Haditha. Not the first. Won't be the last

Psychoblues said:
American GI's are expected tp perform. This is instilled in every operation (regardless of law or political implication) that they perform. They perform admiribly when they simply follow orders. This is no excuse for murder but it does implicate loyalty towards a command or order given them.

Perhaps the insisting of the PTB (Powers That Be) to resist such immoral and flagrant violation of international and humanistic rights was exactly encouraged?

I've been in WAR. Killing is no stranger to me. Is there somewhere lurking a judicial advocate that is intent upon prosecuting ME for my actions while in uniform?

The soldiers must answer for themselves with the understqanding that they performed as ordered or at least demonstrated.

GunnyL, I thinketh you an abomination with great hopes your ideology is rejected and that you are not representative of our present military.


Psychoblues

The fact that you think I am an abomination only reinforces the fact that I am correct, and YOU nothing but a idealogue and a troll.

In the "Sad but True Dept:" I would be interested to know just exactly what it is you think makes me an abomination and not representative of our present military."

Wanting to win? Not listening to political morons like you spouting backwards-assed, in no way in touch with reality propaganda?

The very fact that a person such as yourself has the freedom to express such unrealistic, political propaganda as ideals speaks of what I and those who think like me represent.

And your pure gibberish represents YOU.

And "me three" on going to war. I'm sure we can tally quite a list if all the vets on this board weigh in. Your point is WHAT exactly?
 
I gave you something out of my education, heart and soul. You accuse me of nothing other than your distorted opinion. You can not address the original post, you can not understand any analogy of war crimes or how they relate to Republican politics, you do not even know how your personal oath of allegiance to the very American Constitution and subsequent laws that you swore to protect, considering that you actually are what your avatar would suggest, are all about. Do you?

Like I said, GunnyL, I can help you in your education but I cannot do anything about your stupidity.


Psychoblues


GunnyL said:
The fact that you think I am an abomination only reinforces the fact that I am correct, and YOU nothing but a idealogue and a troll.

In the "Sad but True Dept:" I would be interested to know just exactly what it is you think makes me an abomination and not representative of our present military."

Wanting to win? Not listening to political morons like you spouting backwards-assed, in no way in touch with reality propaganda?

The very fact that a person such as yourself has the freedom to express such unrealistic, political propaganda as ideals speaks of what I and those who think like me represent.

And your pure gibberish represents YOU.

And "me three" on going to war. I'm sure we can tally quite a list if all the vets on this board weigh in. Your point is WHAT exactly?
 
Psychoblues said:
I gave you something out of my education, heart and soul. You accuse me of nothing other than your distorted opinion. You can not address the original post, you can not understand any analogy of war crimes or how they relate to Republican politics, you do not even know how your personal oath of allegiance to the very American Constitution and subsequent laws that you swore to protect, considering that you actually are what your avatar would suggest, are all about. Do you?

Like I said, GunnyL, I can help you in your education but I cannot do anything about your stupidity.


Psychoblues

:sleep: SOS.
 
Psychoblues said:
Not the first, won't be the last?

The further atrosities of WAR will be forthcoming. I am ashamed the WAR itself is illegal and not indicative of true American objectives or values. I continue to be dissappointed that American values lose credibility due to political buying power and general American lack of truth and education.


Psychoblues


By "education" I assume you mean indoctrination in the belief system of the left so free thought is avoided. "American lack of truth" eh? We are the most open society on the planet. If lies exist on either side of the political spectrum their counterparts are quick to point them out to make political hay. What you spout is the same one sided world view shared by Marxists.
 
Psychoblues said:
I do know that, GunnyL. But, you have a problem I can't fix. You are either ignorant or stupid. I can help educate you but I can't do a damn thing about your stupidity.

Psychoblues


I'm curious Psycho, why do you and a few others on this board put your post first with the quote you are refering to below, that makes no sense. You actually have to do it on purpose because the way this board is designed, it works correctly without having to do anything. It kind of exemplifies your backward thinking and ego problem perfectly.

