inside had been left behind by a another group of Marines the day before.

Has the reporter or a USMC squad been watching the insurgents nonstop since then?

Call me insensitive - probably because it's the truth - but I'm not going to drop my guard because some guy with a camera says "No, it's okay, these guys who are bent on killing you any way they can are totally harmless."

- M4H

If you WERE a soldier i would be worried about that attitude, POW's are more worth than dead enemies.

Which is why soldiers follow orders and not emotions, this soldier disobeyed orders and killed an incapacitated enemy, he will spend time in prison for that and he should.

All fine and good to say after the fact that had they taken him in, he wouldn't have blown himself up. But what's worth more, one Iraqi POW, or three US Marines?

And yes, I know - I'm way too insubordinate to ever be a functional grunt. I'm willing to live with that.

- M4H

If that soldier HAD been boobie trapped the shot taken would have ensured death for everyone in the building.

No you are not too insubordinate, you just lack the knowledge neccessary to be a grunt, which is why your assessment of the situation is so completely wrong.

I'm a hothead myself, but that has nothing to do with situations like this one.

It has more to do with boredome than hotheadedness.

Okay, to be clear - are we talking about a booby-trap like "monofilament tied to a claymore" where it'll go off it the guy so much as twitches, or the lower-tech but equally effective "grenade under the coat"? The former will go off if the guy is shot and slumps over, the latter won't.

- M4H

Actually the most common traps are not explosives tied to the body, it is explosives tied to the weak structures of the building, if the man holding the trigger dies you are either dead or trapped.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Taejin
War is an excuse to justify any and all killings that go out there!

Geneva Convention? PAH! Our Fuhrer said it doesn't matter! Unarmed man dies? So what! Let's just chalk it up to accident! You know those soldiers are right in killing every sand n*gger that twitches because THEY'RE ALL RIGGED WITH BOMBS!

Right, and then when they start torturing US soldiers, breaking their arms, putting out their eyes and stripping the muscles from their bones, you'll whine and bitch about how horrible they are.

What goes around, comes around. Expect it - they'll only receive what they dish out.

STFU!

 

[MercenaryForHire]

(De-deepquoted for ease of reading.)

Originally posted by: Klixxer
Actually the most common traps are not explosives tied to the body, it is explosives tied to the weak structures of the building, if the man holding the trigger dies you are either dead or trapped.

I wouldn't think they'd do that in a mosque, but you're right, that would spell doom.

- M4H

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Klixxer

Originally posted by: Taejin
War is an excuse to justify any and all killings that go out there!

Geneva Convention? PAH! Our Fuhrer said it doesn't matter! Unarmed man dies? So what! Let's just chalk it up to accident! You know those soldiers are right in killing every sand n*gger that twitches because THEY'RE ALL RIGGED WITH BOMBS!

Right, and then when they start torturing US soldiers, breaking their arms, putting out their eyes and stripping the muscles from their bones, you'll whine and bitch about how horrible they are.

What goes around, comes around. Expect it - they'll only receive what they dish out.

STFU!

And DIAF!

- M4H

 

[OutHouse]

My problem, you fvcking piece of crap is that these actions puts me and my men in unneccesary jeopardy, the "scumbag" he sho was incapacitated, you can defend that as much as you want, but it is STILL the most stupid stance you can take.

I don't think there are ANY orders to kill the ones injured and incapacitated, this was personal initiative, you have to be REALLY daft not to realize that.

My rank is Captain and i would never issue an order that involved the killing of an injured soldier, neither would ANY officer of the US that i know of.

My fvcking problem is idiots like you who try to justify this, do you think the soldier would have been taken off active duty if he did what he was ordered to? FVCKING THINK MCFLY!!!!

Your idiotic stance is nothing but embarrasing for yourself.

Oooo pardon me Sir!! Since you are an Officer your stance on this is even more disturbing. Good job on backing up your troops there boss. Im sure they sleep well at night knowing they work for a piece of sh*t officer like yourself. The bottom line is, YOU nor I know the exact details of this story. the camera was across the room when mr terrorist went to satans waiting arms. I will always back our troops until the evidence proves other wise. This is something that you as an Officer should be doing as well. did you meet your quota for Artical-15's this month?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: smashp

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Czar

The US admin painted the same picture that every other country did for years and years, until the US wanted to step in and ruin their little oil-for-bribery scam. All of the sudden their tune changed overnight. It was quite astonishing to watch.

I am saying that the Admin knew better but continued to bleat the references they knew were false.

that picture Powell presented at the UN broke a day later when Kurdish leaders in favor of an invasion said that terorrist training camps were actually their own camps, most of the proof went the same way shortly after

Actually, they didn't deny the camps. They denied the assertion by Powell that chemicals/biologicals were being produced there. Powell also discussed Salman Pak which is not in Kurd controlled territory.

And Salman Pak was all overblown and exaggerated claims. Nothing came out of there that matched even the most minute of claims.

Oh. You mean because of claims from people like Mohammed Aldouri, the Iraqi ambassador to the UN, who claimed there was no terrorist training camp in Salman Pak, despite the US having captured foriegn fighters in Iraq claiming they were trained there?

