Haditha the new My Lai?

[Stephanie]

Not according the the definition I posted..



The Taliban are not a terrorist organisation as far as I know. They ran a country...badly, and treated people like shit. They deserved what they got.

Excuse me... But were the Taliban elected to run a country?
Or did they just overrun it.....
I'm not sure???????????
If they just over took a country, then I'd say they were terrorist. No?

 

[Gunny]

Your claim that any justice is out of the window is ridicilous. Why are the Marines gonna make up evidence to convict them ?

In these threads some that attacked Murtha already voiced that we should not care about the arabs anyway if the story is true.

you call him loudmouth, why is that.

It seems to me you try to stop a discussion about the events with this waiting for convictions or former Marines can't accuse their own bullshit/
You are a hypocrite to me.

You seem to have your apples -n- oranges mixed. You're nothing but a sensationalist conspiracy theorist looking for any and every opportunity to make mountains out of molehills and rush to judgement with little-to-no facts. YOU are typical of everything that is wrong here.

You call me a hypocrite. Please feel free to post exactly what I have posted that would lend credence to yet another of your baseless allegations. Put your money where you f-ing mouth is, jack.

I have not tried to stop anyone from discussing the issue, but if you or anyone else is going to speak as if these Marines are already convicted, I'm going to speak out myself. Last I checked, in both civil and military law, the US Constitutional RIGHT of "innocent until proven guilty" still exists.

 

[Annie]

You seem to have your apples -n- oranges mixed. You're nothing but a sensationalist conspiracy theorist looking for any and every opportunity to make mountains out of molehills and rush to judgement with little-to-no facts. YOU are typical of everything that is wrong here.

You call me a hypocrite. Please feel free to post exactly what I have posted that would lend credence to yet another of your baseless allegations. Put your money where you f-ing mouth is, jack.

I have not tried to stop anyone from discussing the issue, but if you or anyone else is going to speak as if these Marines are already convicted, I'm going to speak out myself. Last I checked, in both civil and military law, the US Constitutional RIGHT of "innocent until proven guilty" still exists.

There is no doubt that Nononsense is having trouble with that:

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to GunnyL again.

 

[Dr Grump]

Excuse me... But were the Taliban elected to run a country?
Or did they just overrun it.....
I'm not sure???????????
If they just over took a country, then I'd say they were terrorist. No?

George Washington overtook a country. Mao did. Pol Pot did. William the Conquerer did. Lenin did. Augustus Caesar did. Answer your question?

 

[Gunny]

George Washington overtook a country. Mao did. Pol Pot did. William the Conquerer did. Lenin did. Augustus Caesar did. Answer your question?

I see. So you want to dishonestly compare a war for independence, and the creation of a Nation for the common good to wars of conquest and genocide.

 

[pegwinn]

I left town for the weekend with the wife-n-kid and most of what you said was rendered irrelevant by others. But since you addressed me directly, I guess I should return the favor.

you take that innocent till convicted too far. Yeah, I know, it would be so much easier to simply throw them in jail, or better yet, let's simply hang them. Since so many unimpeachable folks made the assertion it must be true huh?

The honor of any military organization can only be maintained by someone speaking up when he perceives injustice. Really? And you have how many years of service in which branch of what nations armed forces that would qualify you to make this assertion? I have a feeling that to you, Honor is a word most associated with quaint historical romances. Perhaps you need a real world education.

Coverups happened because of people like you. Some things are far easier to say over the internet than to someones face. I notice that the Colonel didn't make his statements in the privacy of the Chairman of the JCS office without benefit of the press. If you perceived a dual message herein, then perhaps you are more perceptive than we've given you credit for.

Murtha, or anyone can voice their opinion. It does not convict any specific soldier per se. Accusations should not be thrown out lightly either but that is not the problem in this case. True, but Murtha didn't voice it as opinion and if you are honest, you will acknowledge that. Of course you have already advocated them to be guilty so I am not sure why we are bothering.

You look like a hypocrit. LOL, you wish. IF I were hypocritical, I'd be hanging out with you. Projecting your loneliness on me won't make us drinking buddies.

