What does everybody think about the soldier , shooting that?

It's his job, don't like it...choose another career.

Besides like someone else said, it seems to me if he actually thought that the soldier might of been a dead booby traped bomb waiting to go off the last thing he should have done was to go shooting at it and so would have been blown to smitherines.

sorry didn't mean to say "it"

We can all form our own opinions, and those opinions are more founded on our political stance than on the "facts" of the instant case. What are the facts? It's pretty certain that a young Marine engaged in fierce urban fighting shot and killed a wounded enemy. That killing may be deemed justified, unintentional, or some degree of murder. BTW, it isn't in any case a war crime, but rather a capital crime that occured during combat.

The videotape is certainly evidence of what happened, but it isn't conclusive. Seeing may be believing, but it doesn't always faithfully record what actually happened. We don't see what else was happening outside the limits of the camera lens. We are given a single point of view that may differ drastically from other points of observation. Watching a videotape from ones armchair can never duplicate the emotional wave that carries men through combat situations.

To understand what happened in this incident, will require a thorough investigation by military specialists. There already appear to be a whole series of mitigating factors. What did the Marine defendant know at the time, and what did he reasonably believe? If he did not know that the wounded enemy was unarmed, and reasonably believed that deadly force was appropriate to protect himself and his squad mates, then the killing was justified. It would be murder only if the young Marine knew that the man he killed was unarmed and no threat. What was the Marines state of mind at the time? Was he capable of rationally making the decision to "execute" the wounded enemy, or did his emotional state preclude his forming the necessary intent?

The USMC is noted for its discipline and for its esprite de corps. The defendant will be represented by competent counsel, the case investigated by officers and non-coms to fully explore the circumstances surrounding the case, and the case will be tried before a board of officers and non-coms who will make the judgements, not a bunch of us feather merchants.

Now, what is my personal opinion on the basis of what little we think we know? I think that the Marine emotionally operating almost on auto-pilot, and did not know the status of the wounded. The wounded person had clearly been wounded while doing his best to kill American Marines, and presumably was still capable of killing (all it would take, would be to roll off of a grenade or pull the pin). The Marine, I think, did what most of us would do in similar circumstances ... act to protect himself and his buddies. This sort of thing happens in combat much more often than it would seem in the movies, or on television. In this case, the young Marine had the misfortune of being videotaped by a reporter. Now there seems to be a rush to judgement on the part of the public, especially those who never let an opportunity to smear American policies go unheeded. Many of the comments condemning the Marine, the military, the Administratoin, etc. appear to come from people who haven't a clue about what combat is like. To believe that soldiers in combat spend much time thinking and considering all the ramifications of what they're involved in have been watching far too many Tom Cruise films. It just aint like that folks.

Let the courts martial process proceed, this is a tempest in a very tiny demitasse.

Is this a facet of military law that is so completely different from civilian law?



If he did the right thing then how can it be misfortune? If he did the wrong thing then I think I'm glad we have it on tape.

Good on ya for admitting this before you offered your opinion on the 'facts' as you perceive them, Asherman.

The definition of murder in the UCMJ is not very different from that in the Common Law.

"If he did the right thing then how can it be misfortune? If he did the wrong thing then I think I'm glad we have it on tape."

In my opinion, the Marine did nothing illegal, or wrong. Why is it unfortunate that his actions were taped and broadcast?

Because, people tend to believe that television IS reality, and that what they think they see is the full story. Neither of those perceptions is true. Often what we see isn't what it seems. Television, even when it is real-time and un-staged, does not represent accurately what is actually happening. television can not capture the emotional state of the people caught up in the action, but magnifies the importance of sometimes totally irrelevant detail. The camera fails to capture what went on just before the scene shown or what happened afterwards, both of which might totally change our perception of what happened. The camera does not see from the same perspective as the active participants in the event, and so the audience can't fully appreciate the impression/understanding that motivates each of the active participants.

The Marine was unfortunate because his actions, no matter how justifiable are taken away from him and those who are competent to judge his actions, and given instead to a television audience. If the camera wasn't there, it is true that this incident would probably have received no public attention at all. The Marine may have carried around with him an unwarranted sense of guilt for the rest of his life, but it is doubtful that any military notice would have been taken. People get killed in combat. Usually there is no question about how "legitimate" it is to kill an enemy, but occasionally folks are inadvertently killed who in a more rational considered environment might have been treated differently. The defendant here had no way of knowing that the man he shot was "an unarmed prisoner". There was no guard placed over the wounded because the prior squad was still involved in a hot fire-fight, so the wounded may have rearmed and returned to the fight in any case. The thing is that the television audience doesn't know any of those things, yet they think they know all that is necessary to pass judgement.

