A Marine will be court-martialed on reduced charges in the killings of 24 Iraqi men, women and children in the town of Haditha in 2005, the Marine Corps announced Monday.

Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, 27, of Meriden, Conn., will stand trial on charges of voluntary manslaughter, aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, dereliction of duty and obstruction of justice. No trial date was set.

More serious charges of unpremeditated murder, as well as charges of soliciting another to commit an offense and making a false official statement, were dismissed by the Marine Corps.

Four enlisted Marines were initially charged with murder in the case, and four officers were charged with failing to investigate the deaths. Charges against several of the men have been dropped, and none will face murder charges.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-12-31-marines-haditha_N.htm


How surprising!!!:bugeye:

http://www.infowars.net/pictures/aug07/310807Haditha.jpg

The victims who weren't

House #1 -- 7 killed, 2 injured (but survived), 2 escaped
1. Abdul Hamid Hassan Ali, 76 -- grandfather, father and husband. Died with nine rounds in the chest and abdomen.
2. Khamisa Tuma Ali, 66 -- wife of Abdul Hamid Hassan Ali
3. Rashid Abdul Hamid, 30.
4. Walid Abdul Hamid Hassan, 35.
5. Jahid Abdul Hamid Hassan, middle-aged man.
6. Asma Salman Rasif, 32.
7. Abdullah Walid, 4.
Injured: Iman, 8, and Abdul Rahman, 5.
Escaped: Daughter-in-law, Hibbah, escaped with 2-month-old Asia
House #2 -- 8 killed, 1 survivor: Shot at close range and attacked with grenades
8. Younis Salim Khafif, 43 -- husband of Aeda Yasin Ahmed, father.
9. Aeda Yasin Ahmed, 41 -- wife of Younis Salim Khafif, killed trying to shield her youngest daughter Aisha.
10. Muhammad Younis Salim, 8 -- son.
11. Noor Younis Salim, 14 -- daughter.
12. Sabaa Younis Salim, 10 -- daughter.
13. Zainab Younis Salim, 5 -- daughter.
14. Aisha Younis Salim, 3 -- daughter.
15. A 1-year-old girl staying with the family.
Survived: Safa Younis Salim, 13.
House #3 -- 4 brothers killed
16. Jamal Ahmed, 41.
17. Marwan Ahmed, 28.
18. Qahtan Ahmed, 24.
19. Chasib Ahmed, 27.
Taxi -- 5 killed: Passengers were students at the Technical Institute in Saqlawiyah
20. Ahmed Khidher, taxi driver.
21. Akram Hamid Flayeh.
22. Khalid Ayada al-Zawi.
23. Wajdi Ayada al-Zawi.
24. Mohammed Battal Mahmoud.
Source: United for Peace and Justice[17]

"The killings occurred Nov. 19, 2005, after a roadside bomb hit a Marine convoy, killing the driver of a Humvee and wounding two other Marines. Wuterich and a squad member, Sgt. Sanick Dela Cruz, allegedly shot five men by a car at the scene. Wuterich then ordered his men into several houses, where they cleared rooms with grenades and gunfire, killing unarmed civilians in the process.

At his preliminary hearing, Wuterich said that he regretted the loss of civilian life but that he believed he was coming under fire from the homes and was operating within the rules of engagement when he ordered his men to assault the buildings."

In the throws of a surprise attack, SAM would insist on first asking her assailants if they were carrying weapons or not.

"The killings occurred Nov. 19, 2005, after a roadside bomb hit a Marine convoy, killing the driver of a Humvee and wounding two other Marines. Wuterich and a squad member, Sgt. Sanick Dela Cruz, allegedly shot five men by a car at the scene. Wuterich then ordered his men into several houses, where they cleared rooms with grenades and gunfire, killing unarmed civilians in the process.

At his preliminary hearing, Wuterich said that he regretted the loss of civilian life but that he believed he was coming under fire from the homes and was operating within the rules of engagement when he ordered his men to assault the buildings."

In the throws of a surprise attack, SAM would insist on first asking her assailants if they were carrying weapons or not.

I suppose if your children were shot and killed by troops breaking illegally into your house during a fake war imposed on you, you would just laugh it off as just another day. And when they were cleared of all charges you would invite them over for a drink.

It is no surprise, nor is anything committed by the lying Government of America. Unfortunately it is usually foreigners who are not fooled by the mirage of perfection that are able to see this.


America will persecute some of their own, yes, but because they have done anything? Because it is truly for justice? Of course not! All is done for support, and the foreign world can see through these actions that America is truly noble and just, but this is a prime example of otherwise.

The true punishment for that Marine, who voluntarily killed so many, is to have his life taken. And then we must look into the greater scheme of things, unto which the greatest blame lies. The Marine is ultimately there by order, and the commander, Bush, is the ultimate villain in this drama.


So.....how'd you like my fancy talk? Been working on it:D

The true punishment for that Marine, who voluntarily killed so many, is to have his life taken.

Is that Islamic justice or do you think he deserves to die due to your ill-informed opinion?

Is that Islamic justice or do you think he deserves to die due to your ill-informed opinion?

No, no, there's execution in America, a Christian nation, is there not?

He deserves to die after VOLUNTARILY MURDERING 20+ PEOPLE

Is that Islamic justice or do you think he deserves to die due to your ill-informed opinion?

What would be justice, in your opinion?

What would be justice, in your opinion?

For you to stop being a WAR MONGER.

For you to stop being a WAR MONGER.

I entered your house and killed your family and got off scot free?:confused:

For you to stop being a WAR MONGER.

In the hours after the strike against New York and Washington on September 11, 2001, the City of Seattle, through its police or city council or whomever, decided to shut down. People working in the downtown area were told to find the first ride out of town and get. So we did.

As my coworkers and I began shuffling down the stairs (the elevators were packed and stacked), I encountered a woman who worked in accounting who was in tears. "Why would anybody do something like this?" she wailed. I shrugged and told her we would know more once someone made the call to claim responsibility. When we knew who, we could probably guess why. The idea absolutely confused her. The idea that anybody anywhere in the world could be so angry at something the United States had done seemed so strange because she did not believe Americans or our government had ever done anything to hurt anyone.

At first I was unsettled. Nearly shocked. I remember thinking, "Geez, lady, and you've got a degree." But, as one of my friends reminded, "You can get an advanced degree and never study any real history." True enough; she was an accountant. I don't know what, when you pursue a business degree, your social-studies obligations are.