This same ambassador also claims Saddam never gassed the Kurds. :roll:

Ask CIA Analyst Stephen Pelletiere and put down the talking points. nobody positively knows how and by who the Halabja townfolk were killed.

You quote Pelletiere and tell ME to put down the talking points?

/deep intake of breath

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. His bs has been so thoroughly debunked it's not even worth posting a rebuttal to it. Do some legwork for yourself and check it out. Replying with the Pelletiere article is like someone claiming the earth is round so you link the Flat Earth Society as proof it's not. It's posted on the intarweb, so it must be true, eh?

Then conjur comes in with claims from Chomsky's buttbuddy, Hersh, that nothing was found in Salman Pak. Well duh. It was already well known by then that Saddam had moved the BW equipment to the al Hakam facility and this was even corroborated by the UN inspection team as well as Butler and Duelfer.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/...ld/iraq/salman_pak.htm

The Salman Pak biological warfare facility was located on a peninsula caused by a bend in the Tigris river, approximately five kilometers (km) from the arch located in the town of Salman Pak. The facility area comprised more than 20 square km, and might have been known as a farmers (or agricultural) experimentation center. The peninsula was fenced off and patrolled by a large guard force. Immediately inside and to the east of the fence line were two opulent villas: the larger built for Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and the other for his half-brother, Barazan al-Tikriti. A main paved road ran through the center of the Salman Pak facility/peninsula. [GulfLINK]

Plans were made in the mid-1980's to develop the Salman Pak site into a secure biological warfare research facility. Dr Rihab Taha, head of a small biological weapons research team, continued to work with her team at al-Muthanna until 1987 when it moved to Salman Pak, which was under the control of the Directorate of General Intelligence.

Located at the facility are several buildings. The probable main research building at the site is a modern building, composed of twenty four rooms, housing a major BW research facility. Using current technology the research area alone had sufficient floor space to accommodate several continuous-flow or batch fermenters that could produce daily sufficient anthrax bacteria to lethally assault hundreds of square kilometers. Adjacent to the research building is a storage area which contains four munitions type storage bunkers with lightning arrestors. Two of these bunkers have facilities for storage of temperature sensitive biological material. Approximately a mile down the road from the research area is a complex US intelligence believed to be an engineering area. One building in this complex was thought to contain a fermentation pilot plant capable of scale up production of BW agents. A construction project comprising several buildings was begun in early 1989 adjacent to the engineering area, and was near completion in 1990. This new complex was assessed as a pharmaceutical production plant. As such, this facility would have an extensive capability for biological agent production. [GulfLINK]

Salman Pak, located 30-40 km SE of Baghdad, engaged in laboratory scale research on Anthrax, Botulinum toxin, Clostridium, perfringens (gas gangrene), mycotoxins, aflatoxins, and Ricin. Researchers at this site carried out toxicity evaluations of these agents and examined their growth characteristics and survivability.

Equipment-moving trucks and refrigerated trucks were observed at the Salman Pak BW facility prior to the onset of bombing, suggesting that Iraq was moving equipment or material into or out of the facility. Information obtained after the conflict revealed that Iraq had moved BW agent production equipment from Salman Pak to the Al Hakam suspect BW facility.

The Qadisiya State Establishment [aka Al-Qadsia], involved in the program to produce Al Hussein class missiles, is apparently located nearby, along with the Al-Yarmouk facility which according to some reports was associated with the chemical munitions program [and which other reports place at Yusufiyah.

Iraq told UN inspectors that Salman Pak was an anti-terror training camp for Iraqi special forces. However, two defectors from Iraqi intelligence stated that they had worked for several years at the secret Iraqi government camp, which had trained Islamic terrorists in rotations of five or six months since 1995. Training activities including simulated hijackings carried out in an airplane fuselage [said to be a Boeing 707] at the camp. The camp is divided into distinct sections. On one side of the camp young, Iraqis who were members of Fedayeen Saddam are trained in espionage, assassination techniques and sabotage. The Islamic militants trained on the other side of the camp, in an area separated by a small lake, trees and barbed wire. The militants reportedly spent time training, usually in groups of five or six, around the fuselage of the airplane. There were rarely more than 40 or 50 Islamic radicals in the camp at one time.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Citrix
Oooo pardon me Sir!! Since you are an Officer your stance on this is even more disturbing. Good job on backing up your troops there boss. Im sure they sleep well at night knowing they work for a piece of sh*t officer like yourself. The bottom line is, YOU nor I know the exact details of this story. the camera was across the room when mr terrorist went to satans waiting arms. I will always back our troops until the evidence proves other wise. This is something that you as an Officer should be doing as well. did you meet your quota for Artical-15's this month?

Maybe all the chickenhawks in this thread can write letters to the troops telling them how they, as e-tough-guys, would handle the situation?

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire
(De-deepquoted for ease of reading.)

Originally posted by: Klixxer
Actually the most common traps are not explosives tied to the body, it is explosives tied to the weak structures of the building, if the man holding the trigger dies you are either dead or trapped.