And who is it who is passing judgement anyway? Those who will seize upon any excuse, any opportunity to condemn the U.S. military, the U.S., or the Administration. The insurgents and Arab Street love this sort of incident so that they can further their efforts to misinform and radicalize the very people that we are trying to help.

I pretty much like the idea of having embedded reporters serving with the troops, and wouldn't change that. However, we need to keep in mind that there are downsides and costs for every choice made. On the scene reports help to inform the American People, but they also give ammunition to our enemies. Embedded reporters have an opportunity to learn what the combat environment is like first hand, so they do a better job of "getting it right", but on the other hand they will still occasionally rush to publish before the facts can be fully known. There is much to be said for making events available in real time, but there is no way to overcome the inherent limitations that such event recording has.

I agree with Asherman, although I make no ultimate conclusions. The USMC needs to evaluate the entirety of the facts before determining this man's guilt. The reason why this particular incident might seem so heinous to many of us is that such a killing would be thoroughly unacceptable in the ordinary course of our lives. Iraq is not an ordinary situation. Was it reasonable for the soldier to suspect that this particular man was dangerous? Even if ex post facto we can discount that possibility, the soldier didn't have the benefit of hindsight.

I suggest we all withhold our judgment until we know the entirety of the facts.

You all are missing the point of this.

It doesn't matter if the kid is guilty or innocent or not, other than to the kid himself and the USMC.

What really matters is Al-Jazeera running a video, of a US soldier, shooting an unarmed man in the head while his friend makes a joke about it, in a mosque.

This is a media war that we are fighting here, people. Think about the effects that this video will have amongst those who live in Iraq, or other ME countries. Think about the effect videos of beheadings have amongst many of our citizens here. This is analogous, but imagine them joking about it and doing it inside a church, and then you'll get an idea of how offensive this video is to the average ME person.

Definately not a step in winning the war in Iraq, that's for sure....

Cycloptichorn

I agree with your analysis of public opinion, but what are our solutions? On the one hand, we could simply forbid media coverage, but I think that neither you or I would find such a solution palatable. On the other hand, we could temper our justice system, finding automatic guilt in order to appease public opinion--that would be equally or more abhorant to any notion of justice or a free society. What happened was a tragic shame, but our military simply isn't trained in media relations. Many of them are extremely young--straight out of high school. My comments were limited to the guilt of the soldier himself. In regards to the media consequences, I agree that this was a tragedy, but I don't have any solution.

I believe I touched on that point earlier, and I agree with your position. This administration took a big gamble in allowing the media to accompany our troops using the rational that the Muslim community will see how "sanitary" we can fight a war.

Well, that gamble is backfiring BIG TIME.

So, Cycloptichorn, you favor much stricter military control over what is published and broadcast? If we did away with enbedded reporters, or exercised more control over what reports could be broadcast/published what would be the result?

I think what we'd have are accusations that military censorship of the media was intended to hide wrong-doing and mislead the American People. What stories would get through the censorship nets? Perhaps only those that clearly supported military objectives, or that had no counter propaganda value. It would be strained carrots delivered to the plate of those starved for roast beef. Let our enemies be the ones who openly manipulate the media for their narrow partisan ends. We should take the high road, even though it is sometimes unpleasant and has some unwanted costs.

But not allowing media coverage would give the impression that we're hiding something, and in fact we would be. We're trying to promote democracy and a free society--can we honestly do so while engaging in a highly contentious war under the cover of media darkness? I don't think it's that simple.

I fully agree.

I remember one kinda dreary afternoon ... low clouds, an on-again-off-again light drizzle. Smoke hung heavy, in every shade from tanslucent white to oily, sooty, grimey, impenetrable black, laden with smells, wafting from burning vehicles and structures, from smoldering rubble piles, from explosions and weapons discharges, sometimes so thick it blotted out all behind it for a moment before swirling a different direction in the barely-there breeze. Among the almost constant rattle and pop of small arms fire from all about there came frequent punctuations of larger stuff ... the dull "wumphs" of more distant explosions, the sharper, louder, chest-kicking "BANG!"s of nearer blasts. Now and again could be heard the distinctive stacatto bark of heavier automatic weapons, the thwuppin' of choppers' rotor blades, the creakin' whine-and-grind of tanks, the roar of low flyin' jets. Randomly interspersed was the whizzin' of nearby bullets, the clatter and patter of fallin' debris, the whine of shrapnel and ricochets, the shouts, and sometimes the screams, of men.