Your post is wrong as far as the world goes, like our country, the rest of the world's idiots are controlled mostly by an agenda driven press(leftist assholes with socialist agendas). I have seen that everywhere I have gone, we could be handing out food and dollar bills to the world(oh wait we do) and still get the shit press from the negative left. I am constantly amazed how very negative leftist like yourself are, very rare that anything positive comes out of any of your mouths. It really doesn't matter who is in the White House, you guys are always the same way. You guys belong to the party of "Half empty" thought....too bad.:coffee3:
 
dmp said:
Ya know? More and More evidence points to haditha being either a COMPLETE Fabrication, or grossly exaggerated.


I believe this to be correct, I will always give our guys the benefit of the doubt until proven differently, especially when the other side are a bunch of whimps that hide behind masks, women, children and goats. They especially seem to enjoy being behind goats the most.
 
I sincerely hope that our soldiers did no harm and only obeyed their commands. But, my experience and knowledge of how the military preys on very young and immature minds tells me that the reports are probably fairly accurate yet the commanders have given themselves some squirm room. Top to bottom, it all stinks with CYA (cover your ass).

Psychoblues




dmp said:
 
Psychoblues said:
I sincerely hope that our soldiers did no harm and only obeyed their commands. But, my experience and knowledge of how the military preys on very young and immature minds tells me that the reports are probably fairly accurate yet the commanders have given themselves some squirm room. Top to bottom, it all stinks with CYA (cover your ass).

Psychoblues

Yep, leave it to a fake veteran to blame the troops first. Tell me, psycho, how many war crimes did you commit during your, what, 50+ years in the Army?
 
I am no "fake" veteran, Hobbit. Where do get that "50+" thing in your post? I've never claimed such but I suppose you have evidence that I did. Please share or consider yourself the liar that you demonstrate that you are.

I didn't "blame the troops first" either. I blame the leaders of the troops and make that quite plain but I suppose you have a problem with truth and orders.

Although my military experience included a tremendous amount of time working with the "Army", I was never in the Army. How did you surmise that false statement, Hobbitt?


Psychoblues





Hobbit said:
Yep, leave it to a fake veteran to blame the troops first. Tell me, psycho, how many war crimes did you commit during your, what, 50+ years in the Army?
 
Psychoblues said:
I sincerely hope that our soldiers did no harm and only obeyed their commands. But, my experience and knowledge of how the military preys on very young and immature minds tells me that the reports are probably fairly accurate yet the commanders have given themselves some squirm room. Top to bottom, it all stinks with CYA (cover your ass).

Psychoblues

Your experience? When and where? Your knowledge? Your idea of how the U.S. Military preys on its recruits? Just what branch of the U.S. Armed Forces did you serve with?
 
Psycho's point about YOUNG soldiers does have SOME merit. While I disagree that our soldiers enjoy killing anyone I would tend to think that when young men are trained, they do tend to be followers and not thinkers.

I remember being told repeatedly when I was a young sailor to do this or that. Failure to follow a lawful order was a court-martial offense. Great emphasis was placed on following orders. Maintaining military bearing depends on it. Leadership skills are learned later. Not as a striker. Having said that one must place themselves inside the psych of a sedventeen year old who is in the military. A young boy of this age is already VERY impressionable to begin with. Uprooted from wherever he may come from, inserted into a military setting and transformed (in only a few weeks) into a soldier is quite an experience. My point: The rah rah of having just been trained to be a killer is an awesome burden to deal with. All of a sudden he is in a situation that would require much more experience in life than a 17 yr old is capable of and FOLLOWS his comrades in moment of indecision to commit an act unbecoming of him and all of a sudden it is too late. Now, my argument to Psycho is this, How guilty is this young man? He claims as written previously in this thread that the LEADERS are mostly at fault. I think that this is only partially correct. Remember the above, LAWFUL ORDER.