I tell this story yet again because regardless of what the patriots and jingoists have to say about why a false statement isn't a false statement, and why participants in what has every appearance of a crime should never be held accountable, people ought not wonder why there are people around the world who are ready to fight and kill Americans.

It was obvious before 9/11. The only surprises, really, were that someone finally got around to it, that they swung for the fences, and that Americans seemed to have absolutely no idea anything like that was coming. There was a bomb in '93. And Osama himself told us he was coming in '96. And the American people? They didn't really care. They didn't want to know.

And so it is this time. Most Americans will sleep just fine even if Wuterich walks. They'll sleep better, in fact, if we give him a freakin' medal.

They just shouldn't wonder, though, why some people are ready to kill us all. Drink a cup of coffee with refined sugar in it while driving a single-occupancy SUV to work, and count the number of human-rights deficiencies, exploitations, and violations that moment depends on. The number will go up even further depending on where you work.

In the throws of a surprise attack, SAM would insist on first asking her assailants if they were carrying weapons or not.
Do you think the 3 year old girl was packing heat?

Or did the soldiers enter the homes and start shooting before they opened their eyes and noticed the homes contained civilian men, women and children (and some babies).

Don't you think it would have been prudent to actually check the houses before clearing them with grenades and gunfire? Lets say in the heat of the moment, they simply forgot to simply check... After the first room was cleared and they noticed the dead were indeed civilians, why keep going and clearing the other rooms and houses? Revenge maybe? Soldiers pissed off someone tried to kill them so just shoot the crap out of anything that moves, even if they happen to be small children? I don't know, what do you think Q? Would you be equally acceptable if a some men entered your homes and killed everyone in it and then claimed it was a mistake? What if it were the police who did it? Would you just shrug and say 'ok'? One or possibly two deaths could be considered a mistake in such a situation. 24 deaths is considered a slaughter and a murderous rampage.

Thats good logic there Tiassa. Using that logic every murder can be justified.

At first I was unsettled. Nearly shocked. I remember thinking, "Geez, lady, and you've got a degree." But, as one of my friends reminded, "You can get an advanced degree and never study any real history." True enough; she was an accountant. I don't know what, when you pursue a business degree, your social-studies obligations are.

Very good, you learned in school that alot of people want to kill alot of people. And of course you will accept it. The best thing you can do then is trade places with the most disenfranchised person you can find, there are millions of them. You can have sam and bells join you.

People want to kill you, and they are justified....very good. You would never survive in prison thats for sure.

The idea that anybody anywhere in the world could be so angry at something the United States had done seemed so strange because she did not believe Americans or our government had ever done anything to hurt anyone.

It is such a docile world out there isn't it?

Thats good logic there Tiassa. Using that logic every murder can be justified.



Very good, you learned in school that alot of people want to kill alot of people. And of course you will accept it. The best thing you can do then is trade places with the most disenfranchised person you can find, there are millions of them. You can have sam and bells join you.

People want to kill you, and they are justified....very good. You would never survive in prison thats for sure.



It is such a docile world out there isn't it?
How is this so difficult for someone to understand?

Apply what you just said to the soldiers involved in this massacre. They thought the killings were justified. And you are defending them, which I find quite appalling. I would have assumed any individual with a grain of decency would have recognised their deaths could never be justified. But you refer to us as 'warmongers' because we are able to distinguish that soldiers entering homes and shooting first (as well as throwing grenades), without first checking to make sure the homes were not occupied by civilians, is wrong? How would you feel if one day a plethora of police officers entered your home shooting you and your girlfriend as you sat and watched TV, killing your loved one, and then saying "oops, we thought this house belonged to a drug dealer and that glass of wine ya were holding looked like a gun"? Would you just say "ok!"? Would you think their entering your home, shooting everyone in sight, as being justified? I can assure you, Sam, Tiassa and I would not find it justified if you were ever unfortunate enough to have to go through something like that. Just as we do not view these deaths as being in any way justified.

Do you think shooting a 3 year old girl is justified in any circumstance John? How about the one year old girl?

Now, as to Tiassa's point. Do you not see why you are so hated in the world? When something like this happens and not a single one of those soldiers is charged with murder, don't you see how that would rankle some people? Try hard. Try to imagine the hypothetical situation where police officers with guns enter your home shooting your girlfriend because her glass of wine looked like a gun and imagine none of them were charged with murder. Would you not hate the officers involved and their superiors who let them walk? How can I put this... If you keep stuffing it up constantly, you will have people who hate you and when you stuff it up to the point where you are attempting to justify shooting babies (can there ever be a justification for such an act?), there might be some people out there who will want to kill you in return..

Hey BELLS, things like this happen AAAALLLLL the time in the world. All colors, all nationalities, all countries. Would you like for me to post the images?

Do you think shooting a 3 year old girl is justified in any circumstance John? How about the one year old girl?

Now, as to Tiassa's point. Do you not see why you are so hated in the world? When something like this happens and not a single one of those soldiers is charged with murder, don't you see how that would rankle some people? Try hard. Try to imagine the hypothetical situation where police officers with guns enter your home shooting your girlfriend because her glass of wine looked like a gun and imagine none of them were charged with murder. Would you not hate the officers involved and their superiors who let them walk? How can I put this... If you keep stuffing it up constantly, you will have people who hate you and when you stuff it up to the point where you are attempting to justify shooting babies (can there ever be a justification for such an act?), there might be some people out there who will want to kill you in return..

Listen here BELLS. I have NOT killed anyone, by your logic you are just as much to blame as me and SAM is just as much to blame when India and Pakistan start killing each other again. Blame the whole human race while you are at it.

Why dont you dig up some images of carnage in Rwanda and hate everyone in that country?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

Why dont you tell us BELLS how to stop murder, and how to stop global terrorism. I would love to hear it. You really have some high horses out in the outback.

Theres a movie, called, Soldier of God that covers this very well. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458485/

Even Sams attitude is covered in that movie.

Theres a movie, called, Soldier of God that covers this very well. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0458485/

Even Sams attitude is covered in that movie.

Thats so awesome! :)Are there any souvenirs?:) Posters? Maybe dolls of dead babies? :)Is there any fucking way to make money out of this situation?

Do you think the 3 year old girl was packing heat?

Or did the soldiers enter the homes and start shooting before they opened their eyes and noticed the homes contained civilian men, women and children (and some babies).

