US Soldier Executes Iraqi - War Crime Caught on Video Tape

timberlandko wrote:

Quote:
Family of hostage Margaret Hassan says she is probably dead
Tuesday, November 16, 2004

(11-16) 09:39 PST LONDON (AP) --

The family of Margaret Hassan, the 59-year-old aid worker kidnapped in Iraq last month, said Tuesday they believed she was dead.

A statement from Hassan's four brothers and sisters was released by Britain's Foreign Office.

"Our hearts are broken," it said. "We have kept hoping for as long as we could, but we now have to accept that Margaret has probably gone and at last her suffering has ended."

Think about it.

It is comforting to know that the Iraqi who was shot in the head has no parents or loved ones to grieve over his death........otherwise one would think his life had value as well....and what treasonous un-american bastard would think that?

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

kickycan wrote:
Gautaum, Hopefully he will realize how stupid what he's saying is and give it up.

Which opinion of mine do you deem stupid?

1) The fact that our soldiers should NOT be there

2) Since GW deems it necessary that they are there, our soldiers should be protected

The part where you glibly state that we should use ANY AND ALL WEAPONS to remove the insurgents, seemingly without any comprehension of what you are talking about.

0 Replies

"The part where you glibly state that we should use ANY AND ALL WEAPONS to remove the insurgents, seemingly without any comprehension of what you are talking about. "

Then you are of the opinion that the US has NO OBLIGATION to protect it's troops in this "conflict".

0 Replies

Of course not. I'm just trying to get you to think about what you are saying. Where does your logic lead?

What you are saying is that we aren't using ANY AND ALL WEAPONS. Why do you think that is? We have nuclear weapons. Should we nuke Falluja? If we were living in a cartoon world, that would be possible. But there are consequences to our actions. Think about it.

0 Replies

How about chemical or biological weapons?

We could just wipe em all out with a little tailored cholera. Less collateral damage that way too, cheaper b/c no money spent on ammo for the troops.

If we were justified to use any and all weapons, this WOULD be the fastest way...

You do realize that we can't kill civilians indiscriminately?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

Of course not. I'm just trying to get you to think about what you are saying. Where does your logic lead?

What you are saying is that we aren't using ANY AND ALL WEAPONS. Why do you think that is? We have nuclear weapons. Should we nuke Falluja? If we were living in a cartoon world, that would be possible. But there are consequences to our actions. Think about it.

You are focusing on 4 words of a position I do not agree with.

Be reminded, my position is we should not be there policing the area.

But since this administration deems it necessary to put our troops at risk in an initiative they were NOT trained for, it is our obligation to provide them with all the protection and material necessary to complete the initiative with minimal cost of US troops. Would you not expect that from your CIC when they come looking for your son/daughter to serve?

If it includes tactical nukes, fine by me. It would not be the first time they were used in an effort to SAVE US soldiers lives.

Yet, I would prefer that our soldiers not be there.

0 Replies

Quote:

You do realize that we can't kill civilians indiscriminately?

I wish Saddam had had the same consideration. He didn't. Neither do the murderers currently beheading and torturing civilians.

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

kickycan wrote:
Of course not. I'm just trying to get you to think about what you are saying. Where does your logic lead?

What you are saying is that we aren't using ANY AND ALL WEAPONS. Why do you think that is? We have nuclear weapons. Should we nuke Falluja? If we were living in a cartoon world, that would be possible. But there are consequences to our actions. Think about it.

You are focusing on 4 words of a position I do not agree with.

Be reminded, my position is we should not be there policing the area.

But since this administration deems it necessary to put our troops at risk in an initiative they were NOT trained for, it is our obligation to provide them with all the protection and material necessary to complete the initiative with minimal cost of US troops. Would you not expect that from your CIC when they come looking for your son/daughter to serve?

If it includes tactical nukes, fine by me. It would not be the first time they were used in an effort to SAVE us soldiers lives.

Yet, I would prefer that our soldiers not be there.

Are ye serious? So you'd rather have just gone in there, tore the country and all organizations with in it apart (basically leave it in the mess it is) and then simply withdraw your troops. But ho would you have clean up your mess?

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

kickycan wrote:
Of course not. I'm just trying to get you to think about what you are saying. Where does your logic lead?

What you are saying is that we aren't using ANY AND ALL WEAPONS. Why do you think that is? We have nuclear weapons. Should we nuke Falluja? If we were living in a cartoon world, that would be possible. But there are consequences to our actions. Think about it.

You are focusing on 4 words of a position I do not agree with.

Yes, I am. If you don't agree with them, then why did you say them? It makes it confusing for us people who attach meaning to words.

0 Replies

JustWonders wrote:

Quote:
You do realize that we can't kill civilians indiscriminately?

I wish Saddam had had the same consideration. He didn't. Neither do the murderers currently beheading and torturing civilians.

You are absolutely correct. Now, to repeat the question...you do realize WE can't kill civilians indicriminately? I will add this....just because they do?

