1
   

What does everybody think about the soldier , shooting that?

 
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Nov, 2004 04:41 pm
When the ship of state has the rudder fixed on a starboard course it just goes around in circle.
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Nov, 2004 04:49 pm
Acquiunk wrote:
The administration does not need a course readjustment, it needs a radical reoganization. All they have at the moment are hammers, and they are busting everything up. The present policy is a classic model of what not to do in an occupation


That is what Kerry campaigned on...and it was rejected by the electorate.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Nov, 2004 05:05 pm
EBrown,

You sound so sure, so certain. What is it that makes it certain so that, "The US has lost Iraq- period. This is a un-winable war and every day spent there means more tragedy"? Of course, every moment of war is almost by definition a tragedy. Those who oppose a stable, democratic Iraq by kidnapping and murder, could throw down their arms and help rebuild the country. That isn't going to happen though, because Al Quida and other similar organizations build on hatred not peace. In the past week the terrorist stronghold in Falujha was wiped out. Thousands of murderers, many of whom are radicals who came from outside Iraq, were deprived of a sanctuary, and perhaps a thousand were killed. It doesn't sound to me as if we have met certain defeat.

How do you know that the U.S. is regarded as a "deeply despised occupier" by ordinary Iraqi citizens? Don't you think that there is a possibility that most Iraqi citizens would like to have their cities rebuilt? To be able to assume a normal life without fear that a roadside bomb will kill their children? Don't you think it possible that Iraqi citizens might be as disgusted by the kidnapping and wanton murder of aid workers who are trying to improve life for Iraqi's? Perhaps you are right, but I see no reason that your opinion is any better than that of those who think our policies in Iraq are proper, and will result in success.

It is nice to hear that you are emotionally conflicted for the young Marine. Rather than call for a rope, you even are decent enough to recognize that the charges he "allegedly broke the law and committed a crime that is international considered immoral", are nothing more than allegations. On the other hand, why waste a moment's concern over the killing of a man who wanted nothing more from life than to kill young Marines? The man had a choice. He could do something constructive to improve his life and the lives of others, or he could join in an effort to kill Americans. He made his choice and did his best to kill our soldiers. The result was he lost his life ... end of story.

I agree that it would be ideal if the Iraqi government could come into being peacefully, and without the assistance of our military. That just isn't the real world. Al Quida and other international radical Islamic terrorist groups belief that they can not afford to lose in Iraq. They hate the idea that Iraq can function as a stable secular government that places humanitarian values above sectarian purity. Building such a government in the vacuum left by decades of political oppression, abuse and corruption is not easy. If we were to suddenly pull out of Iraq, it would be like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It would an acknowledgement that terrorist thugs are the legitimate government of Iraq.

Perhaps in the end, Iraq will not be democratic or even peaceful. Is that a reason not to try? Be patient, things are progressing and in the end oppression will be defeated.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Nov, 2004 05:14 pm
McG,

US military are not often right in these matters. They were thinking they would be over the hump several times. And, besides this sounds awfully like the "light at the end of the tunnel" (which I can't quite remember where I heard.

There is no real evidence that any "hump" has been crossed or any insurgency has been broken up. When do you expect things will get better-- meaning less people on all sides dying.

Larry,

There is no way that anything approaching "free" elections will happen with US troops occupying Iraq. If there were free elections, it is pretty clear that the Shia majoirity would win and probably want at least a mildly theocratic government. It is also pretty clear that the US would not accecpt this (nor the Sunni minority nor the Kurds).

Besides, no one in Iraq, except perhaps Kurds, has any reason to trust the US in their "free" elections. You can't have someone who is seen as an enemy by a significant number of the population running elections.

Aquiunk,

If you bust up my pottery store, the first thing I would want is for you to leave especially if you killed members of my family in the process (I mean nothing personal by this). I would probably want you to pay for the damage, but I wouldn't want you to fix it yourself.

I imagine that many Iraqis feel this way.

All,

Does anyone really think there are going to be anything resembling a legitmate election in January. If this happens and is accepted by a great number of Iraqis (not just our friends) I will admit I was wrong. This would mean that the uncontrolled violence (which requires at least acceptance and probably support from the population at large to continue) would cease.

I would love to be wrong on this one. I think that legitimate, widely accepted elections are impossible.