Don't you think it would have been prudent to actually check the houses before clearing them with grenades and gunfire? Lets say in the heat of the moment, they simply forgot to simply check... After the first room was cleared and they noticed the dead were indeed civilians, why keep going and clearing the other rooms and houses? Revenge maybe? Soldiers pissed off someone tried to kill them so just shoot the crap out of anything that moves, even if they happen to be small children? I don't know, what do you think Q? Would you be equally acceptable if a some men entered your homes and killed everyone in it and then claimed it was a mistake? What if it were the police who did it? Would you just shrug and say 'ok'? One or possibly two deaths could be considered a mistake in such a situation. 24 deaths is considered a slaughter and a murderous rampage.

It was a murderous rampage

Mendoza said Marines under Wuterich's command began clearing nearby houses suspected of containing insurgents responsible for the bombing.

At one house Wuterich gave an order to shoot on sight as Marines waited for a response after knocking on the door, said Mendoza.

"He said 'Just wait till they open the door, then shoot,'" Mendoza said.

Mendoza then said he shot and killed an adult male who appeared in a doorway.

During a subsequent search of the house, Mendoza said he received an order from another Marine, Lance Corporal Stephen Tatum, to shoot seven women and children he had found in a rear bedroom.

"When I opened the door there was just women and kids, two adults were lying down on the bed and there were three children on the bed ... two more were behind the bed," Mendoza said.

"I looked at them for a few seconds. Just enough to know they were not presenting a threat ... they looked scared."

After leaving the room Mendoza told Tatum what he had found.

"I told him there were women and kids inside there. He said 'Well, shoot them,'" Mendoza told prosecutor Lieutenant Colonel Sean Sullivan.

"And what did you say to him?" Sullivan asked.

"I said 'But they're just women and children.' He didn't say nothing."

Mendoza said he returned to a position at the front of the house and heard a door open behind him followed by a loud noise. Returning later that afternoon to conduct body retrieval, Mendoza said he found a room full of corpses.
http://rawstory.com/news/afp/Marine_tells_of_order_to_execute_Ha_08302007.html


[quote]

If these are established rules of combat, no wonder they don't want to do body counts.

Do you think the 3 year old girl was packing heat?

Or did the soldiers enter the homes and start shooting before they opened their eyes and noticed the homes contained civilian men, women and children (and some babies).

Don't you think it would have been prudent to actually check the houses before clearing them with grenades and gunfire? Lets say in the heat of the moment, they simply forgot to simply check... After the first room was cleared and they noticed the dead were indeed civilians, why keep going and clearing the other rooms and houses? Revenge maybe? Soldiers pissed off someone tried to kill them so just shoot the crap out of anything that moves, even if they happen to be small children? I don't know, what do you think Q? Would you be equally acceptable if a some men entered your homes and killed everyone in it and then claimed it was a mistake? What if it were the police who did it? Would you just shrug and say 'ok'? One or possibly two deaths could be considered a mistake in such a situation. 24 deaths is considered a slaughter and a murderous rampage.

Oh yes, I like bells theory that these guys had every intention to go on a murderous rampage. Yes, that sounds perfectly logical. Clearly, bells and SAM, of course, have served in the military and know exactly what it's like to go into combat. They're sage advice in this regard should be considered perfectly valid.

:rolleyes:

Oh yes, I like bells theory that these guys had every intention to go on a murderous rampage. Yes, that sounds perfectly logical. Clearly, bells and SAM, of course, have served in the military and know exactly what it's like to go into combat. They're sage advice in this regard should be considered perfectly valid.

:rolleyes:

According to their own witnesses, they did.

Or do you know any different?

Thats so awesome! :Are there any souvenirs? Posters? Maybe dolls of dead babies? Is there any fucking way to make money out of this situation?

mmmkay. :confused::crazy:

If I remember right, some of the victims were already being held prisoner and not immediately killed? If so there really isn't any possibility of excuse, not that that is in doubt.

S.A.M, those are very serious charges, probably more so than civilian charges but i am not sure.

S.A.M, those are very serious charges, probably more so than civilian charges but i am not sure.

Murder charges have been dismissed against all of them, so its not so serious, is it?

er, maybe life in prison.

Hey BELLS, things like this happen AAAALLLLL the time in the world. All colors, all nationalities, all countries. Would you like for me to post the images?


No John. I have seen enough gruesome images and seen first hand just what people are capable of. Some of which would probably make you sit in a corner and cry like a baby.

Listen here BELLS. I have NOT killed anyone, by your logic you are just as much to blame as me and SAM is just as much to blame when India and Pakistan start killing each other again. Blame the whole human race while you are at it.
You still don't get it. No one is blaming you. What we are blaming is the system that allows the people who did this to get away with it. Can you make the connection John? Do you think these soldiers should be held accountable for their actions?

Why dont you dig up some images of carnage in Rwanda and hate everyone in that country?

Funny you should mention that. I am currently rereading 'Shake hands with the Devil'. And believe me, you do not want to try to deflect the blame there either John.

Why dont you tell us BELLS how to stop murder, and how to stop global terrorism. I would love to hear it. You really have some high horses out in the outback.
:rolleyes:

Now you are sounding emotional, irrational and like Vincent. There is no way to stop people from committing murder (unless of course you have prior knowledge of what they intend to do). But when someone commits a murder, they should be held accountable and be charged accordingly. I cannot understand how you are saying this in this thread, but cannot make the connection that these soldiers committed murder. Do you think these soldiers should be charged with murder? Or should soldiers be exempt from such charges because they are soldiers? Do you think a soldier who shoots a 1 year old girl in a civilian house (along with members of her civilian family) should be viewed as a murderer, or as a hero?

Oh yes, I like bells theory that these guys had every intention to go on a murderous rampage. Yes, that sounds perfectly logical. Clearly, bells and SAM, of course, have served in the military and know exactly what it's like to go into combat. They're sage advice in this regard should be considered perfectly valid.
So you don't think they should face murder charges? You think shooting blindly into houses, then raiding said houses and shooting every man, woman and child who happens to be in range is not murder? Do you think it is logical to shoot a baby Q? I mean honestly, a soldier should be trained to recognise whether a person poses a danger to themselves or not. Can't they tell the difference between a 1 year old girl and an armed terrorist? If the police in the US had done something like this to a US household/family, do you think the public would be so willing to turn a blind eye and attempt to justify it?

I may have never gone into combat Q, but I can assure you, I can tell the difference between an armed terrorist and a 1 year old child. Now you can justify it as much as you want. At the end of the day, there is no justification for what went on that day. At the end of the day, there is no justification in shooting babies and then getting away with murder. You may think it is and that's all well and good for you. I guess that is the difference between you and I. Now why don't you run along and go and play...