I wouldn't think they'd do that in a mosque, but you're right, that would spell doom.

- M4H

It has been quite common in other comabat zones.

The booby trapped corpses are extremely rare and not something you shoot at from less than 100 feet.

This was an example of fatique and indifference, it is to be expected but it can never be used as justification which is why this soldier will face justice.

Some will always justify the actions but you and i know better.

I would REALLY like DonVito in this thread.

 

[Infohawk]

Originally posted by: Klixxer
I would REALLY like DonVito in this thread.

DonVito came in a similar thread I believe. I'm starting to get them all confused. He thought the guy was worthy of prosecution.

But you know, alternatively you could listen to Passions... also a very thoughtful poster. 😉

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Citrix

My problem, you fvcking piece of crap is that these actions puts me and my men in unneccesary jeopardy, the "scumbag" he sho was incapacitated, you can defend that as much as you want, but it is STILL the most stupid stance you can take.

I don't think there are ANY orders to kill the ones injured and incapacitated, this was personal initiative, you have to be REALLY daft not to realize that.

My rank is Captain and i would never issue an order that involved the killing of an injured soldier, neither would ANY officer of the US that i know of.

My fvcking problem is idiots like you who try to justify this, do you think the soldier would have been taken off active duty if he did what he was ordered to? FVCKING THINK MCFLY!!!!

Your idiotic stance is nothing but embarrasing for yourself.

Oooo pardon me Sir!! Since you are an Officer your stance on this is even more disturbing. Good job on backing up your troops there boss. Im sure they sleep well at night knowing they work for a piece of sh*t officer like yourself. The bottom line is, YOU nor I know the exact details of this story. the camera was across the room when mr terrorist went to satans waiting arms. I will always back our troops until the evidence proves other wise. This is something that you as an Officer should be doing as well. did you meet your quota for Artical-15's this month?

I back my troops doing the job right, not acting like vigilantes or terrorists, we do not kill wounded unarmed men, my men are WAY more professional than that.

My men know that commiting crimes of war are unforgivable (which this guy who killed the unarmed man will soon learn as he is being prosecuted, i assume you are against that too?), your willingness to forgive them is disgusting, what the fvck are you aiming for, soldiers following terrorist rules?

You seem to be completely and utterly fvcked in the head, OBL has the same viewpoint as you do, civilian, unarmed, who cares?

I find this utterly dispicable and disgusting, it makes me wish that you never procreate.

This soldier will serve time in prison for his actions, others might learn from this example, which is a good thing.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: smashp

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Czar

The US admin painted the same picture that every other country did for years and years, until the US wanted to step in and ruin their little oil-for-bribery scam. All of the sudden their tune changed overnight. It was quite astonishing to watch.

I am saying that the Admin knew better but continued to bleat the references they knew were false.

that picture Powell presented at the UN broke a day later when Kurdish leaders in favor of an invasion said that terorrist training camps were actually their own camps, most of the proof went the same way shortly after

Actually, they didn't deny the camps. They denied the assertion by Powell that chemicals/biologicals were being produced there. Powell also discussed Salman Pak which is not in Kurd controlled territory.

And Salman Pak was all overblown and exaggerated claims. Nothing came out of there that matched even the most minute of claims.

Oh. You mean because of claims from people like Mohammed Aldouri, the Iraqi ambassador to the UN, who claimed there was no terrorist training camp in Salman Pak, despite the US having captured foriegn fighters in Iraq claiming they were trained there?

This same ambassador also claims Saddam never gassed the Kurds. :roll:

Ask CIA Analyst Stephen Pelletiere and put down the talking points. nobody positively knows how and by who the Halabja townfolk were killed.

You quote Pelletiere and tell ME to put down the talking points?

/deep intake of breath

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA. His bs has been so thoroughly debunked it's not even worth posting a rebuttal to it. Do some legwork for yourself and check it out. Replying with the Pelletiere article is like someone claiming the earth is round so you link the Flat Earth Society as proof it's not. It's posted on the intarweb, so it must be true, eh?

Then conjur comes in with claims from Chomsky's buttbuddy, Hersh, that nothing was found in Salman Pak. Well duh. It was already well known by then that Saddam had moved the BW equipment to the al Hakam facility and this was even corroborated by the UN inspection team as well as Butler and Duelfer.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/...ld/iraq/salman_pak.htm

The Salman Pak biological warfare facility was located on a peninsula caused by a bend in the Tigris river, approximately five kilometers (km) from the arch located in the town of Salman Pak. The facility area comprised more than 20 square km, and might have been known as a farmers (or agricultural) experimentation center. The peninsula was fenced off and patrolled by a large guard force. Immediately inside and to the east of the fence line were two opulent villas: the larger built for Iraqi president Saddam Hussein and the other for his half-brother, Barazan al-Tikriti. A main paved road ran through the center of the Salman Pak facility/peninsula. [GulfLINK]

Plans were made in the mid-1980's to develop the Salman Pak site into a secure biological warfare research facility. Dr Rihab Taha, head of a small biological weapons research team, continued to work with her team at al-Muthanna until 1987 when it moved to Salman Pak, which was under the control of the Directorate of General Intelligence.