But what if I am right and we keep sinking deeper and deeper into an unwinnable quagmire? At what point will you realize that it is time to pull out and end this type of tragedy.

Are you really willing to keep sacraficing soldiers, insurgents and civilians until we reach an unreachable goal?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Nov, 2004 05:32 pm
Asherman wrote:
EBrown,
How do you know that the U.S. is regarded as a "deeply despised occupier" by ordinary Iraqi citizens? Don't you think that there is a possibility that most Iraqi citizens would like to have their cities rebuilt? To be able to assume a normal life without fear that a roadside bomb will kill their children? Don't you think it possible that Iraqi citizens might be as disgusted by the kidnapping and wanton murder of aid workers who are trying to improve life for Iraqi's? Perhaps you are right, but I see no reason that your opinion is any better than that of those who think our policies in Iraq are proper, and will result in success.


One thing without doubt is that there is a significant amount of Iraqi citizens who are willing to risk their lives to fight the US occupation. Sure some are disgusted by barbaric acts commited by insurgents. Others clearly feel it is justified. It seems reasonable to expect that many are in the middle, willing to shoot at soldiers, but not willing to bomb civilians or murder civilians.

But, an insurgency simply can not survice without the tacit support of the population. If the majority of Iraqi civilians cooperated with the US occupation, the insurgents would all quickly be killed, captured or fade away.

Iraqis are willing to fight the occupation at great risk and cost. Some of them would be murderers anyway, but not that many. From the size of the insurgency, it is clear that many people, who in a stable government would lead quiet productive lives, are joining the fight against the US.

Quote:

It is nice to hear that you are emotionally conflicted for the young Marine. Rather than call for a rope, you even are decent enough to recognize that the charges he "allegedly broke the law and committed a crime that is international considered immoral", are nothing more than allegations. On the other hand, why waste a moment's concern over the killing of a man who wanted nothing more from life than to kill young Marines? The man had a choice. He could do something constructive to improve his life and the lives of others, or he could join in an effort to kill Americans. He made his choice and did his best to kill our soldiers. The result was he lost his life ... end of story.


How do you know that? This is an bloody armed conflict and it is easy to see why young men (who in a stable society would lead peaceful productive lives) would decide to fight against an occupier. Don't let your American bias get in the way of reason.

The marines job is to kill insurgents-- many of the insurgents are Iraqis. Saying the man's motives were that he wanted "nothing more than to kill young marines" is an awfully big stretch. Patriotism or anger at the loss of family or fear of an American dominated government would all be understandable motivations.

The fact is you don't know very much about this man. You don't know his reasons for joining the insurgency. You don't know what crimes he commited nor the crimes that commited against him. You don't know if he had the honor to avoid killing civilians.

You make a lot of assumptions based on your view of him as the enemy. He was certainly a human being, and probably an Iraqi, and he most certainly opposed the occupation of his country.

Quote:

I agree that it would be ideal if the Iraqi government could come into being peacefully, and without the assistance of our military. That just isn't the real world. Al Quida and other international radical Islamic terrorist groups belief that they can not afford to lose in Iraq. They hate the idea that Iraq can function as a stable secular government that places humanitarian values above sectarian purity. Building such a government in the vacuum left by decades of political oppression, abuse and corruption is not easy. If we were to suddenly pull out of Iraq, it would be like snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. It would an acknowledgement that terrorist thugs are the legitimate government of Iraq.

Perhaps in the end, Iraq will not be democratic or even peaceful. Is that a reason not to try? Be patient, things are progressing and in the end oppression will be defeated.


I never suggested the Iraqi government could come into being peacefully. I am saying that a government that comes to being under occupation by a nation that much of population sees as hostile is a recipe for disaster.
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Thu 18 Nov, 2004 05:42 pm
ebrown: Methinks you underestimate the Iraqi peoples' desire for a government other than a dictatorship or theorcracy.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 06:20 am
timberlandko wrote:
Quote:
http://www.opengroup.com/sports/images/(SC)Jack_Nicholson_Photo.jpg

Jessep: You can't handle the truth! Son, we live in a world that has walls. And those walls have to be guarded by men with guns.

Who's gonna do it? You? You, Lt. Weinberg?
I have a greater responsibility than you can possibly fathom. You weep for Santiago and you curse the Marines.
You have that luxury. You have the luxury of not knowing what I know: that Santiago's death, while tragic, probably saved lives.