*Makes shooing motion*

No John. I have seen enough gruesome images and seen first hand just what people are capable of. Some of which would probably make you sit in a corner and cry like a baby.

You have no idea what i have seen. That is why i did not even read sams post, i dont need the pictures or sensationalism sam is trying to incite.

You still don't get it. No one is blaming you. What we are blaming is the system that allows the people who did this to get away with it. Can you make the connection John? Do you think these soldiers should be held accountable for their actions?



My record is clean, like my conscience.

And BELLS, Do you even know that these are serious charges.

Did the military officially provide a reason for the reduction in charges? I can't find it anywhere, but I assume they must've given some reason.

At one house Wuterich gave an order to shoot on sight as Marines waited for a response after knocking on the door, said Mendoza.

"He said 'Just wait till they open the door, then shoot,'" Mendoza said.

I find this incredulous.

Knock on the door... shoot who answers? When it is pretty much predetermined to get a non-combatant answering the door? I don't assume the insurgents would be polite enough to open the door.

I think I've heard of this procedure used before.

My record is clean, like my conscience.

And BELLS, Do you even know that these are serious charges.

Your record is clean? Wonderful! But we are not discussing your record John. Unless you were one of those soldiers knocking on the front door to each house and then shooting whoever opened (strange how when supposedly in combat and scared for one's life, they took the time to knock on the doors and waiting for someone to answer and then shooting whoever opened on sight, before storming in and shooting everyone inside each house), then this is really not about you. We are discussing whether these soldiers should face murder charges and whether they should go to jail. Not you.

Here is the issue with this massacre John. The charges were simply not serious enough. And some instances, the charges were dropped.

The real cause of things like this happening are the cowardly tactics of terrorists, hiding behind families with "1 and 3 year old girls" while fighting in a war.
That is why sh!t like this happens, they're relying on the notion that US soldiers won't shoot through babies to get at them. The only way to really combat tactics of that nature is to shoot through babies.
They're generally not doing that, and that's the only reason this war isn't won and over.

Essentially we're talking about iraqi fighters using civilians as human shields, that is what is going on in this current "war", and then when the civilians are killed we act like US demons are going on murderous rampages against civilians to satiate their perverse urges.
That's precisely the goal of these fighters, to get you to think like that, and you all just take the bait like brainless reactionary fish.

Obviously this sucks, and it was fairly ridiculous for these marines to mow down families, but maybe they were kind of shellshocked after litterally being shelled. You will make mistakes in that kind of environment.
The problem is it shouldn't be taking place amongst civilians where mistakes in judgement can have these kinds of consequences, and that is entirely the fault, and intentional fault, of terrorists.
The difference between them and the marines is they want civilians to be killed, marines sometimes (and perhaps sometimes through flagrant slapstick incompetence) fall into their traps and regrettably kill civilians like the terrorists want them to.
While I think the marines should be punished and held accountable for killing innocent people, we shouldn't insult our own intelligence by reacting exactly how it was intended for us to react by the people who orchestrated these atrocities. We are smart enough to see through what they're doing, and it's disgustingly sinister. The bulk of the blame has to be handed to it's rightful owners, or else they are in affect being actively encouraged to continue using these tactics which always will and were always going to result in civilian casualties.

we shouldn't insult our own intelligence by reacting exactly how it was intended for us to react by the people who orchestrated these atrocities.

Did the terrorists fabricate the W.M.D. evidence?

If not, who's fault is it now?

I didn't think there was any wmd evidence?

I didn't think there was any wmd evidence?


Good..... keep going....

The real cause of things like this happening are the cowardly tactics of terrorists, hiding behind families with "1 and 3 year old girls" while fighting in a war.
That is why sh!t like this happens, they're relying on the notion that US soldiers won't shoot through babies to get at them. The only way to really combat tactics of that nature is to shoot through babies.
They're generally not doing that, and that's the only reason this war isn't won and over.

Essentially we're talking about iraqi fighters using civilians as human shields, that is what is going on in this current "war", and then when the civilians are killed we act like US demons are going on murderous rampages against civilians to satiate their perverse urges.
That's precisely the goal of these fighters, to get you to think like that, and you all just take the bait like brainless reactionary fish.

Obviously this sucks, and it was fairly ridiculous for these marines to mow down families, but maybe they were kind of shellshocked after litterally being shelled. You will make mistakes in that kind of environment.
The problem is it shouldn't be taking place amongst civilians where mistakes in judgement can have these kinds of consequences, and that is entirely the fault, and intentional fault, of terrorists.
The difference between them and the marines is they want civilians to be killed, marines sometimes (and perhaps sometimes through flagrant slapstick incompetence) fall into their traps and regrettably kill civilians like the terrorists want them to.
While I think the marines should be punished and held accountable for killing innocent people, we shouldn't insult our own intelligence by reacting exactly how it was intended for us to react by the people who orchestrated these atrocities. We are smart enough to see through what they're doing, and it's disgustingly sinister. The bulk of the blame has to be handed to it's rightful owners, or else they are in affect being actively encouraged to continue using these tactics which always will and were always going to result in civilian casualties.
Were the women and children being used as human shields in this instance? My guess would be no since they knocked on the doors of each house, waiting for someone to answer and being ordered to shoot whoever opened the door and everyone inside. If one is coming under fire, as they claimed they had been, one does not then walk up to the front doors of the houses the gunfire is coming from and knock on the door.

And when confronted by women and children, all unarmed, one should definitely not open fire.

"When you see nothing but women and children, you don't fire," said Gary Solis, a former Marine Corps prosecutor and judge who teaches law of war at Georgetown University Law Center.

In heated combat, it may be difficult to hold fire, Solis said. "In this case, they were not engaged. They were not receiving fire."
Link (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-10-04-3785523458_x.htm)


At the second house, Mendoza said he shot a man who peeked around the side of a kitchen door in the house as the team went in. He said he stayed in the kitchen while squad members threw a grenade and moments later found a woman in her 20s cowering in a back bedroom with four or five children, one a girl in her teens.

"I told (Tatum) there's just womens and kids in the room," Mendoza said. "He replied, 'Well, shoot them.'"

Tatum then went into the room himself, followed by noise that could have been M-16 gunfire, Mendoza said.