In the military we are taught not to just sit and scrutinize every command and when in doubt, FOLLOW the order! Where is that imaginary (and it certainly IS imaginary) line that seperates our duty from our conscious. Making a mistake in the heat of the moment does not necessaryily make the young man a criminal in my opinion. If at that time and moment the soldier FOLLOWS the LEADER he has been trained to follow and commits an act unbecoming of his military obligation in battle, well, Psycho is then right. The leader should be held accountable for his contemporaries actions.

But............................

When he is holding his weapon squarely on an individual who is incapable of harming him and pulls the trigger, it dosen't matter if he was told to shoot by 16 generals, he is a murderer.

Gunny has always offered what I think is an honorable opinion when concerning military issues. My guess is that he served our country honorably. Having read hundreds of his posts concerning military issues I have almost always if not ALways found myself to be in agreement with him. He was very clear the other night about what he thought concerning the possibility that soldiers in Iraq had committed any atrocities and what should happen to them if that was the case. Soldiers who "go over the line" certainly shame their comrades and cause many of the heroic acts of past soldiers to be overshadowed. We all admire the heroism displayed by the special soldiers who do their job well and somehow manage to locate that imaginary line rather well and adhere to a military standard while bearing a personal one in unison.

The soldiers are not the planners of war. They serve. Their duty is honorable and we should appreciate their sacrifice. Rather we believe in a war or not we should ALWAYS support our soldiers at all times. In the same regard, disagreement with the cause of war does not represent unpatriotic behavior. We should not be ready to stew our soldiers however without bringing in all details and allowing the system to explore them.

The "cover your ass" philosophy which was previously implicated by Psycho, well, it does exist. Gunny, you know it does. It does not mean however that in the end the ass will be covered. Merely looking for the answers could be said to attempting to cover ass in essence. The military has a high degree of difficulty as it applies to PR. Frankly, keeping things out of the press and away from the naysayers for a period of time allows for proper investigative time for the military to see what the fuck really happened! This can be a dangerous activity because the press is always going to say that it was an attempt at cover up. It is human nature to first try and rectify a mistake when you make one. Hell, as a kid, if you break a window you immediately start thinking about how to explain it to the powers that be. In the end, it could be decided that you just broke the window. Rather you meant to or not might just require some investigating by the powers that be before a proper decision can be made. While Mr. Jones is trying to get to the bottom of things, Mrs. Jones might not be so understanding about the baseball lodged in the breakfront of her DeHaviland china cabinet. She just wants to get her hands on the little bastard that hit the ball. Maybe a strange anology but it is all I can think of at the moment.

We all tend to do this. In a traffic accident we run up to the guilty party and begin to release our frustration, it's a natural reaction.

In this war, we have those who ARE NOT reacting naturally. There are those who just look to exploit what ever has happened and spin it as close to their anti war platform as possible even if it means accusing young soldiers of murder even when they don't know shit about what has really happened. They read the anti war press stories (no shortage of those) and then add a little spin. I wonder if news reporters in their hurried effort to produce news really care if their work is accurate or not so long as it produces low rate inaccurate versions of what took place so people will watch. It just stirs the shitpot.
 
Emmett said:
Psycho's point about YOUNG soldiers does have SOME merit. While I disagree that our soldiers enjoy killing anyone I would tend to think that when young men are trained, they do tend to be followers and not thinkers.

I remember being told repeatedly when I was a young sailor to do this or that. Failure to follow a lawful order was a court-martial offense. Great emphasis was placed on following orders. Maintaining military bearing depends on it. Leadership skills are learned later. Not as a striker. Having said that one must place themselves inside the psych of a sedventeen year old who is in the military. A young boy of this age is already VERY impressionable to begin with. Uprooted from wherever he may come from, inserted into a military setting and transformed (in only a few weeks) into a soldier is quite an experience. My point: The rah rah of having just been trained to be a killer is an awesome burden to deal with. All of a sudden he is in a situation that would require much more experience in life than a 17 yr old is capable of and FOLLOWS his comrades in moment of indecision to commit an act unbecoming of him and all of a sudden it is too late. Now, my argument to Psycho is this, How guilty is this young man? He claims as written previously in this thread that the LEADERS are mostly at fault. I think that this is only partially correct. Remember the above, LAWFUL ORDER.