And my existence, while grotesque and incomprehensible to you, saves lives...You don't want the truth. Because deep down, in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that wall. You need me on that wall.

We use words like honor, code, loyalty...we use these words as the backbone to a life spent defending something.

You use 'em as a punchline. I have neither the time nor the inclination to explain myself to a man who rises and sleeps under the blanket of the very freedom I provide, then questions the manner in which I provide it! I'd rather you just said thank you and went on your way. Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon and stand a post.

Either way, I don't give a damn what you think you're entitled to!

Col Nathan R. Jessep {Jack Nicholson), A few Good Men




From an email I received earlier today (I was not the original recipient, the email was not from my son, this was forwarded to me)
Quote:
Good Morning Everybody. The following is an email from my son regarding the NBC report (with embedded reporter Kevin Sites), concerning the Marine who is being investigated for "murdering" the insurgent in Fallaja. I will be sending his mail to every news program's email I can find. I find it sickening that this Kevin Sites is even allowed to be embedded with our Marines, as this isn't the first report I've heard from him that took on a decidely unfriendly tone. My son also gave me permission to release it to anyone that wants to pass it on, as long as it remains unedited.


Quote:
This is one story of many that people normally don't hear, and one that everyone does. This is just 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 you recliner, lace up your 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.

Sincerely,
xxxxxxxxxxxx, LCPL USMC


"For those who fight for it, freedom has a flavor the protected never know." -- Written on a C-ration box lid at Khe Sanh, South Vietnam, 1968

"There will be nowhere left for the insurgents to hide. We will fight them until there are none of them left to fight." U.S. Army Gen. John Abizaid, chief of U.S. Central Command


xxxxxxxxxxxx, MGySgt., USMC (Ret.) Not as lean, Not as mean, But still a Marine.


Timber - do you truly admire what the character of jessep is saying in the quotes you give? Truly?
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 06:25 am
This video from F-16 targeting a safe house housing Iraqi insurgents puts the single killing of an Iraqi insurgent by the Marine in pespective with the horror of the total war I think.

http://mailcenter2.comcast.net/wmc/v/wm/419DE30D000EF12A000001042200758942970104049A030D04/bomb.wmv?cmd=MimePart&no=78&uid=233184&sid=c0&folder=Trash&format=raw&mimepart=2&content_type=video/x-ms-wmv&name=bomb.wmv
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 08:13 am
Larry, fix your link so it doesn't stretch the thread so far...

Like this...

link to f-16 video
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 08:44 am
An interesting perspective from another soldier.

Quote:
They're Called Security Rounds

Its a safety issue pure and simple. After assaulting through a target, put a security round in everybody's head. Sorry al-Reuters, there's no paddy wagon rolling around Fallujah picking up "prisoners" and offering them a hot cup a joe, falafel, and a blanket. There's no time to dick around in the target, you clear the space, dump the chumps, and moveon.org. Are Corpsman expected to treat wounded terrorists? Negative. Hey libs, worried about the defense budget? Well, it would be waste, fraud, and abuse for a Corpsman to spend one man minute or a battle dressing on a terrorist, its much cheaper to just spend the $.02 on a 5.56mm FMJ.

By the way, terrorists who chop off civilian's heads are not prisoners, they are carcasses.

UPDATE: Let me be very clear about this issue. I have looked around the web, and many people get this concept, but there are some stragglers. Here is your situation Marine. You just took fire from unlawful combatants shooting from a religious building attempting to use the sanctuary status of their position as protection. But you're in Fallujah now, and the Marine Corps has decided that they're not playing that game this time. That was Najaf. So you set the mosque on fire and you hose down the terrorists with small arms, launch some AT-4s (Rockets), some 40MM grenades into the building and things quiet down. So you run over there, and find some tangos wounded and pretending to be dead. You are aware that suicide martyrdom is like really popular with these kind of idiots, and like taking some Marines with them would be really cool. So you can either risk your life and your fireteam's lives by having them cover you while you bend down and search a guy that you think is pretending to be dead for some reason. Also, you don't know who or what is in the next room, and you're already speaking english to each other and its loud because your hearing is poor from shooting people for several days. So you know that there are many other rooms to enter, and that if anyone is still alive in those rooms, they know that Americans are in the mosque. Meanwhile (3 seconds later), you still have this terrorist that was just shooting at you from a mosque playing possum. What do you do?

