Countless My Lai Massacres in Iraq

woiyo wrote:

xingu wrote:
I remember when this happened. Nice cover-up by the Marines.

I wonder how many terrorist this incident made.

The Marines said they attacked it because it was a safe house. I guess whenever Marines decide to declare a house a safe house that automatically means any men, women and children that enter it are subject to the death penalty.

And we like to pretend we're the good guys.

You were not there and you have no idea what was going on around these brave soldiers.

Let the investigation conclude and if any solder acted improperly, all necessary punishment should be handed out.

Recently, I watched a documentary about a marine unit in Iraq. One of the young marines talked about witnessing his fellow soldiers getting blown up---seeing the body parts of his closest friends strewn among the debris---feeling so angry and grief stricken that he wanted to kill everything in sight---about storming through the door of Iraqi house, seeing a man and a teenage boy huddled inside---and STOPPING HIMSELF from opening fire upon them. He came to his senses and stopped himself from killing.

I'm not condoning a situation where innocent civilians are slaughtered, but it's easy to understand how some of our soldiers can mentally snap out of control and become murderers.

0 Replies

I'm thinking that there will always be the "human element" in any war. There will always be atrocities because war is, by nature, very ugly. The thing to keep in mind is we should always be very careful in making decisions to go to war in the first place. No room for guesswork, philosophical ideology, economic advantage or ego maintainence. Dire need of self-defence only can be used as justification. Korea/Viet Nam/Iraq (our last 3 wars) and all ended in defeat for the US of A. Perhaps we can learn from this, probably not. (We did win the invasion of Grenada but only because there was no enemy to defeat)

0 Replies

"it's easy to understand how some of our soldiers can mentally snap out of control and become murderers." One more reason why war is to be avoided if at all possible. The blood is on the CIC who abused his authority and lied us into war for no good reason. Bushie says any Marine found guilty in the Haditha atrocity will be punished. Nothing about the 500 pound bombs we're dropping on cribs under Bushie's command. Is blowing a baby's head off at point blank range more of a horror than dropping a 500 pound bomb on a baby?

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I'm thinking that there will always be the "human element" in any war. There will always be atrocities because war is, by nature, very ugly. The thing to keep in mind is we should always be very careful in making decisions to go to war in the first place. No room for guesswork, philosophical ideology, economic advantage or ego maintainence. Dire need of self-defence only can be used as justification. Korea/Viet Nam/Iraq (our last 3 wars) and all ended in defeat for the US of A. Perhaps we can learn from this, probably not. (We did win the invasion of Grenada but only because there was no enemy to defeat)

This is 100% how I feel about it and what drove me to be so against this war in the first place. I know that things like this will happen in every war, which makes a war of choice and bad judgment like this one all the more reprehensible.

Also agree with DLaw -- I can certainly see how it could cause a soldier to snap, but that doesn't change their responsibility to control themselves. When civilians snap in response to watching their loved ones get blown up, we call them terrorists.

0 Replies

This is what war means. This is what America has done to it's children. To stand back now and wring our hands and declaim that it's just a few bad eggs is the height of hypocrisy. SOMEBODY stuck these average guys in an untenable situation in an unwinnable war against an unidentifiable enemy for which they were neither prepared, equipped nor trained. SOMEBODY allows it to continue. SOMEBODY needs to accept that by doing so that they-- that WE-- are responsible for these actions just as if we pulled the triggers or lobbed the grenades ourselves.

We are a democracy and we have the power and ability to make ourselves known and heard. Whether out of fear or sloth or ignorance, we did not do so. In shirking this responsibility, we both let these guys down and tacitly, if not overtly, acquiesced to the murder of civilian noncombatants.

Personally, I will be forever ashamed that this occurred on my watch and that I allowed this to happen and that I couldn't do enough or say enough to stop it.

0 Replies

True or false: There were countless Mai Lai massacres in Vietnam?
True or false: There were countless Mai Lai massacres in WW2?

If the point is that it's awful, and unacceptable, and those guilty should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, I agree. If the point is that it's unusual compared to past wars, I strongly suspect it is not.

I await the usual moronic, "just because it's happened before, doesn't mean it's okay," response - moronic because I am not saying that it's okay.

0 Replies

Just because it's happened before, doesn't mean it should happen again.

Embarrassed

0 Replies

Several of us have already said that it's to be expected in war. The only thing that makes it worse in this particular war is that this one was so obviously unnecessary.

0 Replies

dyslexia wrote:

I'm thinking that there will always be the "human element" in any war. There will always be atrocities because war is, by nature, very ugly. The thing to keep in mind is we should always be very careful in making decisions to go to war in the first place. No room for guesswork, philosophical ideology, economic advantage or ego maintainence. Dire need of self-defence only can be used as justification. Korea/Viet Nam/Iraq (our last 3 wars) and all ended in defeat for the US of A. Perhaps we can learn from this, probably not. (We did win the invasion of Grenada but only because there was no enemy to defeat)

From Al Gore's speech:

Quote:

In the United States Senate, which used to pride itself on being the "greatest deliberative body in the world," meaningful debate is now a rarity. Even on the eve of the fateful vote to authorize the invasion of Iraq, Senator Robert Byrd famously asked: "Why is this chamber empty?"