Mendoza said he returned to the house later as part of a body retrieval team and saw that the woman and children had been killed. All had multiple wounds that could have been caused by M-16 fire, he said.
Link (http://www.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2007-07-16-3785523458_x.htm)



There comes a time when military personnel should be held accountable for their actions. All involved in the killings in Haditha should face the appropriate charges. That they were not smears the soldiers who are doing the right thing in very difficult circumstances. This was not a case of insurgents hiding behind women and children. This was a case of marines knowingly and willingly taking the lives of innocent civilians and for that, they should face the maximum penalty.

I don't think he was serious. His ID is Dark Pig, and look at all of his posts... must be a troll.

That ID makes me really laugh in real life. Dark pig... lol.

Mendoza!!!!!!

The real cause of things like this happening are the cowardly tactics of terrorists, hiding behind families with "1 and 3 year old girls" while fighting in a war.

So if Iraqi troops invade your country, and burst into your house and shoot your families, you are a cowardly terrorist and they are brave but shell shocked soldiers?:mad:

I may have never gone into combat Q, but I can assure you, I can tell the difference between an armed terrorist and a 1 year old child.

That's wonderful, Bells. Clearly, the soldiers had no idea as to what is a terrorist and what is a 1 year old child. Stupid soldiers. Smart Bells.

Let us know when you actually get a clue. :zzz:

So if Iraqi troops invade your country, and burst into your house and shoot your families, you are a cowardly terrorist and they are brave but shell shocked soldiers?:mad:

If my country was run by Saddam i would most likely thank them.

Edit: well except for 'and burst into your house and shoot your families' that part.

So if Iraqi troops invade your country, and burst into your house and shoot your families, you are a cowardly terrorist and they are brave but shell shocked soldiers?

And when your cats decide they've had enough puss n' boots, and pick up an UZI and start shooting up your apartment, will you finally change your long distance plan?

Relevance is not a state of SAM.

So if Iraqi troops invade your country, and burst into your house and shoot your families, you are a cowardly terrorist and they are brave but shell shocked soldiers?
No, if my country had terrorists that terrorised the middle east, and then iraqi troops came over to my country to root out the terrorists, and then the terrorists hid in my neighbourhood and decided to make it a battle ground I would blame them when the iraqi troops shot me, yes.

That's wonderful, Bells. Clearly, the soldiers had no idea as to what is a terrorist and what is a 1 year old child. Stupid soldiers. Smart Bells.

Let us know when you actually get a clue. :zzz:

No they don't, or perhaps they think it is better to get them before they are able to fight back. Do you have a clue?

And are you actually defending this fucking atrocity?

No, if my country had terrorists that terrorised the middle east, and then iraqi troops came over to my country to root out the terrorists, and then the terrorists hid in my neighbourhood and decided to make it a battle ground I would blame them when the iraqi troops shot me, yes.

You been sleeping through the last 50 years?

And are you actually defending this fucking atrocity?

Come on SAM. You and BELLS are throwing low blows, no one is defending what happened. Obviously you, or BELLS, do not understand the charges against these people.

Come on SAM. You and BELLS are throwing low blows, no one is defending what happened. Obviously you, or BELLS, do not understand the charges against these people.

Do tell. :bugeye:

People are rotting in Gitmo in solitary confinement for YEARS for far less.

That's wonderful, Bells. Clearly, the soldiers had no idea as to what is a terrorist and what is a 1 year old child. Stupid soldiers. Smart Bells.

Let us know when you actually get a clue. :zzz:

Ah, welcome back little one.

It would seem some of them did have trouble distinguishing the two.

At the second house, Mendoza said he shot a man who peeked around the side of a kitchen door in the house as the team went in. He said he stayed in the kitchen while squad members threw a grenade and moments later found a woman in her 20s cowering in a back bedroom with four or five children, one a girl in her teens.

"I told (Tatum) there's just womens and kids in the room," Mendoza said. "He replied, 'Well, shoot them.'"

Tatum then went into the room himself, followed by noise that could have been M-16 gunfire, Mendoza said.

Mendoza said he returned to the house later as part of a body retrieval team and saw that the woman and children had been killed. All had multiple wounds that could have been caused by M-16 fire, he said.

As quoted previously..


But it seems, the defence force is concerned enough to give their soldiers refresher courses as to who is a combatant and who is not... who one can shoot and who one should not shoot.

Marines taking a refresher course in "Core Warrior Values" say they understand the need to go back to basics in response to allegations that fellow Marines killed 24 civilians in November in this town 125 miles northwest of Baghdad.

--------------------------------------------------------

The mandatory refresher course for all U.S. service personnel in Iraq was ordered this month by Gen. George Casey, the top U.S. commander in Iraq.

Over the past few days, Marines have taken the course in droves — squeezed 300 at a time inside a stuffy white tent at the Al-Asad Air Base near Haditha or a dozen at a time in a makeshift conference room at the Haditha base. All commanders leading the sessions used the same computer-generated slides projected on white pull-down screens.

Lt. Col. Ronald Gridley, Marine Regimental Combat Team-7's executive officer, led Thursday's two-hour session at the Al-Asad base. Gridley went over key points including identifying non-combatants and the rules of engagement.

He explained that non-combatants generally include women, children and about eight of 10 military-age males. Gridley also said any kind of theft is against military rules.

"Desecrating dead bodies is prohibited," one slide said. Gridley told troops they should ask for clarification if an order seems illegal. "You do not have to follow illegal orders," he said.
Link (http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2006-06-18-warrior-values_x.htm)

Tell me Q, in your infinite wisdom, do you think Tatum knew the difference between insurgents and a room full of cowering children? Seeing he gave a specific order to kill all of them, and then went and did it himself, one would have to say no. Now do you think Tatum should face murder charges? After all, he was advised the room in one particular house had nothing but women and children in it. He then gave the order to shoot them all and then went and did it himself. Tell me Q, do you view a man who walks into a room full of children and women, knowing there were only children and women in there, opens fire, killing them all, to be a good soldier or a cold blooded killer?

Do tell. :bugeye:

People are rotting in Gitmo in solitary confinement for YEARS for far less.

Each case is different, now you want to discuss every one held at Gitmo? From my uinderstanding, the military justice system is much harsher than civilian. For serious crimes anyway.

He explained that non-combatants generally include women, children and about eight of 10 military-age males. Gridley also said any kind of theft is against military rules.

"Desecrating dead bodies is prohibited," one slide said. Gridley told troops they should ask for clarification if an order seems illegal. "You do not have to follow illegal orders," he said.

Unbelievable. They need to be TOLD this?

Unbelievable. They need to be TOLD this?

YES sam, they have rules.