You double tap his head, and you go to the next room, that's what.

What about the Geneva Conventions and all that Law of Land Warfare stuff? What about it. Without even addressing the issues at hand you first thought should be, "I'd rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6." Bear in mind that this is a perpetual mindset that is reinforced by experiences gained on a minute by minute basis. Secondly, you are fighting an unlawful combatant in a Sanctuary which is a double No No on his part. Third, tactically you are in no position to take "prisoners" because there are more rooms to search and clear, and the behavior of said terrorist indicates that he is up to no good. No good in Fallujah is a very large place and the low end of no good and the high end of no good are fundamentally the same... Marines get hurt or die. So there is no compelling reason for you to do anything but double tap this idiot and get on with the mission.

If you are a veteran then everything I have just written is self evident, if you are not a veteran than at least try to put yourself in the situation. Remember, in Fallujah there is no yesterday, there is no tomorrow, there is only now. Right NOW. Have you ever lived in NOW for a week? It is not easy, and if you have never lived in NOW for longer than it takes to finish the big roller coaster at Six Flags, then shut your hole about putting Marines in jail for war crimes. Be advised, I am not talking to my readers, but if this post gets linked up, I want regular folks to get this message loud and clear. Froggy OUT.


source
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 12:01 pm
Every word of it, dlowan. Every word.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 12:17 pm
What the Marine Did (Slate)

Quote:
t's being investigated, and justice will be done."

On the same day as this story, the tragic news broke that CARE International worker Margaret Hassan had been executed by her captors in Iraq. Already, there have been cries of moral equivalence. One Iraqi told the Los Angeles Times: "It goes to show that [Marines] are not any better than the so-called terrorists." Al Jazeera fanned these flames of anti-American sentiment by broadcasting the shooting incident in full while censoring Hassan's execution snuff tape. (U.S. networks refused to air actual footage of both killings.) There is a simplistic appeal to such arguments because both events involve the killing of a human being and, more specifically, the apparent execution of a noncombatant in the context of war.

Yet it is the differences between these two killings that reveal the most important truths about the Marine shooting in Fallujah. Hassan was, in every sense of the word, a noncombatant. She worked for more than 20 years to help Iraqis obtain basic necessities: food, running water, medical care, electricity, and education. The Iraqi insurgents kidnapped her and murdered her in order to terrorize the Iraqi population and the aid workers trying to help them.

By contrast, the Marines entered a building in Fallujah and found several men who, until moments before, had been enemy insurgents engaged in mortal combat. A hidden grenade would have changed everything, and the Marine would have been lauded. As it turned out, the Iraqi was entitled to mercy, but Hassan was truly innocent. There is no legitimate moral equivalence between a soldier asking for quarter and a noncombatant like Hassan.

There is another key difference that reveals a great moral divide between the Marines and insurgents they fought this week in Fallujah. The insurgents choose the killing of innocents as their modus operandi and glorify these killings with videos distributed via the Internet and Al Jazeera. They recognize no civilized norms of conduct, let alone the rules of warfare. The Marines, on the other hand, distinguish themselves by killing innocents so rarely and only by exception or mistake.
...
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 12:24 pm
A Few Good Men

Dawson and Downey are put on trial for the death of a member of their squad, Santiago, who died as a result of a medical condition unknown to them that was speeded up by a rag stuffed in his throat. The commander of the base, Colonel Jessup, ordered Dawson and Downey to carry out the Code Red after specifically ordering the whole platoon to leave Santiago alone. Because of loyalty to their positions, Dawson and Downey carry out the Code Red with no questions asked. When Santiago dies, Colonel Jessup covers his back, and tries to let the marines solely take responsibility for the death, but the laywer, Kaffee, of the men accused, goads Jessup into admitting on the stand that he did order the Code Red. Dawson and Downey are cleared of the charges, but are given a dishonorable discharge from the marines, and Jessup is arrested. Sorry for revealing the ending if you can't handle the truth.

We need men on the wall. But if our democracy is to thrive they must be moral men.

BTW I don't understand the furor over the Marine. In combat, I imagine there is no time to wonder about niceties. As the great director Sam Fuller said: "Only one thought goes through your mind in combat...live...live...live"

Jessup , as much as we'd like to heroise him...is basically morally bankrupt.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 01:36 pm
In fairness, I acknowledge Nicholson's character was not the hero - quite the contrary, which pretty much was the point of the movie. That in no way changes the fact the words of the cited scene have powerful meaning, even if the character uttering them was a heel.