I am sure Clinton did not get the same inncoent till convicted approach. By his own admission the former president was a dope smoking, draft dodging, womanizer, who was suspected (but never convicted) of having something to do with the death of a Mr. Foster, and (again by his own admission) something of a cigar aficionado with a thing for blue dresses. But, having said that, during his presidency, your certainty was surely mistaken.

Anyway Mr. nosarcasm, you have not proven your assertions because you position appears untenable. But, whenever you are ready to actually learn something about core values and how they relate to the US Military, stop on by and see the Gunny, or the Sergeant Major (CSM), or any of the other vets.

 

[Annie]

http://medienkritik.typepad.com/blog/2006/05/ard_us_soldiers.html

links and screenshot available on site:

ARD Tagesschau: US Soldiers Guilty Until Proven Innocent

(By Ray D.)

It has happened before: Members of the German media have tried and convicted American soldiers of alleged war crimes before they ever go to trial. The latest case involves an article featured on the homepage of ARD tagesschau, a large, state-sponsored news program:

The headline above speaks of a "massacre" even though it has not been conclusively determined that the killings were part of an actual massacre. Additionally, the lead paragraph claims that the 24 civilians involved were "murdered." Certainly, if an investigation and trial determine that the soldiers in question are, in fact, guilty of murder and participation in a massacre, they should be punished to the fullest extent of the law. But the bottom line is that the German media has no right to conclusively label the killings murders (and thus imply that the soldiers are murderers) until all the facts are known and until said soldiers are found guilty and convicted.

The fact that other media outlets, including ZDF and the BBC, have chosen their words more carefully further highlights ARD's blatant bias and lack of professionalism. Just compare this ZDF piece to the ARD piece. You will notice that ZDF has a question mark after the word "massacre" and reports that the soldiers allegedly killed the 24 civilians in an act of revenge and that they may well stand trial for murder. In other words, ARD immediately jumped to the conclusion that the soldiers are murderers, ZDF did not.

Ironically, the same ARD journalists who can't seem to stop screaming about the denial of judicial due process to Guantanamo inmates are not even willing to afford the same privilege to American soldiers, despite the fact that American soldiers stood guard for decades and guaranteed their freedom of speech during the Cold War. In the ARD world, Guantanamo terrorists are innocent until proven guilty, American soldiers guilty until proven innocent. The agenda of ARD and many on the Angry Left in dealing with the alleged massacre is best summarized in the following passage by John Gibson:

"It was last November and according to the story that is now shaping up, Marines went on a rampage after one of their own was killed by a roadside bomb. In the end, it appears they killed 24 people, including women and children.

The original story of the incident said the civilians were also killed by the roadside bomb that killed the Marine. That appears to be not true and the military is running a full-scale investigation. If it turns out to be not true, then the crime is doubled: first the massacre, then the cover-up.

I'm against massacres of civilians — I think we all are. I'm against cover-ups — you probably are too.

But I'm also against taking an incident in which our troops overreact and commit an arguably criminal act and making it stand for the entire war. The war in Iraq is not the story of massacres by Americans. If Iraqis know their own history they know this is true. Massacres have been committed in Iraq by warring parties for millennia piled on millennia. This is the part of the world that was in on the massacre game early, played it often and the last character to be up to his eyeballs in massacres was the very guy we went in to regime change: Saddam Hussein himself.

Those people who oppose the war and want to make those who supported it pay with shame, embarrassment and a complete loss of credibility and reputation, want desperately for this massacre — if it turns out to be what happened — to be the name this war is known by forever. Haditha — My Lai — Iraq — Vietnam: it all fits together neatly in a slime fest designed to win elections and set the direction of the history books.

The Iraq War may not be the best war we ever fought. When the dust settles we'll know for sure. But it accomplished a great goal that no one else had managed for the last 15 years at least: ridding the world of Saddam. No matter what the political spinners say, that was a great thing. And the Iraq War should be known for that fact — Saddam is gone — not for one incident of alleged revenge killing in a place called Haditha." (emphasis ours)

That is exactly what this is about for ARD, SPIEGEL ONLINE, Stern, SZ and other members of the anti-American German media establishment. This is about shaming the United States of America and those who supported the war, regardless of the facts, right or wrong. This is about seizing the moral high ground, pure and simple. The killing of two dozen Iraqi civilians suddenly matters to the German media elite. Why? Because it has the potential to discredit the United States, Bush and supporters of the war. Conversely, the same media cynics stood by and largely ignored the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians during the Hussein regime. Today they stand by and ignore the fact that their own government continues to promote trade with a government guilty of an ongoing campaign of mass murder in Sudan.