Come on SAM. You and BELLS are throwing low blows, no one is defending what happened. Obviously you, or BELLS, do not understand the charges against these people.

And I don't think you understand the serious charges were dropped and in many instances, the soldiers allowed to go free without even a conviction. Do you get that?

The low blow is the system that has allowed them to go free. The low blow is that they slaughtered innocent civilians, including women and children, and got away with it. If you choose to ignore the facts of this incident, all well and good for you John. But do not accuse us of using 'low blows' when we choose to discuss it. Those soldiers are murderers and the system that allowed them to walk free is a system that is supporting, harboring and pardoning murderers. And that, my dear John, makes the system that is attempting to force democracy down the throats of others, no better than the regime they decided to over-throw in Iraq. Do you not see the hypocrisy in this? Invade a country to bring the joys of freedom, democracy and escape from a maniacal despot. And the result? Soldiers who commit similar atrocities that Saddam has been accused of committing. The only difference here is that Saddam is called a murderer and the soldiers? They get off.

No they don't, or perhaps they think it is better to get them before they are able to fight back. Do you have a clue?

And are you actually defending this fucking atrocity?

So, you want to talk about fucking atrocities now? Have you always been a hypocrite or is this something new for you?

Perhaps the soldiers would have been better off to have hijacked a jetliner and flown it into the buildings instead. No court marshals. Nice and clean.

So, you want to talk about fucking atrocities now? Have you always been a hypocrite or is this something new for you?

Perhaps the soldiers would have been better off to have hijacked a jetliner and flown it into the buildings instead. No court marshals. Nice and clean.

And what does that have anything to do with Haditha or the people who were killed by the troops?

And yeah I prefer dead terrorists to freed cold blooded murderers. Don't you?

You throw low blows because you cannot win.

He then gave the order to shoot them all and then went and did it himself. Tell me Q, do you view a man who walks into a room full of children and women, knowing there were only children and women in there, opens fire, killing them all, to be a good soldier or a cold blooded killer?

NO ONE IS DEFENDING THEIR ACTIONS or what happened.

The low blow is the system that has allowed them to go free. The low blow is that they slaughtered innocent civilians, including women and children, and got away with it. If you choose to ignore the facts of this incident, all well and good for you John. But do not accuse us of using 'low blows' when we choose to discuss it. Those soldiers are murderers and the system that allowed them to walk free is a system that is supporting, harboring and pardoning murderers. And that, my dear John, makes the system that is attempting to force democracy down the throats of others, no better than the regime they decided to over-throw in Iraq. Do you not see the hypocrisy in this? Invade a country to bring the joys of freedom, democracy and escape from a maniacal despot. And the result? Soldiers who commit similar atrocities that Saddam has been accused of committing. The only difference here is that Saddam is called a murderer and the soldiers? They get off.

How can you say it is no better? If you cannot see the difference of REAL ORGANIZED TERRORISM then what is the point of this discussion?

AND Saddam WAS the government HE was torturing and killing his own people for years. See the difference?

Do you even realize that with these attitudes NOTHING is going to change?

Why cant you see that?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7168580.stm

If you cannot see the difference of REAL ORGANIZED TERRORISM then what is the point of this discussion?

You mean where the an organisation kills innocent people and considers itself not accountable?

Like the US army?

Tell me Q, do you view a man who walks into a room full of children and women, knowing there were only children and women in there, opens fire, killing them all, to be a good soldier or a cold blooded killer?

One thing is certain, Bells, the events and their results are void of your clueless opinions.

Bells barks, yet the caravan passes.

One thing is certain, Bells, the events and their results are void of your clueless opinions.

Bells barks, yet the caravan passes.

And those who forget history, once more are doomed to repeat it.

You mean where the an organisation kills innocent people and considers itself not accountable?

Like the US army?

SAM, the person responsible IS being held accountable.:truce::wallbang:

SAM, the person responsible IS being held accountable.:truce::wallbang:

Tatum? The shooter? The charges against him were dismissed.

None will be charged with murder

Charges against several of the men have been dropped, and none will face murder charges.

SAM, the person responsible IS being held accountable.


They're all in it obviously.

One of them is taking the grenade.

And yeah I prefer dead terrorists to freed cold blooded murderers. Don't you?

Allah be praised for the careful, scrupulous, detailed planning and intent of those terrorists... er... martyrs.

And those who forget history, once more are doomed to repeat it.

Ever forget to think, and can't get started again?

Allah be praised for the careful, scrupulous, detailed planning and intent of those terrorists... er... martyrs.

You still haven't indicated what the terrorists have to do with Haditha or the troops killing those Iraqi civilians

Or does this bring back fond memories of your past?

RUSSIAN TROOPS' BRUTALITY. (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=9E0CEEDA143DE433A2575BC0A96E9C94 6197D6CF); After Capture of Tien-Tsin They Killed Women and Children, Tossing the Latter on Bayonets.

Is this what you consider "reeducation? :mad:

You throw low blows because you cannot win.


Win what? Is this a competition? If yes, what's the prize?

Why are you taking this so personally John? Unless you happen to be one of the soldiers involved, you really should not be taking this so personally? Or do you have issues with people commenting on the failure of the system?

You aren't supposedly defending their actions, but you are so defensive of anyone criticising those involved. Why? Or is this just you trolling?

How can you say it is no better? If you cannot see the difference of REAL ORGANIZED TERRORISM then what is the point of this discussion?

AND Saddam WAS the government HE was torturing and killing his own people for years. See the difference?

Yes. The difference is we send our soldiers to torture and kill people in other countries.

I understand and see the difference of 'real organised terrorism' and soldiers who are meant to be trained to know the difference between an armed insurgent and a room full of cowering women and children. The question remains, can you tell the difference? If a terrorist had committed such an act in the US, they would have received the death penalty. No questions asked. These soldiers committed the act and they are not even charged with murder. Can you not understand the gravity of what they have done?

One thing is certain, Bells, the events and their results are void of your clueless opinions.

Bells barks, yet the caravan passes.
You keep defending their actions? You actually can't answer the question can you?

Seriously Q, go and troll someone else. Go on now.. 'shoo'..

Ever forget to think, and can't get started again?

Pardon, is that what your problem is? I hadn't considered your senility, no, but now you mention it, I'll keep it in mind. :mad:

You keep defending their actions? You actually can't answer the question can you?

A stupid question deserves a stupid answer. Is that what you want?

They're all in it obviously.

One of them is taking the grenade.

That is not how justice system works in 98% of the countries on the Earth.