There were 11 of us ... the squad had taken a couple casualties over the past day, but we'd been in pretty much constant action, and hadn't gotten any replacements. That was fine, this was no time of place to be worried about clueless newbies. For the umpteenth time that day, the point guy kicked open a door, another, weapon at the ready, stood cover, and three guys scuttled warily through into the room behind the door, some scuffling boot thumps, some furniture bein' shoved around or somethin', a door slam or two, then a shout of "Clear" was heard, and the three rejoined the street sweep. That door had revealed no evident threat, but previous ones had, we'd lost a couple guys already, and there were plenty of doors to go yet. Two choppers thwupped by close overhead, not goin' particularly fast. The door gunners waved, we waved back. From somewhere far off came the unmistakeable ground-shaking rumble of a couple bombs from one of the jets ... prolly thousand-pounders.

Just then, a dirty yellow sparkle began winkin' from a second-story window across the street and a few doors down, a corner buildin', and with sparks and flashes and puffs of masonry dust, and shriekin' ricochets and thwockin' impacts, the guys on our side of the street were pinned down by a machinegun. Nobody got hit, but there wasn't much we could do, other than try to stay out of the line of fire. Across the street, the other 6 guys moved as quickly as could be managed while in a crouch to the buildin' housin' the machinegun. Somehow or another, 3 of us managed to get inside the room just checked, it seemed to be a sewing goods shop, and from the imagined shelter of the pretty much ruined window began firin' bursts at the machinegunner's window just to try to keep his attention off other things. Echoin' back off the buildin' fronts, bouncin' around inside the little shop, the sound was somethin' felt, not heard.

Two grenades, detonatin' almost simultaneously, opened the front of the machinegunner's buildin', the green-painted door, or half of it, hangin' at a wierd angle from its twisted jamb, which leaned out over the sidewalk. By then, all 5 guys on our side of the street were pourin' fire at the second floor window; it was all but invisible behind a growin' cloud of smoke and dust and sparks, and still the dirty yellow winkin' of the machinegun pierced the pall, and the incomin' was tearin' hell outta the little shop we were in, but across the street, the other guys had entered the building, one left just inside the ruined entrance, kneelin', weapon at the ready, watchfully scannin' the rooftops, windows, and doorways on our side of the street. The sound of another pair of grenade blasts, quickly followed by a third, then series of long bursts came from across the street, thick black-tinged dirty brown smoke gushed from the machinegunner's window, and then, almost like a switch had been thrown, there was just the background sound of the myriad similar little battles that were, and had been, and were gonna continue to be, goin' on all over the town. One of the guys that had gone in across the street waved from the jagged opening that had been the window, brandishing the twisted wreck of the machinegun a moment before letting it tumble to the street below. A sorta ragged cheer arose. The guys that had handled the machinegun exited the buildin', one of 'em holdin' up the spread fingers of one hand to say there had been 5 badguys taken out. We did a quick headcount and ammo check. Everybody was fine. Without any further converstion, just a few more hand signals, some guys took up cover positions that other guys began to move through. There was a sorta open square or plaza to cross, littered with debris and a twisted, charred bus skeleton.

Just then, the shattered, tattered half of that green door fell to the sidewalk. Almost as one, all 11 of us turned instantly toward the sound and began firin'. That lasted only a moment, and ended with what best might be described as a collective guilty chuckle. Everybody relaxed ... in an alert-and-wary sorta way. Some canteens were broken out, some guys lit up smokes, and we took a little breather. Real heavy smoke, licked through with bright orange and yellow flames, began to billow from the machinegunner's window, or what was left of it, and then more issued from the ruined building front. We paid it no attention; it was just another another buildin' on fire. Sarge pulled out his map, studied it and our surroun's a bit, then checked in by radio, and let 'em know where we were, what we'd seen, and that we were doin' fine. They musta been satisfied; Sarge just folded up his map and put it away, and didn't say anything was gonna get different.

That episode behind us, the fire startin' to throw off more heat and smoke than was comfortable to be close to, we hitched up our gear, stubbed out our smokes, and got back into the routine. It had been a long day already, and there was a lot of it to come. Crossin' that square to get to the next block of buildin's was somethin' we really weren't lookin' forward to, but it was what was next. You do that sorta leapfrog style, some guys coverin', some guys movin' to set up cover for the first guys to move trhough, and so on. We were nervous; open ground ain't the groundpounder's freind, specially when its surrounded by buildin's and rooftops. It started rainin' a little harder, big cold drops that almost hurt when they hit.