Finally, to top it all off, Germany's media cynics continue to blatantly mislead the German people by insinuating that the American media is somehow in bed with the Bush administration and only presenting a heroic view of the war that ignores the suffering. The most recent examples come from correspondents Udo Lielischkies of ARD in Washington (who claims the US media is only presenting a one-sided, heroic view of the war) and Sebastian Heinzel of SPIEGEL ONLINE in New York (who claims that almost nothing in American society or media exists to remind people of the war). Apparently these "journalists" just haven't seen the daily television news or read many newspapers while in the United States. They must have missed the thousands and thousands of articles and televised news features on bombings, beheadings, killings and kidnappings in Iraq run day for day for day in the US media with no positive story in sight. They must have missed all of Michael Moore's books and films, (quite an accomplishment for a German!) They must have missed Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal and Cindy Sheehan and Air America. They must have missed George Clooney's Syriana. They must have missed the recent parade of retired generals calling for Don Rumsfeld's head. They must have missed John Murtha and Cobra II. They must have missed the daily casualty count on CNN, FoxNews, MSNBC and every other significant news network in the United States.

Simply put: The "journalists" in question must be blind, deaf and dumb. Or they must be lying our their asses to the German people. We strongly suspect it's the latter...

UPDATE: Michelle Malkin is also on the case...

UPDATE #2: Below is ARD's confusing new homepage summary of its latest Haditha piece. The headline calls the Haditha incident a "massacre" while the introductory paragraph that follows speaks of an "alleged massacre." So which is it at this point? As a reader, you really wouldn't know by looking at tagesschau online.

Unfortunately, ARD continues to call the 24 killings "murder." Again, whether it was murder or not ought to be determined by the appropriate legal and investigative authorities, not by the mainstream media or anyone else.

UPDATE #3: American troops are also guilty until proven innocent at SPIEGEL ONLINE. The Haditha incident has given SPON and other members of the Angry Left a new excuse to make further brain-dead comparisons to Vietnam.

 

[Gunny]

Didn't we kick their asses a couple of times last century? Losers.

 

[pegwinn]

Didn't we kick their asses a couple of times last century? Losers.

Piss poor leadership at the top. Kaiser was a sickly man with something to prove and Hitler was bug fucking nuts. If either war had had a competent head of state, I bet it would've gone a bit different. Thank God for idiots.

 

[Gunny]

Piss poor leadership at the top. Kaiser was a sickly man with something to prove and Hitler was bug fucking nuts. If either war had had a competent head of state, I bet it would've gone a bit different. Thank God for idiots.

ITA. In wargaming, I actually took over all of Europe and had a nice treaty with Russia. Just changed a few decision really. I did not switch to bombing British cities during the Battle of Britain, did not attack Russia, and invalidate my treaty with Japan when they bombed the US; thus, removing Roosevelt's legal excuse to declare war on me.

Maybe Hitler should have listened to his SNCO's?

 

[nosarcasm]

You seem to have your apples -n- oranges mixed. You're nothing but a sensationalist conspiracy theorist looking for any and every opportunity to make mountains out of molehills and rush to judgement with little-to-no facts. YOU are typical of everything that is wrong here.

Show one incident where I supported a conspiracy theory you liar.

You call me a hypocrite. Please feel free to post exactly what I have posted that would lend credence to yet another of your baseless allegations. Put your money where you f-ing mouth is, jack.

First fuck you asshole. And you have a double standard when discussing the Marines in comparison to Liberals that are accused of crimes.

I have not tried to stop anyone from discussing the issue, but if you or anyone else is going to speak as if these Marines are already convicted, I'm going to speak out myself. Last I checked, in both civil and military law, the US Constitutional RIGHT of "innocent until proven guilty" still exists.