In the military we are taught not to just sit and scrutinize every command and when in doubt, FOLLOW the order! Where is that imaginary (and it certainly IS imaginary) line that seperates our duty from our conscious. Making a mistake in the heat of the moment does not necessaryily make the young man a criminal in my opinion. If at that time and moment the soldier FOLLOWS the LEADER he has been trained to follow and commits an act unbecoming of his military obligation in battle, well, Psycho is then right. The leader should be held accountable for his contemporaries actions.

But............................

When he is holding his weapon squarely on an individual who is incapable of harming him and pulls the trigger, it dosen't matter if he was told to shoot by 16 generals, he is a murderer.

Gunny has always offered what I think is an honorable opinion when concerning military issues. My guess is that he served our country honorably. Having read hundreds of his posts concerning military issues I have almost always if not ALways found myself to be in agreement with him. He was very clear the other night about what he thought concerning the possibility that soldiers in Iraq had committed any atrocities and what should happen to them if that was the case. Soldiers who "go over the line" certainly shame their comrades and cause many of the heroic acts of past soldiers to be overshadowed. We all admire the heroism displayed by the special soldiers who do their job well and somehow manage to locate that imaginary line rather well and adhere to a military standard while bearing a personal one in unison.

The soldiers are not the planners of war. They serve. Their duty is honorable and we should appreciate their sacrifice. Rather we believe in a war or not we should ALWAYS support our soldiers at all times. In the same regard, disagreement with the cause of war does not represent unpatriotic behavior. We should not be ready to stew our soldiers however without bringing in all details and allowing the system to explore them.

The "cover your ass" philosophy which was previously implicated by Psycho, well, it does exist. Gunny, you know it does. It does not mean however that in the end the ass will be covered. Merely looking for the answers could be said to attempting to cover ass in essence. The military has a high degree of difficulty as it applies to PR. Frankly, keeping things out of the press and away from the naysayers for a period of time allows for proper investigative time for the military to see what the fuck really happened! This can be a dangerous activity because the press is always going to say that it was an attempt at cover up. It is human nature to first try and rectify a mistake when you make one. Hell, as a kid, if you break a window you immediately start thinking about how to explain it to the powers that be. In the end, it could be decided that you just broke the window. Rather you meant to or not might just require some investigating by the powers that be before a proper decision can be made. While Mr. Jones is trying to get to the bottom of things, Mrs. Jones might not be so understanding about the baseball lodged in the breakfront of her DeHaviland china cabinet. She just wants to get her hands on the little bastard that hit the ball. Maybe a strange anology but it is all I can think of at the moment.

We all tend to do this. In a traffic accident we run up to the guilty party and begin to release our frustration, it's a natural reaction.

In this war, we have those who ARE NOT reacting naturally. There are those who just look to exploit what ever has happened and spin it as close to their anti war platform as possible even if it means accusing young soldiers of murder even when they don't know shit about what has really happened. They read the anti war press stories (no shortage of those) and then add a little spin. I wonder if news reporters in their hurried effort to produce news really care if their work is accurate or not so long as it produces low rate inaccurate versions of what took place so people will watch. It just stirs the shitpot.

Regardless teh level you are at in the military, those that don't think either cannot or will not. I was no more likely to follow an unlawful order when I was a private than I was as a Gunny. I knew the rules, and I knew right from wrong.

ANyone who joins an organization and does not learn the rules puts themselves in a compromising position, and in a position to possibly violate those rules unknowingly.

In the case of these allegations, there is no "gray area, I didn't know." Murder and rape are against the law and morally unacceptable in ALL facets of our society.