You still haven't indicated what the terrorists have to do with Haditha or the troops killing those Iraqi civilians

What do your worthless assertions have to do with reality?

A stupid question deserves a stupid answer. Is that what you want?

And you accuse Sam of derailing threads?:rolleyes:

What do your worthless assertions have to do with reality?

Oh what reality? Do tell us. The dead men, women and children of Haditha and their murderers getting off scot free is obviously a realm of fantasy.:bugeye:

I am curious as to this new aspect of "secular humanism" and "rational thinking" and "enlightened morality" you are sharing with us.

You two sure look funny with big red noses and floppy shoes.

Coward.

Win what? Is this a competition? If yes, what's the prize?

Why are you taking this so personally John? Unless you happen to be one of the soldiers involved, you really should not be taking this so personally? Or do you have issues with people commenting on the failure of the system?

You aren't supposedly defending their actions, but you are so defensive of anyone criticising those involved. Why? Or is this just you trolling?

Yes. The difference is we send our soldiers to torture and kill people in other countries.



http://sciforums.com/images/icons/icon13.gif

http://sciforums.com/images/icons/icon13.gif

Indeed it is John. The actions of the soldiers and the system that allowed them to get away with it do deserve a thumbs down.

Thats right BELLS. You are of the opinion that regions all over the world with government oppression should just deal with it. That is how many people feel and you know i am beginning to think you are right.

Bells, dont you want to see change? dont you want to see a world where people can walk without fear? Do borders matter when it comes to people being tortured?

Let me see if I get this straight. You are arguing against me because I think these soldiers should be made to pay for their crimes. But then you come out with the following?

Bells, dont you want to see change? dont you want to see a world where people can walk without fear? Do borders matter when it comes to people being tortured?

:bugeye:

I will put it simply. Do you think these soldiers did the right thing? Yes or no?

Do you think they should be charged accordingly? Yes or no?

Bells, dont you want to see change? dont you want to see a world where people can walk without fear? Do borders matter when it comes to people being tortured?

And killing babies and getting off scott free is going to achieve this?

Ever heard of the gulags? Of concentration camps? Did they create a "better society"?

If I beat you every day will you grow up to be kind?

Ever heard of the gulags? Of concentration camps? Did they create a "better society"?



No never heard of them, i dont even understand your question.

If I beat you every day will you grow up to be kind?

WhaaaaaT?

Let me see if I get this straight. You are arguing against me because I think these soldiers should be made to pay for their crimes. But then you come out with the following?

:bugeye:

I will put it simply. Do you think these soldiers did the right thing? Yes or no?

Do you think they should be charged accordingly? Yes or no?

Go to a law sight and research Voluntary Manslaughter.

Bells, dont you want to see change? dont you want to see a world where people can walk without fear? Do borders matter when it comes to people being tortured? We have brought torture into our own borders, and brought fear into others'. Does that matter ?

Oh yes, I like bells theory that these guys had every intention to go on a murderous rampage. Yes, that sounds perfectly logical. Clearly, bells and SAM, of course, have served in the military and know exactly what it's like to go into combat. They're sage advice in this regard should be considered perfectly valid.

:rolleyes:

What are you getting at here (or with any of your posts in the thread)? I can't tell if you are excusing them, or what your reasons are. It would be helpful if you laid out what you specifically think about all of this.

What are you getting at here (or with any of your posts in the thread)? I can't tell if you are excusing them, or what your reasons are. It would be helpful if you laid out what you specifically think about all of this.

It's irrelevant what I think about it. I wasn't there.

Bells and SAM however, appear to be the combat professionals and claim to know the difference between terrorists and 1 year old babies. We should all follow their sage JUDGEMENTS.

It's irrelevant what I think about it. I wasn't there.

Bells and SAM however, appear to be the combat professionals and claim to know the difference between terrorists and 1 year old babies. We should all follow their sage JUDGEMENTS.

If you cannot tell the difference between a terrorist and a one year old baby, yes.

Can you?

It's irrelevant what I think about it. I wasn't there.


Their appears to be ample evidence, including the testimonies of the marines themselves.

It's irrelevant what I think about it. I wasn't there.



So you do not believe the evidence presented by the survivors and the soldiers? How can what you think be irrelevant? If what you think on this subject is irrelevant, why are you even in this thread?

Bells and SAM however, appear to be the combat professionals and claim to know the difference between terrorists and 1 year old babies. We should all follow their sage JUDGEMENTS.
I would imagine any sane individual would be able to tell the difference between a terrorist and a one year old girl. If a person is unable to tell the difference, they should not be in the armed forces. They should also not be allowed to have a weapon. Hell, they should be locked up in a mental institution. If a person decides to walk into a room full of children and open fire, knowing full well that room contained children (he had been told there were only women and children in that room), they should not be allowed in the armed forces, but should be in jail for the rest of their miserable lives.

If thinking such makes me supposedly insane, then so be it. I'd rather be insane and believe killing children in cold blood is wrong, than be sane and defend their actions.

So you do not believe the evidence presented by the survivors and the soldiers? How can what you think be irrelevant? If what you think on this subject is irrelevant, why are you even in this thread?

It is you and your idiotic drivel that is irrelevant, Bells.

I'd rather be insane...

:D

Their appears to be ample evidence, including the testimonies of the marines themselves.

So what?

So what?

IOW, if you see this:

http://pr.utk.edu/etorch/photos/babyvol/baby-orange.jpg

you require evidence that this is NOT a terrorist.

I'm beginning to see what atheists mean about not blindly accepting anything as fact.:rolleyes:

you require evidence that this is NOT a terrorist.

Will that be one or two heaping spoons of reality in your cup of idiocy?

Will that be one or two heaping spoons of reality in your cup of idiocy?

Whatever it takes to make you eat crow. :D

*Feels a bite on my ankle*

*Look down*

It is you and your idiotic drivel that is irrelevant, Bells.

Awweee look!

It's our resident religiously atheist troll.:)

*Pinches Q's cheeks*

*Wipes Q's drool off my fingers*

Still can't answer the question Q?

you require evidence that this is NOT a terrorist.
You never know Sam. He could have an uzi under that beanie.

I'm beginning to see what atheists mean about not blindly accepting anything as fact.
Some atheists are just so religious about it they fail to recognise reality. It is a blight on the rest of us atheists to be honest. Quite embarrassing. A bit like having one of those relatives you always pretend to not be home when they knock on the front door. Imagine Marie (the mother) in 'Everybody Loves Raymond'...