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Text_of_Gore_speech_0116.html

0 Replies

http://www.cagle.com/working/060531/chappatte.gif

0 Replies

A short while ago I was on the sofa "resting my eyes" and the telly was on CNN. I sorta awoke to hear a whitehouse spokesman say "all us troops receive training regarding "rules of engagement" Personally I was 'engaged" in "engagement" in Viet Nam and never heard either the words "rules of engagement" nor the concept. What I did hear was whatever my NCO/CO tell me to my face re any specific action to be taken (Anything crosses the perimeter-kill it). I may or may not have commited an atrocity, I don't really know and I don't care to think about that, I was 18 years old at the time and I am now 61, I am not the person I was then.

0 Replies

Would there be any debate vis a vis the "atrocity question" dys if you had walked into a home and killed an entire unarmed family in a completely unheated conflict?

0 Replies

In an occupied country the one thing you need most is the co-operation of the locals. I am sure that many marines and officers do a lot to become friends with the population.
.
To avoid losing all this goodwill, all troops should be drilled to stay friendly with civilians. One slip and all goodwill is lost. It will take a long time before Iraqis will forgive this behaviour.
.
Here is an example of the wrong approach. This redneck talk by a general is resulting in many locals joining up with the insurrection.
.........................
July 20 - In a press conference last week, our new Chief of the Defence Staff for Canada, General Rick Hillier, came out swinging. Announcing our new mission in Afghanistan, he called the enemy "detestable murderers and scumbags...they detest our freedoms, they detest our society, they detest our liberties."

0 Replies

New 'Iraq massacre' tape emerges

The pictures came from a hardline Sunni group
The BBC has uncovered new video evidence that US forces may have been responsible for the deliberate killing of 11 innocent Iraqi civilians.
The video appears to challenge the US military's account of events that took place in the town of Ishaqi in March.

The US said at the time four people died during a military operation, but Iraqi police claimed that US troops had deliberately shot the 11 people.

A spokesman for US forces in Iraq told the BBC an inquiry was under way.

The new evidence comes in the wake of the alleged massacre in Haditha, where US marines are suspected of massacring up to 24 Iraqi civilians in November 2005.

'Massacre'

The video pictures obtained by the BBC appear to contradict the US account of the events in Ishaqi, about 100km (60 miles) north of Baghdad, on 15 March 2006.

The US authorities said they were involved in a firefight after a tip-off that an al-Qaeda supporter was visiting the house.

According to the Americans, the building collapsed under heavy fire killing four people - a suspect, two women and a child.

But a report filed by Iraqi police accused US troops of rounding up and deliberately shooting 11 people in the house, including five children and four women, before blowing up the building.

The video tape obtained by the BBC shows a number of dead adults and children at the site with what our world affairs editor John Simpson says were clearly gunshot wounds.

The pictures came from a hardline Sunni group opposed to coalition forces.

It has been cross-checked with other images taken at the time of events and is believed to be genuine, the BBC's Ian Pannell in Baghdad says.

http://rawstory.com/showarticle.php?src=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.crooksandliars.com%2F2006%2F06%2F01.html%23a8536

0 Replies

Quote:

On Wednesday, American troops near the restive city of Samarra shot and killed two Iraqi women, including one who might have been pregnant and on her way to a hospital, after their car did not heed what the American military command said were repeated warnings to stop.

Whenever we do crap like this we make new terrorist. That's why we're losing this war. The violence is getting worse and it will never cease as long as we're there.

We're the source for terrorist. We created sectarian warfare. We created the Sunnis terrorist in Iraq. We created the conditions that's leading to civil war. We are creating an atmosphere of hate for Americans. Bush is bin Laden's helper; not a willingly helper but a helper because of his ignorance and unbending ideology.

0 Replies

detano inipo wrote:

...One slip and all goodwill is lost. It will take a long time before Iraqis will forgive this behaviour....

The Germans and Japanese seem to have forgiven us for whatever atrocities were committed in their countries during WW2. Why should this be different? I guess the Iraqis wish that they could have been opressed by the Hussein family for another few generations.

0 Replies

"We're the source for terrorist. We created sectarian warfare. We created the Sunnis terrorist in Iraq. We created the conditions that's leading to civil war. We are creating an atmosphere of hate for Americans. Bush is bin Laden's helper; not a willingly helper but a helper because of his ignorance and unbending ideology. "

Your extremely naive to think the WE created Sunnis terrorists since these people have been killing each other for centuries.

I will agree that stuff like this does not help the cause, however, do not act, as the media has, by painting every soldier with this broad brush and think an ENTIRE population of Iraqis are against our efforts.

0 Replies

The first thing soldiers are taught is: obeing orders.
.
All officers know that in Iraq it is not a good idea to commit war crimes or murders. If their men are good soldiers they will obey orders and behave.
.
These marines were not good soldiers.

0 Replies

Brandon wrote:

The Germans and Japanese seem to have forgiven us for whatever atrocities were committed in their countries during WW2. Why should this be different? I guess the Iraqis wish that they could have been opressed by the Hussein family for another few generations.

I can't believe the stupidity of conservatives. Why do you keep insisting that what's happening in Iraq is compatable to WW II? It's not. Bush is not a Roosevelt or Truman, no matter how many wet dreams he has about it. Iraq is not Germany and Saddam is not Hitler.

0 Replies

Hitler was in a class all by himself. He actually threatened Europe and the whole world. Saddam Hussein was a little jerk who threatened nobody.
.
Pearl and Wolfowitz had a sick obsession with Iraq. Clinton refused to listen to them, Bush was an easier target. He fell for it and when 9/11 happened all fell into place.

0 Replies

Countless My Lai Massacres in Iraq

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know