Located at the facility are several buildings. The probable main research building at the site is a modern building, composed of twenty four rooms, housing a major BW research facility. Using current technology the research area alone had sufficient floor space to accommodate several continuous-flow or batch fermenters that could produce daily sufficient anthrax bacteria to lethally assault hundreds of square kilometers. Adjacent to the research building is a storage area which contains four munitions type storage bunkers with lightning arrestors. Two of these bunkers have facilities for storage of temperature sensitive biological material. Approximately a mile down the road from the research area is a complex US intelligence believed to be an engineering area. One building in this complex was thought to contain a fermentation pilot plant capable of scale up production of BW agents. A construction project comprising several buildings was begun in early 1989 adjacent to the engineering area, and was near completion in 1990. This new complex was assessed as a pharmaceutical production plant. As such, this facility would have an extensive capability for biological agent production. [GulfLINK]

Salman Pak, located 30-40 km SE of Baghdad, engaged in laboratory scale research on Anthrax, Botulinum toxin, Clostridium, perfringens (gas gangrene), mycotoxins, aflatoxins, and Ricin. Researchers at this site carried out toxicity evaluations of these agents and examined their growth characteristics and survivability.

Equipment-moving trucks and refrigerated trucks were observed at the Salman Pak BW facility prior to the onset of bombing, suggesting that Iraq was moving equipment or material into or out of the facility. Information obtained after the conflict revealed that Iraq had moved BW agent production equipment from Salman Pak to the Al Hakam suspect BW facility.

The Qadisiya State Establishment [aka Al-Qadsia], involved in the program to produce Al Hussein class missiles, is apparently located nearby, along with the Al-Yarmouk facility which according to some reports was associated with the chemical munitions program [and which other reports place at Yusufiyah.

Iraq told UN inspectors that Salman Pak was an anti-terror training camp for Iraqi special forces. However, two defectors from Iraqi intelligence stated that they had worked for several years at the secret Iraqi government camp, which had trained Islamic terrorists in rotations of five or six months since 1995. Training activities including simulated hijackings carried out in an airplane fuselage [said to be a Boeing 707] at the camp. The camp is divided into distinct sections. On one side of the camp young, Iraqis who were members of Fedayeen Saddam are trained in espionage, assassination techniques and sabotage. The Islamic militants trained on the other side of the camp, in an area separated by a small lake, trees and barbed wire. The militants reportedly spent time training, usually in groups of five or six, around the fuselage of the airplane. There were rarely more than 40 or 50 Islamic radicals in the camp at one time.

Hmm...you're basing your claims on two defectors??

Gee...wouldn't be these two, would it?
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg02445.html

Almost immediately after September 11th, the I.N.C. began to publicize the stories of defectors who claimed that they had information connecting Iraq to the attacks. In an interview on October 14, 2001, conducted jointly by the Times and "Frontline," the public television program, Sabah Khodada, an Iraqi Army captain, said that the September 11th operation "was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam," and that Iraq had a program to instruct terrorists in the art of hijacking. Another defector, who was identified only as a retired lieutenant general in the Iraqi intelligence service, said that in 2000 he witnessed Arab students being given lessons in hijacking on a Boeing 707 parked at an Iraqi training camp near the town of Salman Pak, south of Baghdad.

In separate interviews with me, however, a former C.I.A. station chief and a former military intelligence analyst said that the camp near Salman Pak had been built not for terrorism training but for counter-terrorism training. In the mid-eighties, Islamic terrorists were routinely hijacking aircraft. In 1986, an Iraqi airliner was seized by pro-Iranian extremists and crashed, after a hand grenade was triggered, killing at least sixty-five people. (At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war, and America favored Iraq.) Iraq then sought assistance from the West, and got what it wanted from Britain's MI6. The C.I.A. offered similar training in counter-terrorism throughout the Middle East. "We were helping our allies everywhere we had a liaison," the former station chief told me. Inspectors recalled seeing the body of an airplane?which appeared to be used for counter-terrorism training?when they visited a biological-weapons facility near Salman Pak in 1991, ten years before September 11th. It is, of course, possible for such a camp to be converted from one purpose to another. The former C.I.A. official noted, however, that terrorists would not practice on airplanes in the open. "That' s Hollywood rinky-dink stuff," the former agent said. "They train in basements. You don't need a real airplane to practice hijacking. The 9/11 terrorists went to gyms. But to take one back you have to practice on the real thing."

 

[wiin]

A Marine Writes Home

This is one story of many that people normally don't hear, and one that everyone does.
This is one most don't hear:
A young Marine and his cover man cautiously enter a room just recently filled with insurgents armed with Ak-47's and RPG's. There are three dead, another wailing in pain. The insurgent can be heard saying, "Mister, mister! Diktoor, diktoor(doctor)!" He is badly wounded, lying in a pool of his own blood. The Marine and his cover man slowly walk toward the injured man, scanning to make sure no enemies come from behind. In a split second, the pressure in the room greatly exceeds that of the outside, and the concussion seems to be felt before the blast is heard. Marines outside rush to the room, and look in horror as the dust gradually settles. The result is a room filled with the barely recognizable remains of the deceased, caused by an insurgent setting off several pounds of explosives.