Now, lets see what we know about this shooting incident

1) The insurgents essentially are ununiformed irregular forces, overtly and intentionally indistinguishable from the population among whom they hide. That itself is in contravention of the established standards of the legal practice of war.

2) The insurgents are known to use suicide tactics.

3) The insurgents are known to feign death or surrender in order to gain tactical advantage, another violation of accepted practice.

4) The insurgents are known to boobytrap dead and wounded fellow combatants and non-combatant civilians, another illegal practice.

5) The insurgents are known to deploy themselves in mosques, schools, and hospitals ... again illegal practice by the laws of civilized war.

6) The Marine in question had the previous day, in a very similar circumstance, been wounded and had seen squadmates killed and wounded by the detonation of the boobytrapped corpse of an insurgent.

7) No more than the twitch of a finger is required to set off a suicide bomb.

8) The camera showed an encounter between uniformed combatants and un-uniformed males of military age, some dead, some wounded, which encounter took place within a mosque which had been the source of offensive fire directed against the uniformed combatants.

8) The Marine in question apparently perceived a threat, then over a time period of approximately 3 to 4 seconds, warned his compatriots of the perceived threat and dealt with the perceived threat.

10) The embedded cameraman, Kevin Sites, has a personal Agenda, and has been lauded by al-Jazeera.

Thats what we know.

War is a nasty business, a business unkind to hesitation and unforgiving of error.

That, too, we know.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 01:51 pm
That's all delightful, timber, if you believe that what is happening in Iraq is a legal war instead of an invasion.

Since there continues to be disagreement in many corners of the world about what is happening there, particularly in Iraq, I think we can excuse some Iraqui residents from observing the niceties of legal war.

However, since the U.S. seems to feel it is waging a war, I will, based on your input, feel comfortable holding the U.S. military to the "established standards of the legal practice of war".




achh, it's a stupid position, trying to defend anyone's murder.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 01:59 pm
Quote:
5) The insurgents are known to deploy themselves in mosques, schools, and hospitals ... again illegal practice by the laws of civilized war.


When confronting those who would not stick to the laws of civilized war,

The ability to keep yourself to the laws of civilized war is what differentiates you from your enemies.

Without that differentiation, the US loses a lot of respect in people's minds. I'm not trying to say that we should hang the kid; but without a show of force on our side re: following the rules of civilized warfare, I fear the differences between our side and theirs will become smaller and smaller in the Iraqi people's minds, until there is none, anymore, and then where will we be?

I urge caution.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
Larry434
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 02:03 pm
Since there continues to be disagreement in many corners of the world about what is happening there, particularly in Iraq, I think we can excuse some Iraqui residents from observing the niceties of legal war.

Insurgency is illegal under international law, regardless of the legality of the invasion and occupation of the insurgents home country.

Strange law I know, but true nonetheless.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 02:05 pm
I simply present my opinions, ehBeth, and from time to time cite material wherefrom the reasoning behind that opinion is drawn. I don't seek to defend anything or convince anyone of anything or change anyone's mind; what anyone else may think of what I think is entirely the business of that other anyone. I just call things as I see things, and that's just the way I see things. In my opinion, we're all entitled to our opinions, and equally entitled to weigh the opinions of others against our own, entitled to present corroborative evidence and foundation, and entitled to rebut opposing evidence and foundation.

But that's just my opinion.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 02:28 pm
Quote:
War crimes?
Oliver North

November 19, 2004


WASHINGTON, D.C. -- By now, almost everyone in the world with a television has seen the videotape that appears to show a U.S. Marine shooting a wounded Iraqi terrorist inside a mosque in Fallujah. For the record, here are the facts, because facts -- not rumors or emotions -- really are important. Here is what those who were there told me:

On Friday, Nov. 12, U.S. Marines were fired upon by terrorists armed with AK-47s, RPD machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades from a mosque and an adjacent building. The Marines returned fire, first with M-16s and 240G machine guns, and then, as they continued to take fire and casualties, they escalated to an MK-19, a 40mm grenade launcher and then an AT-4 missile.