0 Replies

"Yes, I am. If you don't agree with them, then why did you say them? It makes it confusing for us people who attach meaning to words. "

Well, if you had read the entire posts, you would have seen that it I do not agree with the administrations position.

However, the REALITY is we ARE there and I have no choice but to accept that reality. Therefore, since I have a personal stake in this matter (nephew is serving in US Army), I can have an opinion.

My opinion is as stated, the administration has an obligation to provide our troops with ALL THE NECESSARY tools needed to achieve the objective with minimal cost of US lives.

Gav - I already responded to that question.

0 Replies

woiyo wrote:

My opinion is as stated, the administration has an obligation to provide our troops with ALL THE NECESSARY tools needed to achieve the objective with minimal cost of US lives.

I don't think even you know what you are saying at this point. Do you believe we are NOT doing that now?

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

timberlandko wrote:
Quote:
Family of hostage Margaret Hassan says she is probably dead
Tuesday, November 16, 2004

(11-16) 09:39 PST LONDON (AP) --

The family of Margaret Hassan, the 59-year-old aid worker kidnapped in Iraq last month, said Tuesday they believed she was dead.

A statement from Hassan's four brothers and sisters was released by Britain's Foreign Office.

"Our hearts are broken," it said. "We have kept hoping for as long as we could, but we now have to accept that Margaret has probably gone and at last her suffering has ended."

Think about it.

It is comforting to know that the Iraqi who was shot in the head has no parents or loved ones to grieve over his death........otherwise one would think his life had value as well....and what treasonous un-american bastard would think that?

I'm not claiming the dead member of the insurgency's life had little or no value, but do you fail to see the contrast in the killing of Margaret Hassan, a charity worker who has devoted her life to helping the Iraqi people, with the killing of a militant member of the insurgency who was obviously taking an active part in attacking members of the US military on the battlefield?

Added to the mix is the apparent fact that these terrorists/insurgents have in the past engaged in the despicable tactic of feigning death in order to lure US soldiers closer, where they shoot them or blow themselves up.

0 Replies

U.S. Marines Rally Round Iraq Probe Comrade

FALLUJA, Iraq (Reuters) - U.S. Marines rallied round a comrade under investigation for killing a wounded Iraqi during the offensive in Falluja, saying he was probably under combat stress in unpredictable, hair-trigger circumstances.

Marines interviewed on Tuesday said they didn't see the shooting as a scandal, rather the act of a comrade who faced intense pressure during the effort to quell the insurgency in the city.

"I can see why he would do it. He was probably running around being shot at for days on end in Falluja. There should be an investigation but they should look into the circumstances," said Lance Corporal Christopher Hanson.

"I would have shot the insurgent too. Two shots to the head," said Sergeant Nicholas Graham, 24, of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. "You can't trust these people. He should not be investigated. He did nothing wrong."

The military command launched an investigation after video footage showed a U.S. Marine shooting a wounded and unarmed man in a mosque in the city on Saturday. The man was one of five wounded and left in the mosque after Marines fought their way through the area.

A pool report by NBC correspondent Kevin Sites said the mosque had been used by insurgents to attack U.S. forces, who stormed it, killing 10 militants and wounding the five. Sites said the wounded had been left for others to pick up.

A second group of Marines entered the mosque on Saturday after reports it had been reoccupied. Footage from the embedded television crew showed the five still in the mosque, although several appeared to be close to death, Sites said.

He said a Marine noticed one prisoner was still breathing.

A Marine can be heard saying on the pool footage provided to Reuters Television: "He's f***ing faking he's dead."

"The Marine then raises his rifle and fires into the man's head," Sites said.

NBC said the Marine, who had reportedly been shot in the face himself the previous day, said immediately after the shooting: "Well, he's dead now."

continued

0 Replies

Gautam wrote:

I totally agree !! he is a vicitim of circumstances, and he deserves a full hearing.

But when statements like "We do not know what the Iraqi who was shot did just before his being dispatched to the 7 virgins, now do we? " are made, it is disrespectful to human kind, and a dead human being at that.

You cannot hold different moral yardsticks for different people when it comes to sanctity of human life. An iraqi is as entitled to a fair hearing as an American marine. And people who seek to differentiate between them, just because all "Americans" are good guyz and all "Iraqis" are bad guyz really annoy me

I disagree that the insurgent? Iraqi? (we don't know) was entitled to a fair hearing.

Where was the fair hearing when the insurgent placed the improvised explosive device (roadside bomb) which could kill American troops, a taxi driver, an Iraqi cop or a schoolbus full of kids?

Where was the fair hearing when the insurgent was firing off a mortar, an inaccurate weapon after fired could land anywhere killing a farmer and his family, a kid walking home from school, a mother returning from the market, Iraqi troops, relief workers, etc??

This is not a conventional war. There will be no surrender documents signed on the Battleship Missouri. We are dealing with killers. Killers who don't care whom they kill. The kid gloves have come off.