Sure you CYA. You do so by KNOWING the rules and laws that apply to you and others as a member of the US Armed Forces.

Yes, you are required to follow orders, with ONE caveat: it is unlawful to carry out an unlawful order. Such an order is to be reported immediately to the chain of command.

Be advised that if you choose to defend psychoblues -- Mr "I was in all of them" -- you carry his pack.
 
Psychoblues said:
All of them.

You need help. Now you were in "all of them;" which, by implication is CIA. Frankly, you're too stupid and out of touch with reality to be a spook, and even if they made the mistake of recruiting you, they would have long ago rectified their error and you would be a non-issue.
 
I agree with you, not that it matters. We usually agree on most stuff. I was however trying to disect an issue into the deep zone, which is hard for guy like me, pretty much being a simpleton.

My point was in essence, this: (and maybe I do disagree with one of your points), you claim that you had the same ability to judge orders as a private that you did as a Gunny. I would find it hard to believe that in your military career your ability to scrutinize orders was never enhanced by the fact that as your career grew your order issueing responsibility grew as well.

This might be flanking the point of the thread a little but what the hell, I got nothing better to do sitting here in this truck. When I was a young sailor of 17 I was always very impressed with the older saltier cheifs and senior petty officers. Obviously a boy of that age is impressionable and this point would be understandable. I must say however that the young officers, JG's and Ensigns were far less impressive to me. Had a young officer ordered me to shoot someone while on watch for no apparent reason in a heated moment I would have questioned his judgement and quickly tried to acess the situation for myself. If however the order had come from a Senior Cheif Petty Officer I would have acted immediately and asked questions later. How this relates to what we are talking (and of course you and I were not there) is that possibly when younger soldiers see the shit go down so quickly they may just jump in thinking at THAT moment it is the right thing to do. Hindsight many minutes later might have him thinking.

An older wiser enlisted man in my opinion has a better ability to evaluate what a LAWFUL ORDER is. I just believe that.

Additionally, not all officers are the same. They don't all command the same way either. For instance, I knew an officer in the Navy who didn't give a damn about hair requirements. Lt Ron Schilling, VA-25, he was an A-6 pilot. Not a lax guy really, pretty gung ho and a fine man to serve with. He also had some Hilton time. I had alot of respect for him. I broke my arm and elbow one time and was assigned TAD in Aviation Administration on ship watching the flight deck on TV and logging activities in the Aviators Flight Logs. It was one boring ass job but I got to hob nob with the officers alot and get to know alot more about them than say, my shipmates did. Schilling told me that his philosophy about discipline was softer than his associates and he knew that but it was due to something he had learned from a strong influence in his military life. His father in law was a high ranking Army officer who graduated from West Point. He once told Schilling as a little piece of advice to not be too hard on enlisted guys especially the harder to manage ones. He even pointed out the guys who don't always keep their giglines straight and hair cut just right. The non conformers can be your best fighting soldiers in battle. I thought that very interesting and retained it forever. It makes sense.

I think I made a point but I'm not sure! Gunny, I enjoy reading your posts and appreciate your service. Have a good one!
 
In the military, all branches, they teach even in Basic Training to steal. They make necessary the expectation of "scrounging" which is just another word for "stealing". If you ain't got it, goddamnit GO GET IT!!!!!! True Vets understand this concept. Some go way beyond it. Impressionable minds are exactly what Emmett suggests. How far does the impression go and how deep does the impression implant?

Get on with it, Vets that contribute here in USMB. I'd like to hear your comments.


Psychoblues
 
Psychoblues said:
In the military, all branches, they teach even in Basic Training to steal. They make necessary the expectation of "scrounging" which is just another word for "stealing". If you ain't got it, goddamnit GO GET IT!!!!!! True Vets understand this concept. Some go way beyond it. Impressionable minds are exactly what Emmett suggests. How far does the impression go and how deep does the impression implant?

Get on with it, Vets that contribute here in USMB. I'd like to hear your comments.