The Marines' remains are gathered by teary eyed comrades, brothers in arms, and shipped home in a box. The families can only mourn over a casket and a picture of their loved one, a life cut short by someone who hid behind a white flag.

But no one hears these stories, except those who have lived to carry remains of a friend, and the families who loved the dead. No one hears this, so no one cares.

This is the story everyone hears:

A young Marine and his fire team cautiously enter a room just recently filled with insurgents armed with AK-47's and RPG's. There are three dead, another wailing in pain. The insugent can be heard saying, "Mister, mister! Diktoor, diktoor(doctor)!" He is badly wounded. Suddenly, he pulls from under his bloody clothes a grenade, without the pin. The explosion rocks the room, killing one Marine, wounding the others. The young Marine catches shrapnel in the face.

The next day, same Marine, same type of situation, a different story. The young Marine and his cover man enter a room with two wounded insurgents. One lies on the floor in puddle of blood, another against the wall. A reporter and his camera survey the wreckage inside, and in the background can be heard the voice of a Marine, "He's moving, he's moving!"

The pop of a rifle is heard, and the insurgent against the wall is now dead. Minutes, hours later, the scene is aired on national television, and the Marine is being held for commiting a war crime. Unlawful killing.

And now, another Marine has the possibility of being burned at the stake for protecting the life of his brethren. His family now wrings their hands in grief, tears streaming down their face. Brother, should I have been in your boots, i too would have done the same.

For those of you who don't know, we Marines, Band of Brothers, Jarheads, Leathernecks, etc., do not fight because we think it is right, or think
it is wrong. We are here for the man to our left, and the man to our right. We choose to give our lives so that the man or woman next to us can go home and see their husbands, wives, children, friends and families.

For those of you who sit on your couches in front of your television, and choose to condemn this man's actions, I have but one thing to say to you. Get out of your recliner, lace up my boots, pick up a rifle, leave your family behind and join me. See what I've seen, walk where I have walked. To those of you who support us, my sincerest gratitude. You keep us alive.

I am a Marine currently doing his second tour in Iraq. These are my opinions and mine alone. They do not represent those of the Marine Corps or of the US military, or any other.


Posted by Hindrocket at 04:43

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: Infohawk

Originally posted by: Klixxer
I would REALLY like DonVito in this thread.

DonVito came in a similar thread I believe. I'm starting to get them all confused. He thought the guy was worthy of prosecution.

But you know, alternatively you could listen to Passions... also a very thoughtful poster. 😉

I'll search for his post, i have no reason to argue the issue, but he knows more about this than i do, and i know more about it than most.

Passions is always high, it says so in the description of this forum.

Then there is Citrix who is ok with crimes of war, i think he got dropped one time too many as a baby or something.

It is not something i take lightly and there is a reason for that.

 

[Klixxer]

Originally posted by: wiin
A Marine Writes Home

This is one story of many that people normally don't hear, and one that everyone does.
This is one most don't hear:
A young Marine and his cover man cautiously enter a room just recently filled with insurgents armed with Ak-47's and RPG's. There are three dead, another wailing in pain. The insurgent can be heard saying, "Mister, mister! Diktoor, diktoor(doctor)!" He is badly wounded, lying in a pool of his own blood. The Marine and his cover man slowly walk toward the injured man, scanning to make sure no enemies come from behind. In a split second, the pressure in the room greatly exceeds that of the outside, and the concussion seems to be felt before the blast is heard. Marines outside rush to the room, and look in horror as the dust gradually settles. The result is a room filled with the barely recognizable remains of the deceased, caused by an insurgent setting off several pounds of explosives.

The Marines' remains are gathered by teary eyed comrades, brothers in arms, and shipped home in a box. The families can only mourn over a casket and a picture of their loved one, a life cut short by someone who hid behind a white flag.

But no one hears these stories, except those who have lived to carry remains of a friend, and the families who loved the dead. No one hears this, so no one cares.

This is the story everyone hears:

A young Marine and his fire team cautiously enter a room just recently filled with insurgents armed with AK-47's and RPG's. There are three dead, another wailing in pain. The insugent can be heard saying, "Mister, mister! Diktoor, diktoor(doctor)!" He is badly wounded. Suddenly, he pulls from under his bloody clothes a grenade, without the pin. The explosion rocks the room, killing one Marine, wounding the others. The young Marine catches shrapnel in the face.

The next day, same Marine, same type of situation, a different story. The young Marine and his cover man enter a room with two wounded insurgents. One lies on the floor in puddle of blood, another against the wall. A reporter and his camera survey the wreckage inside, and in the background can be heard the voice of a Marine, "He's moving, he's moving!"

The pop of a rifle is heard, and the insurgent against the wall is now dead. Minutes, hours later, the scene is aired on national television, and the Marine is being held for commiting a war crime. Unlawful killing.

And now, another Marine has the possibility of being burned at the stake for protecting the life of his brethren. His family now wrings their hands in grief, tears streaming down their face. Brother, should I have been in your boots, i too would have done the same.