The first few guys, 3 to the left, 3 to the right, dashed to the cover of the bus. Something moved inside the wrecked bus. A shout "In the bus!" rang out, everybody froze, weapons trained toward the hulk. A filthy, bedraggled dog slunk out, looked around, and dashed toward the street we'd just left. We made it across the square without further incident, and readied ourselves to start clearin' another block. It wouldn't be dark for hours.

Somewhere to the left, a few blocks over, somebody was takin' a buncha mortar fire, from the sound of things. We were glad it wasn't us.

That was the afternoon Gonzalez and McConnell bought it. Nobody expected that old man - the one we all thought was sick, so we gave him a canteen of water and just let him stay in his bed while we searched his place - to pull an AK from under his blanket and cut loose into the backs of the guys walkin' away from him. He only got a few rounds off, before he was cut to bloody shreds, but it was enough.

Gonzalez was gonna be goin' home in 26 days. He was gonna get married.

What a touching story. [/sarcasm]

My point isn't that we should have media blackouts; not at all.

My point is that we, the Americans, kill innocent people as a result of our war. It is unavoidable. But we sure avoid talking about it, or filiming it, so we can pretend it doesn't happen, and say things like 'there are no civilian casualties in Fallujah.'

We like to present war as a clean operation these days, but it isn't. This is problematic, as more and more people around the world are realizing just how brutal and dirty a war can be. More people are also coming around to the idea that civilian deaths are unacceptable, and that killing isn't the way to solve problems.

This isn't good for those hawks who are running the war, and it isn't good when it comes to the fact that film of U.S. soldiers acting in a dishonorable fashion loses us the respect of the Iraqis and other people in the Middle East.

But, the real key is, they deserve to see an accurate picture of the US. So my real suggestion would not to be to get rid of video; it would be to make sure our kids know to not shoot unarmed people in the f*cking head!!!!

Cycloptichorn

Thanks for that Timber. I know it must have been hard, but these folks need to hear what its like ... even when the story still fails to convey the truth of things. Semper Fi.

This is a personal story, Timber? With all do respect, Cycloptichorn, I'm don't think that story deserved sarcasm. I think it added to the discussion. Thanks, Timber.

Yup ... its a personal story. Figured it'd get flack from some folks, and figured I had a pretty good idea who they might be. Pretty much guessed right about that.

Dunno how much it added to the conversation, but I figured it was somethin' I wanted to say.

Cyclopticorn,

Sarcasm is, I suppose, expected from some. One of these days, and I dearly hope it never comes, you might not have those boys out bleeding for you and then we'll all see if you can "stay the course".

It is an unfortunate fact that innocent people get killed. Sometimes in war, and sometimes in peace. The U.S. doesn't have a policy of killing innocent people, and our military does the best it can to keep the collateral damage to a minimum. When a soldier, or unit, goes rogue the military itself is first in line to discipline appropriately the offenders. No one has ever to my knowledge denied that sometimes individuals, or even units, cross the line of acceptable behavior. It happens, but not very often.

It is wrong. No, very wrong to condemn everyone in the military for the transgressions of the few. The Court of Public Opinion can also be called a lynch mob, and our servicemen and women deserve better than that.

You have apparently already decided that the young Marine is guilty of murder, of cooly deciding to kill a person that he knew to be an unarmed, wounded prisoner who posed no threat to either himself, or his unit. What you seem to be saying is that there is a policy to mislead the world into believing that we only kill those who deserve to die. No one has in this administration, much less the military, has ever said any such thing.

War kills people, and destroys property. We do our best to avoid casualties even among the enemy, but accidents, errors, and malfunctions are to be expected in the chaos that is combat. It isn't the administration, or military, that fosters unrealistic ideas about war, it is the sort of dreamworld expectations we've learned from television and the movies. There is no conspiracy by "hawks" to pursue a war policy, but when war is thrust upon us it must be reluctantly fought.

United States, and secular Western Civilization, are and have been under attack by radical Islamic international terror groups for almost a decade. The U.S. has finally stopped hoping that they would just go away. They woke up the sleeping giant on 9/11, and now we will pursue them and kill them wherever they go, wherever they try to hide. Some who might not have joined them will be motivated to take up arms against us. That's too bad, but if they want to die then I'm sure we can help them to paradise. With every passing day there are fewer of radicals willing and able to attack outside their strongholds.