Psychoblues

As usual, you dishonestly portray something to be what it is NOT.

US government property relocating us government property from the custody of one US government organization to another US government organization is NOT "stealing." It is realigning assets in more fair and equitable manner. Since the US government subsidizes all of the above personnel and materiel, there is no crime.

It's an art form and a game, done tongue-in-cheek. If you were the vet you claim to be, you'd know that.
 
Emmett said:
I agree with you, not that it matters. We usually agree on most stuff. I was however trying to disect an issue into the deep zone, which is hard for guy like me, pretty much being a simpleton.

My point was in essence, this: (and maybe I do disagree with one of your points), you claim that you had the same ability to judge orders as a private that you did as a Gunny. I would find it hard to believe that in your military career your ability to scrutinize orders was never enhanced by the fact that as your career grew your order issueing responsibility grew as well.

This might be flanking the point of the thread a little but what the hell, I got nothing better to do sitting here in this truck. When I was a young sailor of 17 I was always very impressed with the older saltier cheifs and senior petty officers. Obviously a boy of that age is impressionable and this point would be understandable. I must say however that the young officers, JG's and Ensigns were far less impressive to me. Had a young officer ordered me to shoot someone while on watch for no apparent reason in a heated moment I would have questioned his judgement and quickly tried to acess the situation for myself. If however the order had come from a Senior Cheif Petty Officer I would have acted immediately and asked questions later. How this relates to what we are talking (and of course you and I were not there) is that possibly when younger soldiers see the shit go down so quickly they may just jump in thinking at THAT moment it is the right thing to do. Hindsight many minutes later might have him thinking.

An older wiser enlisted man in my opinion has a better ability to evaluate what a LAWFUL ORDER is. I just believe that.

Additionally, not all officers are the same. They don't all command the same way either. For instance, I knew an officer in the Navy who didn't give a damn about hair requirements. Lt Ron Schilling, VA-25, he was an A-6 pilot. Not a lax guy really, pretty gung ho and a fine man to serve with. He also had some Hilton time. I had alot of respect for him. I broke my arm and elbow one time and was assigned TAD in Aviation Administration on ship watching the flight deck on TV and logging activities in the Aviators Flight Logs. It was one boring ass job but I got to hob nob with the officers alot and get to know alot more about them than say, my shipmates did. Schilling told me that his philosophy about discipline was softer than his associates and he knew that but it was due to something he had learned from a strong influence in his military life. His father in law was a high ranking Army officer who graduated from West Point. He once told Schilling as a little piece of advice to not be too hard on enlisted guys especially the harder to manage ones. He even pointed out the guys who don't always keep their giglines straight and hair cut just right. The non conformers can be your best fighting soldiers in battle. I thought that very interesting and retained it forever. It makes sense.

I think I made a point but I'm not sure! Gunny, I enjoy reading your posts and appreciate your service. Have a good one!

You're making a couple of points.

One, you are misinterpreting what I posted. I stated, in so many words, a private has the same access to the UCMJ as any SgtMaj. The law is the law, as stated, regardless WHO is reading it.

Havign said that, it is experience that gives a SNCO a better ability to make a judgement call in regard to the law. That is why as you progress in rank, you are put into increasingly higher positions of responsibility.

It is also why if I was sitting on a court-martial, I would probably give a junior enlisted person more benefit of doubt than I would a GySgt. In case you've never heard it, SNCO's who are court-martialed almost uniformly demand their right to officer representation on the board because they KNOW they will get no mercy from those whose reputation as SNCOs they have sullied.

In the specific case in question; however, there is no excuse for ANY participant IF the allegations are true. Rape and murder is against the morals and laws of our society, not just military law, and we are taught it from Day One.

Officers are just people too. There're good ones, mediocre ones, and bad ones. The officer who is least likely to conform to the status quo is usually the one I wanted to follow into combat. So the same rule you apply to enlisted, also applies to officers.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top