For those of you who don't know, we Marines, Band of Brothers, Jarheads, Leathernecks, etc., do not fight because we think it is right, or think
it is wrong. We are here for the man to our left, and the man to our right. We choose to give our lives so that the man or woman next to us can go home and see their husbands, wives, children, friends and families.

For those of you who sit on your couches in front of your television, and choose to condemn this man's actions, I have but one thing to say to you. Get out of your recliner, lace up my boots, pick up a rifle, leave your family behind and join me. See what I've seen, walk where I have walked. To those of you who support us, my sincerest gratitude. You keep us alive.

I am a Marine currently doing his second tour in Iraq. These are my opinions and mine alone. They do not represent those of the Marine Corps or of the US military, or any other.


Posted by Hindrocket at 04:43

I would like the real story, not some made up BS like this.

"a young and his cover man (which is not likely, three at least) enters a building and sees men armed with AK47's" the first step would be to secure the building, but nah -ah they just stood there for a while and got blown to pieces, did they observe the men, nah -ah, did they get them out, nah -ah, they went in and stood still?

Honestly, you have to see the BS in this.

To contrast it i will tell you how these missions are done, 3-6 men are sent in with a 3-6 backup team clearing of the rooms goes fast, fast, fast, you get the people out of the building and keep them under control, they are searched and then delivered to other teams.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur
Hmm...you're basing your claims on two defectors??

Gee...wouldn't be these two, would it?
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg02445.html

Almost immediately after September 11th, the I.N.C. began to publicize the stories of defectors who claimed that they had information connecting Iraq to the attacks. In an interview on October 14, 2001, conducted jointly by the Times and "Frontline," the public television program, Sabah Khodada, an Iraqi Army captain, said that the September 11th operation "was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam," and that Iraq had a program to instruct terrorists in the art of hijacking. Another defector, who was identified only as a retired lieutenant general in the Iraqi intelligence service, said that in 2000 he witnessed Arab students being given lessons in hijacking on a Boeing 707 parked at an Iraqi training camp near the town of Salman Pak, south of Baghdad.

In separate interviews with me, however, a former C.I.A. station chief and a former military intelligence analyst said that the camp near Salman Pak had been built not for terrorism training but for counter-terrorism training. In the mid-eighties, Islamic terrorists were routinely hijacking aircraft. In 1986, an Iraqi airliner was seized by pro-Iranian extremists and crashed, after a hand grenade was triggered, killing at least sixty-five people. (At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war, and America favored Iraq.) Iraq then sought assistance from the West, and got what it wanted from Britain's MI6. The C.I.A. offered similar training in counter-terrorism throughout the Middle East. "We were helping our allies everywhere we had a liaison," the former station chief told me. Inspectors recalled seeing the body of an airplane?which appeared to be used for counter-terrorism training?when they visited a biological-weapons facility near Salman Pak in 1991, ten years before September 11th. It is, of course, possible for such a camp to be converted from one purpose to another. The former C.I.A. official noted, however, that terrorists would not practice on airplanes in the open. "That' s Hollywood rinky-dink stuff," the former agent said. "They train in basements. You don't need a real airplane to practice hijacking. The 9/11 terrorists went to gyms. But to take one back you have to practice on the real thing."

Hmmm, you're basing your claim on intelligence organiations you claim provided faulty intel on Iraq's WMDs? Suddenly they are spot on in this case?

If you haven't looked, more people than just those two have made the claims about Salman Pak and there are reports of captured foreign insurgents who claim to have received training at Salman Pak as well. Maybe you should check those out instead of relying only on that which fits your narrow pov?

Also, from here:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk...cle/0,,4296646,00.html

Zeinab and Khodad said the Salman Pak students practised their techniques in a Boeing 707 fuselage parked in the foreigners' part of the camp. Yesterday their story received important corroboration from Charles Duelfer, former vice chairman of Unscom, the UN weapons inspection team.

Duelfer said he visited Salman Pak several times, landing by helicopter. He saw the 707, in exactly the place described by the defectors. The Iraqis, he said, told Unscom it was used by police for counter-terrorist training. 'Of course we automatically took out the word "counter",' he said. 'I'm surprised that people seem to be shocked that there should be terror camps in Iraq. Like, derrrrrr! I mean, what, actually, do you expect? Iraq presents a long-term strategic threat. Unfortunately, the US is not very good at recognising long-term strategic threats.

Of course, what would Duelfer know? He only visited Salman Pak personally on several occasions.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
Hmm...you're basing your claims on two defectors??

Gee...wouldn't be these two, would it?
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg02445.html

Almost immediately after September 11th, the I.N.C. began to publicize the stories of defectors who claimed that they had information connecting Iraq to the attacks. In an interview on October 14, 2001, conducted jointly by the Times and "Frontline," the public television program, Sabah Khodada, an Iraqi Army captain, said that the September 11th operation "was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam," and that Iraq had a program to instruct terrorists in the art of hijacking. Another defector, who was identified only as a retired lieutenant general in the Iraqi intelligence service, said that in 2000 he witnessed Arab students being given lessons in hijacking on a Boeing 707 parked at an Iraqi training camp near the town of Salman Pak, south of Baghdad.