You said Murtha should not have spoken out on it. Your claim that it leads to an inevitable conviction of the marines is ridicilous. If the accusations are true you indicated that the Arab deserved it. guess they are not innocent till proven guilty.

 

[nosarcasm]

I left town for the weekend with the wife-n-kid and most of what you said was rendered irrelevant by others. But since you addressed me directly, I guess I should return the favor.



Anyway Mr. nosarcasm, you have not proven your assertions because you position appears untenable. But, whenever you are ready to actually learn something about core values and how they relate to the US Military, stop on by and see the Gunny, or the Sergeant Major (CSM), or any of the other vets.

I am advocating that Murtha can voice his oppinion without being called a traitor or being hushed.

I am a veteran myself. I dont know if there was an incident of murder, I d like an investigation of it.

 

[Gunny]

Show one incident where I supported a conspiracy theory you liar.

The honor of any military organization can only be maintained by someone speaking up when he perceives injustice. Coverups happened because
of people like you. Murtha, or anyone can voice their opinion. It does not convict any specific soldier per se. Accusations should not be thrown out lightly either but that is not the problem in this case.

Looks like a conspiracy theory to me. Too easy.

First fuck you asshole. And you have a double standard when discussing the Marines in comparison to Liberals that are accused of crimes.

Your evidence? The fact is, I do not, but you ARE ranting.


You said Murtha should not have spoken out on it. Your claim that it leads to an inevitable conviction of the marines is ridicilous. If the accusations are true you indicated that the Arab deserved it. guess they are not innocent till proven guilty.

I said inevitable conviction? I think not. I said something along the lines of it made next to impossible for them to get a fair trial by being convicted before the fact in the media. Learn to read, dummy.

And where you get that I said anything even resembling that noncombatants deserve to be mirdered by troops is beyond me and is a blatant fabrication on your part.

 

[nosarcasm]

I said inevitable conviction? I think not. I said something along the lines of it made next to impossible for them to get a fair trial by being convicted before the fact in the media. Learn to read, dummy

You did not say inevitable so I overstated your bluster there. mea culpa
I assume they will have a fair process. That remains to be seen if
this goes really forward. If the media coverage helps to find out the Iraqis made it up it will help them in the end. Media coverage is a two sided sword, but I guess free speech makes it impossible to stop the media from commenting.

And where you get that I said anything even resembling that noncombatants deserve to be mirdered by troops is beyond me and is a blatant fabrication on your part.

Quoting you: YOur points have merit, but are irrelevant. If the situation is untenable, one does what is best for the living, not sacrifice even more fo them to honor the dead. http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32451


That is not to say I favor pulling out. I favor getting off this moral high horse we tie ourselves to and fighting fire with fire. When we adhere to an arbitrary set of rules the enemy does not, it just ties our tropps' hands behind their backs.

That thread gave me the impression. You later backpaddled in it, but it seemed you were in the omerta marine mode.

I am not surprised that civilians get killed sometimes intentionally. That is the nature of war. happened in all major ones at least. But unlike other countries the US is on the moral high horse and does take these incident seriously.

That people like Kerry during Vietnam helped the enemy was a great lesson to this country. I dont think it will repeat. But to give the military a card blanche on investigations leads to no good outcome either imo.

You can be a patriot and still enforce the rules of warfare on your troops.
I understand that it can be frustrating when the enemy so blatantly has not any concerns. In the long run I would hope this will win the victory for the US. Given that I do not support the withdrawal of troops till an solid Iraqi state is established. And yeah more incident , false and real will happen over time. The US has to prove it has the staying power in the region.

 

[Gunny]

You did not say inevitable so I overstated your bluster there. mea culpa
I assume they will have a fair process. That remains to be seen if
this goes really forward. If the media coverage helps to find out the Iraqis made it up it will help them in the end. Media coverage is a two sided sword, but I guess free speech makes it impossible to stop the media from commenting.



Quoting you: YOur points have merit, but are irrelevant. If the situation is untenable, one does what is best for the living, not sacrifice even more fo them to honor the dead. http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=32451


That is not to say I favor pulling out. I favor getting off this moral high horse we tie ourselves to and fighting fire with fire. When we adhere to an arbitrary set of rules the enemy does not, it just ties our tropps' hands behind their backs.