There are few who know what needs to be done and fewer who are willing to do it. The kid was wrong in one way and right in another. That's between him and God now.

0 Replies

Quote:

"One thing for sure. This incident will garner more media reaction and public outrage than did the public beheadings of innocent citizens by Islamic terrorists. "
...

0 Replies

Quote:

I disagree that the insurgent? Iraqi? (we don't know) was entitled to a fair hearing.

You are wrong.

Everyone, even a murderer, is entitled to a fair hearing.

Otherwise, we are no different than they are.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
timberlandko wrote:
Quote:
Family of hostage Margaret Hassan says she is probably dead
Tuesday, November 16, 2004

(11-16) 09:39 PST LONDON (AP) --

The family of Margaret Hassan, the 59-year-old aid worker kidnapped in Iraq last month, said Tuesday they believed she was dead.

A statement from Hassan's four brothers and sisters was released by Britain's Foreign Office.

"Our hearts are broken," it said. "We have kept hoping for as long as we could, but we now have to accept that Margaret has probably gone and at last her suffering has ended."

Think about it.

It is comforting to know that the Iraqi who was shot in the head has no parents or loved ones to grieve over his death........otherwise one would think his life had value as well....and what treasonous un-american bastard would think that?

I'm not claiming the dead member of the insurgency's life had little or no value, but do you fail to see the contrast in the killing of Margaret Hassan, a charity worker who has devoted her life to helping the Iraqi people, with the killing of a militant member of the insurgency who was obviously taking an active part in attacking members of the US military on the battlefield?

Added to the mix is the apparent fact that these terrorists/insurgents have in the past engaged in the despicable tactic of feigning death in order to lure US soldiers closer, where they shoot them or blow themselves up.

I concede that the Iraqi insurgent placed himself into that situation and has to shoulder his share of the blame for his own demise yes....and I suppose given that circumstance was more likely than that unfortunate lady to be killed and I do not have any particular sympathy for him as I do Ms. Hassan...........but that's not the point..... murder 1 is murder 1 ....and we are supposed to be the good guys....not the ones that are killing unarmed and injured people no matter how despicable they might be....that's what gives us the God almighty moral high ground the administration and it's supporters are always going on about ad nauseum......on paper anyway.....

0 Replies

kickycan wrote:

woiyo wrote:
My opinion is as stated, the administration has an obligation to provide our troops with ALL THE NECESSARY tools needed to achieve the objective with minimal cost of US lives.

I don't think even you know what you are saying at this point. Do you believe we are NOT doing that now?

Do I believe the US is providing the troops with ALL NECESSARY tools to accomplish this task?

No, the US is NOT providing all the tools necessary. They are NOT trained to be POLICE, they are trained as soldiers.

This task of removing insurgents, since it is deemed necessary by the CIC, can be accomplished in other ways that would minimze US troop casualties.

0 Replies

Bi-Polar Bear wrote:

Ticomaya wrote:
Bi-Polar Bear wrote:
timberlandko wrote:
Quote:
Family of hostage Margaret Hassan says she is probably dead
Tuesday, November 16, 2004

(11-16) 09:39 PST LONDON (AP) --

The family of Margaret Hassan, the 59-year-old aid worker kidnapped in Iraq last month, said Tuesday they believed she was dead.

A statement from Hassan's four brothers and sisters was released by Britain's Foreign Office.

"Our hearts are broken," it said. "We have kept hoping for as long as we could, but we now have to accept that Margaret has probably gone and at last her suffering has ended."

Think about it.

It is comforting to know that the Iraqi who was shot in the head has no parents or loved ones to grieve over his death........otherwise one would think his life had value as well....and what treasonous un-american bastard would think that?

I'm not claiming the dead member of the insurgency's life had little or no value, but do you fail to see the contrast in the killing of Margaret Hassan, a charity worker who has devoted her life to helping the Iraqi people, with the killing of a militant member of the insurgency who was obviously taking an active part in attacking members of the US military on the battlefield?

Added to the mix is the apparent fact that these terrorists/insurgents have in the past engaged in the despicable tactic of feigning death in order to lure US soldiers closer, where they shoot them or blow themselves up.

I concede that the Iraqi insurgent placed himself into that situation and has to shoulder his share of the blame for his own demise yes....and I suppose given that circumstance was more likely than that unfortunate lady to be killed and I do not have any particular sympathy for him as I do Ms. Hassan...........but that's not the point..... murder 1 is murder 1 ....and we are supposed to be the good guys....not the ones that are killing unarmed and injured people no matter how despicable they might be....that's what gives us the God almighty moral high ground the administration and it's supporters are always going on about ad nauseum......on paper anyway.....

Yes, I rather understood that to be your point: The US should be measured against a different yardstick than the rest of the world.

I agree with other remarks I've seen that the full circumstances surrounding this unfortunate incident need to be investigated.

0 Replies

US Soldier Executes Iraqi - War Crime Caught on Video Tape

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know