In separate interviews with me, however, a former C.I.A. station chief and a former military intelligence analyst said that the camp near Salman Pak had been built not for terrorism training but for counter-terrorism training. In the mid-eighties, Islamic terrorists were routinely hijacking aircraft. In 1986, an Iraqi airliner was seized by pro-Iranian extremists and crashed, after a hand grenade was triggered, killing at least sixty-five people. (At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war, and America favored Iraq.) Iraq then sought assistance from the West, and got what it wanted from Britain's MI6. The C.I.A. offered similar training in counter-terrorism throughout the Middle East. "We were helping our allies everywhere we had a liaison," the former station chief told me. Inspectors recalled seeing the body of an airplane?which appeared to be used for counter-terrorism training?when they visited a biological-weapons facility near Salman Pak in 1991, ten years before September 11th. It is, of course, possible for such a camp to be converted from one purpose to another. The former C.I.A. official noted, however, that terrorists would not practice on airplanes in the open. "That' s Hollywood rinky-dink stuff," the former agent said. "They train in basements. You don't need a real airplane to practice hijacking. The 9/11 terrorists went to gyms. But to take one back you have to practice on the real thing."

Hmmm, you're basing your claim on intelligence organiations you claim provided faulty intel on Iraq's WMDs? Suddenly they are spot on in this case?

If you haven't looked, more people than just those two have made the claims about Salman Pak and there are reports of captured foreign insurgents who claim to have received training at Salman Pak as well. Maybe you should check those out instead of relying only on that which fits your narrow pov?

Also, from here:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk...cle/0,,4296646,00.html

Zeinab and Khodad said the Salman Pak students practised their techniques in a Boeing 707 fuselage parked in the foreigners' part of the camp. Yesterday their story received important corroboration from Charles Duelfer, former vice chairman of Unscom, the UN weapons inspection team.

Duelfer said he visited Salman Pak several times, landing by helicopter. He saw the 707, in exactly the place described by the defectors. The Iraqis, he said, told Unscom it was used by police for counter-terrorist training. 'Of course we automatically took out the word "counter",' he said. 'I'm surprised that people seem to be shocked that there should be terror camps in Iraq. Like, derrrrrr! I mean, what, actually, do you expect? Iraq presents a long-term strategic threat. Unfortunately, the US is not very good at recognising long-term strategic threats.

Of course, what would Duelfer know? He only visited Salman Pak personally on several occasions.

And what was Duelfer's reasoning for removing the term "counter"? Because he wanted to? Of course it was. Duelfer is merely a yes-man sent into Iraq to find the slimmest pieces of evidence to justify Bush's romp in Iraq *after* the invasion.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
Hmm...you're basing your claims on two defectors??

Gee...wouldn't be these two, would it?
http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/2003/msg02445.html

Almost immediately after September 11th, the I.N.C. began to publicize the stories of defectors who claimed that they had information connecting Iraq to the attacks. In an interview on October 14, 2001, conducted jointly by the Times and "Frontline," the public television program, Sabah Khodada, an Iraqi Army captain, said that the September 11th operation "was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam," and that Iraq had a program to instruct terrorists in the art of hijacking. Another defector, who was identified only as a retired lieutenant general in the Iraqi intelligence service, said that in 2000 he witnessed Arab students being given lessons in hijacking on a Boeing 707 parked at an Iraqi training camp near the town of Salman Pak, south of Baghdad.

In separate interviews with me, however, a former C.I.A. station chief and a former military intelligence analyst said that the camp near Salman Pak had been built not for terrorism training but for counter-terrorism training. In the mid-eighties, Islamic terrorists were routinely hijacking aircraft. In 1986, an Iraqi airliner was seized by pro-Iranian extremists and crashed, after a hand grenade was triggered, killing at least sixty-five people. (At the time, Iran and Iraq were at war, and America favored Iraq.) Iraq then sought assistance from the West, and got what it wanted from Britain's MI6. The C.I.A. offered similar training in counter-terrorism throughout the Middle East. "We were helping our allies everywhere we had a liaison," the former station chief told me. Inspectors recalled seeing the body of an airplane?which appeared to be used for counter-terrorism training?when they visited a biological-weapons facility near Salman Pak in 1991, ten years before September 11th. It is, of course, possible for such a camp to be converted from one purpose to another. The former C.I.A. official noted, however, that terrorists would not practice on airplanes in the open. "That' s Hollywood rinky-dink stuff," the former agent said. "They train in basements. You don't need a real airplane to practice hijacking. The 9/11 terrorists went to gyms. But to take one back you have to practice on the real thing."

Hmmm, you're basing your claim on intelligence organiations you claim provided faulty intel on Iraq's WMDs? Suddenly they are spot on in this case?

If you haven't looked, more people than just those two have made the claims about Salman Pak and there are reports of captured foreign insurgents who claim to have received training at Salman Pak as well. Maybe you should check those out instead of relying only on that which fits your narrow pov?