When none of these weapons successfully eliminated enemy fire, the platoon commander called for and received permission to open fire with the main gun of an M-1 Abrams tank and then storm the buildings. In the ensuing assault, 10 terrorists were killed and five others were wounded, as the Marines went room-to-room clearing the buildings. Immediately afterward, two correspondents accompanying coalition forces were shown a large quantity of AK-47s, machine guns, mortar rounds, explosives, RPGs and hand grenades that had been stored in the mosque.

While the print and broadcast cameramen were photographing the evidence of a war crime -- weapons being stored in a place of worship -- the Marine unit received an order over the radio to advance and secure another building. As the bone-tired troops departed for their next objective, one of the correspondents asked what would become of the wounded terrorists. A Marine sergeant replied that another unit was to move up and evacuate the injured enemy to the rear for treatment and detention.

The following morning -- Saturday -- another platoon of Marines from a different company was attacked from the mosque. A second gunfight ensued, and once again, a squad of Marines assaulted the structure. They were accompanied by NBC correspondent Kevin Sites and his cameraman, taping for the "pool" -- meaning that whatever tape he filed would be available to all the networks accredited to cover Operation New Dawn.

According to the videotape and the report filed after the action, as the Marines burst into one of the rooms inside the mosque, they found four terrorists -- one dead and three wounded. In the video that has now been seen around the world, one of the battle-weary Marines points his weapon at one of the enemy combatants lying against the wall and shouts, "He's (expletive) faking he's dead. He's faking he's (expletive) dead." An instant later, the Marine raises his rifle and fires into the insurgent's head. Immediately thereafter, another Marine can be heard saying, "Well, he's dead now."

For American broadcasts, the actual shot is "blacked out." But when the tape airs on Al Jazeera, Al Arabiya, Lebanon TV and other Arab media outlets, nothing is left to the imagination. Unfortunately, neither version is accurate -- though both are very troubling. Like so much of what's on television today, only the goriest, most sensational portion of the tape has aired. As a consequence, "the rest of the story" -- as my friend Paul Harvey puts it -- has been lost in the clamor created by 15 seconds of videotape.

Only a few have seen the footage shot the day before -- providing irrefutable evidence that the mosque was a well-defended arms depot. And fewer still have viewed the very next sequence after "the shooting," which shows two Marines pointing their weapons at another combatant lying motionless. Suddenly, one of the Marines jumps back as the terrorist stretches out his hand, motioning that he is alive. Neither Marine opens fire.

According to the Marines, a Navy medical corpsman was then summoned to treat the two wounded prisoners. In his original written report, Sites, the correspondent who videotaped the shooting, doesn't mention the medical treatment provided to the injured enemy combatants, but he does note that four of the combatants were some of those who had been left behind from the firefight on Friday. If the NBC reporter knew that from being there the day before, why didn't he tell this new group of Marines before they rushed into the room?

None of that is included in the tape, which is now being used to raise Islamic ire at the "American invader." Why? And why did it take more than a day to learn that the Marine seen shooting on the videotape had been wounded in the face the day before if the correspondent knew that when he filed the videotape? Why didn't the original story include the fact that a Marine in the same unit had been killed 24 hours earlier while searching the booby-trapped dead body of a terrorist?

Within hours of the videotaped incident in the mosque, another Marine was killed and five others wounded by a booby-trapped body they found in a house after a gunfight. Why was this not made part of the original story? Even Amnesty International, no friend to the American armed forces, has reported that the Iraqi terrorists have illegally used white flags to lure coalition forces into ambushes. Yet this, too, is absent in the original story.

Though the Arab media doesn't mention it, the incident is being fully investigated -- even as combat operations continue. If a court martial is convened, the young Marine in the videotape will have a chance to defend his actions. Meanwhile, Arab broadcasts outside Iraq that won't even mention the murder of relief worker Margaret Hassan will replay the "shooting video" for weeks to come as an incitement to join the Jihad.

In the rush to air sensational footage, the "pool" system failed us all. Worse yet, it failed the young soldiers and Marines and their brave Iraqi allies who are fighting to liberate Fallujah from the terrorists' bloody grip. Even though the "shooting video" lacked context and failed to tell the full story -- it became the big story. If it becomes the story of Fallujah, that would be a crime.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Nov, 2004 02:33 pm
I can't believe you would seriously present an article by Oliver North for consideration.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/09/2025 at 06:19:14