That thread gave me the impression. You later backpaddled in it, but it seemed you were in the omerta marine mode.

I am not surprised that civilians get killed sometimes intentionally. That is the nature of war. happened in all major ones at least. But unlike other countries the US is on the moral high horse and does take these incident seriously.

That people like Kerry during Vietnam helped the enemy was a great lesson to this country. I dont think it will repeat. But to give the military a card blanche on investigations leads to no good outcome either imo.

You can be a patriot and still enforce the rules of warfare on your troops.
I understand that it can be frustrating when the enemy so blatantly has not any concerns. In the long run I would hope this will win the victory for the US. Given that I do not support the withdrawal of troops till an solid Iraqi state is established. And yeah more incident , false and real will happen over time. The US has to prove it has the staying power in the region.

Dude, my posts are quite consistent, and being a Marine as you pointed out, I NEVER backpedal.

I have never said anything other than if the Marines are found guilty of war crimes they should be hung out to dry -- meaning punished to the fullest extent of the law. Nowhere on this board have I ever stated otherwise.

The statement you quoted above was made in the context of US involvement in Iraq, not the specific incident at Haditha.

 

[nosarcasm]

I take it back I misunderstood your mindset.

 

[pegwinn]

I am advocating that Murtha can voice his oppinion without being called a traitor or being hushed. I said Murtha did it wrongly. He did it for personal gain. As a Marine himself he knows the right way to address this and chose to do it wrong.

I am a veteran myself. I dont know if there was an incident of murder, I d like an investigation of it. Where did you ever get the idea I don't support an investigation, if needed a court martial, and if guilty deep frying the guilty parties?

AS a veteran, unless it was the Army of the Potomac, you know that Murtha is in the wrong. You know exactly the process he should have followed. Since you are a veteran, and concerned that the proper things happen; How can you defend his method?

 

[pegwinn]

ITA. In wargaming, I actually took over all of Europe and had a nice treaty with Russia. Just changed a few decision really. I did not switch to bombing British cities during the Battle of Britain, did not attack Russia, and invalidate my treaty with Japan when they bombed the US; thus, removing Roosevelt's legal excuse to declare war on me.

Maybe Hitler should have listened to his SNCO's?

If he'd listened to the General Staff, England today would be a province. If he'd listened to the fieldwebels, He'd still be alive and partying in Speers version of paris.

 

[nosarcasm]

AS a veteran, unless it was the Army of the Potomac, you know that Murtha is in the wrong. You know exactly the process he should have followed. Since you are a veteran, and concerned that the proper things happen; How can you defend his method?

I am not an American veteran, so it is not the same.

As a German veteran in view of our history I prefer investigations and press coverage over tradition.

That being said as I posted earlier , manslaughter in the line of duty should be protected. Just outright murder out of vengeance should be very limited.
Enemy sniper etc if they kill them as pow I wouldnt care.
Children, well that goes too far.

And I just support Murtha right to voice his opinion and put a spotlight
on this case. If they are proven innocent the better.


PS: so you better understand where I am coming from, I post also on a German political messageboard. quite big with ca. 10000 active users.
There I have to defend the US daily against lies, absurd claims etc.
The leftwing in Germany is far more extreme then here in there rant of warcrimes and Bush and his "regime" intent to committ genocide. It is ridicilous. While I am not alone in defending the US and setting the record straight I see those ranting communist, greens etc as people that really hate
the marines. Murtha might be an peace activist these days but I dont think
he want to hurt the Us or the Marines per se.

 

[Dr Grump]

I see. So you want to dishonestly compare a war for independence, and the creation of a Nation for the common good to wars of conquest and genocide.

No. Stephanie says that the Taliban overan Afghanistan and are therefore terrorists. Lenin overran a country, Mao did, Pol Pot did, George Washington did. Nobody ever called them terrorists. Mao, Pot and Lenin could arguably be called communist idiots, but nobody ever accused them of terrorism. So who is being dishonest? Not I. And as far as a lot of Taliban were concerned it was a war of independence - from the warlords. Unfortunately, the Taliban offered nothing new for the people of Afghanistan but more heartache. If she wants to say the Taliban harboured terrorists, she'll get no argument from me.