Also, from here:

http://politics.guardian.co.uk...cle/0,,4296646,00.html

Zeinab and Khodad said the Salman Pak students practised their techniques in a Boeing 707 fuselage parked in the foreigners' part of the camp. Yesterday their story received important corroboration from Charles Duelfer, former vice chairman of Unscom, the UN weapons inspection team.

Duelfer said he visited Salman Pak several times, landing by helicopter. He saw the 707, in exactly the place described by the defectors. The Iraqis, he said, told Unscom it was used by police for counter-terrorist training. 'Of course we automatically took out the word "counter",' he said. 'I'm surprised that people seem to be shocked that there should be terror camps in Iraq. Like, derrrrrr! I mean, what, actually, do you expect? Iraq presents a long-term strategic threat. Unfortunately, the US is not very good at recognising long-term strategic threats.

Of course, what would Duelfer know? He only visited Salman Pak personally on several occasions.

And what was Duelfer's reasoning for removing the term "counter"? Because he wanted to? Of course it was. Duelfer is merely a yes-man sent into Iraq to find the slimmest pieces of evidence to justify Bush's romp in Iraq *after* the invasion.

Sure. Because we know the Iraqis would never BS us.

"There are no US soldiers within 100 miles of Baghdad!"

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
Of course, what would Duelfer know? He only visited Salman Pak personally on several occasions.

And what was Duelfer's reasoning for removing the term "counter"? Because he wanted to? Of course it was. Duelfer is merely a yes-man sent into Iraq to find the slimmest pieces of evidence to justify Bush's romp in Iraq *after* the invasion.

Sure. Because we know the Iraqis would never BS us.

"There are no US soldiers within 100 miles of Baghdad!"[/quote]Remember Chalabi and how he fed fake information via fake defectors to Wolfowitz?

 

[Alistar7]

Saddam murdered at least 300,000, that represents a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Pol Pot?s Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
Of course, what would Duelfer know? He only visited Salman Pak personally on several occasions.

And what was Duelfer's reasoning for removing the term "counter"? Because he wanted to? Of course it was. Duelfer is merely a yes-man sent into Iraq to find the slimmest pieces of evidence to justify Bush's romp in Iraq *after* the invasion.

Sure. Because we know the Iraqis would never BS us.

"There are no US soldiers within 100 miles of Baghdad!"

Remember Chalabi and how he fed fake information via fake defectors to Wolfowitz?[/quote]

And Clinton? In fact, wasn't it Clinton that pulled in Chalabi and the INC gang as "informants" in the first place?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: conjur
And what was Duelfer's reasoning for removing the term "counter"? Because he wanted to? Of course it was. Duelfer is merely a yes-man sent into Iraq to find the slimmest pieces of evidence to justify Bush's romp in Iraq *after* the invasion.

Sure. Because we know the Iraqis would never BS us.

"There are no US soldiers within 100 miles of Baghdad!"

Remember Chalabi and how he fed fake information via fake defectors to Wolfowitz?

And Clinton? In fact, wasn't it Clinton that pulled in Chalabi and the INC gang as "informants" in the first place?

No, Clinton didn't. The CIA did and then the CIA kicked him out in 1996 when they found out he was worthless.

If you had read the Seymour Hersh articles linked to from the link in my sig you'd have known that already and wouldn't have embarrassed yourself.

There was a close personal bond, too, between Chalabi and Wolfowitz and Perle, dating back many years. Their relationship deepened after the Bush Administration took office, and Chalabi?s ties extended to others in the Administration, including Rumsfeld; Douglas Feith, the Under-Secretary of Defense for Policy; and I. Lewis Libby, Vice-President Dick Cheney?s chief of staff. For years, Chalabi has had the support of prominent members of the American Enterprise Institute and other conservatives. Chalabi had some Democratic supporters, too, including James Woolsey, the former head of the C.I.A.

There was another level to Chalabi?s relationship with the United States: in the mid-nineteen-nineties, the C.I.A. was secretly funnelling millions of dollars annually to the I.N.C. Those payments ended around 1996, a former C.I.A. Middle East station chief told me, essentially because the agency had doubts about Chalabi?s integrity. (In 1992, Chalabi was convicted in absentia of bank fraud in Jordan. He has always denied any wrongdoing.) ?You had to treat them with suspicion,? another former Middle East station chief said of Chalabi?s people. ?The I.N.C. has a track record of manipulating information because it has an agenda. It?s a political unit?not an intelligence agency.?

 

[Alistar7]

Tatses, conjur is not a righty/left issue as most objectors to the Iraq war. His problem is not with Bush, but with the US.

 

[Alistar7]

Saddam murdered at least 300,000, that represents a crime against humanity surpassed only by the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Pol Pot?s Cambodian killing fields in the 1970s, and the Nazi Holocaust of World War II.


The most important thing about Iraq is that, and that it has ended. I honestly don't care if Bush sexed up commonly believed but still murky intel for some nefarious reason, or certain govts opposed the efforts to remove Saddam and why they did so, or anything else, the "cocentration camps have been closed." That IMO is the most important issue here, and the most worthwhile and indisputably final effect of our war.