*Points to Q*

:)

You never know Sam. He could have an uzi under that beanie.

http://bestsmileys.com/shooting1/20.gif

So what?

So, this has as more than enough information than you should require to judge it, even though you weren't there. Unless you don't judge anything at all without having been there.

The evidence including marine testimony has indicated that they had children basically captured, identified as non-threats, and then murdered them anyway. There should be enough evidence to judge for this part of the incident, at the least.

Not much useful discussion happening here.

So, this has as more than enough information than you should require to judge it, even though you weren't there. Unless you don't judge anything at all without having been there.

The evidence including marine testimony has indicated that they had children basically captured, identified as non-threats, and then murdered them anyway. There should be enough evidence to judge for this part of the incident, at the least.

Sorry, but I never judge incidents in which people have been placed in combat positions, you simply cannot. Whoever does simply hasn't a clue. The fact that Bells, SAM and others have been doing so is more a reflection on their lack of understanding of combat situations.

Of course, the point of the thread was merely another excuse for SAM to rant her hatred of the US, which brought the other clueless ranters out of the woods.

Unbelievable.

Killing unarmed women and children (even those that can barely walk) is apparently justified under (Q)'s definition of rationality.

If you are unable to think rationally, should you be holding a gun?

Unbelievable.

Killing unarmed women and children (even those that can barely walk) is apparently justified under (Q)'s definition of rationality.

If you are unable to think rationally, should you be holding a gun?

See what I mean? Clueless. Rants. :crazy:

I suppose you consider the mass murder by Stalin's army as incidental war casualties.

Sick.

I suppose you consider the mass murder by Stalin's army as incidental war casualties.

Sick.

Wow, you brought in the despot argument rather quickly, off-topically, predictably, and idiotically.

Congratulations! You're up to your usual standards. :thumbsup:

Wow, you brought in the despot argument rather quickly, off-topically, predictably, and idiotically.

Congratulations! You're up to your usual standards. :thumbsup:

I'm merely assuming that you have personally been in combat and felt inclined to shoot babies.

I'm merely assuming that you have personally been in combat and felt inclined to shoot babies.

I'm certainly inclined to laugh at the clueless.

:roflmao:

I'm sure those soldiers signed up to shoot babies, sam. They would have never been complete without fulfilling their lifelong dreams to shoot babies, sam.

One could simply be born female in a Muslim state to know such pleasures of life, eh sam?

I'm certainly inclined to laugh at the clueless.

I'm sure those soldiers signed up to shoot babies, sam. They would have never been complete without fulfilling their lifelong dreams to shoot babies, sam.


You should have just said that to begin with.

I am not familiar with the convictions of those who make it a profession to invade countries.

I am not familiar with...

You've discovered the problem. :)

You've discovered the problem. :)

http://logo.cafepress.com/2/507270.2601812.jpg

Sorry, but I never judge incidents in which people have been placed in combat positions, you simply cannot. Whoever does simply hasn't a clue. The fact that Bells, SAM and others have been doing so is more a reflection on their lack of understanding of combat situations.

Of course, the point of the thread was merely another excuse for SAM to rant her hatred of the US, which brought the other clueless ranters out of the woods.

Wow, that is a extremely limiting restriction. I have a hard time believing that if you were related to the innocent victims that you could possibly share the same outlook... It seems clear you want to avoid addressing the issue.

It would be one thing if there was some crossfire that led to the innocent deaths; that would make it hard to judge. But there was no real "combat situation" at the point of the execution of children. Note: I focus on this part because it should be simple, not because I excuse the other parts. The children were identified as non-threats and then deliberately shot. I can't believe any adult is unable to make a judgment on that.

There is no gray area. You either are against, or somehow for, the murder of these innocent people.

Sorry, but I never judge incidents in which people have been placed in combat positions, you simply cannot. Whoever does simply hasn't a clue. The fact that Bells, SAM and others have been doing so is more a reflection on their lack of understanding of combat situations.


Was it a combat situation? Or a mission to search the houses after a roadside bombing? One of the marines who was there stated he (Tatum) had been advised that one room contained women and children. His order was specific. Kill them all anyway. When the soldier reiterated there were just women and children in that room, he then went and did it himself, knowing none of them posed a thread to him or anyone else. One does not knock on the door and wait to see who answers said knock in combat situations. Nor does one enter a roomful of women and children and deliberately open fire with the intent of killing innocent civilians.

Now, surely you are not so blinded by your dislike of Sam and myself to not be able to recognise such actions as being murder.

Of course, the point of the thread was merely another excuse for SAM to rant her hatred of the US, which brought the other clueless ranters out of the woods.
Ermm Q, the only one clueless here is the individual who refuses to answer any queries and who appears, for all intents and purposes, to be defending the actions of men who deem it necessary to shoot up a roomful of women and children. Your actions in this thread have denoted you to be nothing but a troll.

I'm certainly inclined to laugh at the clueless.
To be honest, I just pity you.

There is no gray area. You either are against, or somehow for, the murder of these innocent people.

You may join the others and judge. Be my guest. :)

Ermm Q, the only one clueless here is the individual who refuses to answer any queries and who appears, for all intents and purposes, to be defending the actions of men who deem it necessary to shoot up a roomful of women and children.

I'm not defending anyone, you are the one judging, trialling and demanding execution.

Your actions in this thread have denoted you to be nothing but a troll.

And you a complete idiot. Are you done ranting?

To be honest, I just pity you.

I don't think of you at all. :D

I'm not defending anyone, you are the one judging, trialling and demanding execution.


Really?

Wow! Your words point to defending those involved.

Do I think they should face tougher penalties? Yes. I also think their charges should not be dismissed so arbitrarily, due to the mountain of evidence against them. You can't even answer any of the questions posed to you in this thread. All you have done in this thread has been to troll and attempt to flame. For example:

And you a complete idiot. Are you done ranting?


:rolleyes:

I don't think of you at all.
Of course you don't Q.:rolleyes:

I still pity you though.:)

Q have you ever herd of the laws of war?
how about the geniva convention?
International laws of human and political rights?
The international criminal court?

All of these things set down what can and cant be done in a war zone. Shooting indiscriminatly is banned and so is DELIBRATLY SHOOTING NO COMBATANTS

Q have you ever herd of the laws of war?
how about the geniva convention?
International laws of human and political rights?
The international criminal court?

Those only apply to other people, not to (Q). :)

He's vastly beyond such inanities.

Really?

Wow! Your words point to defending those involved.

That's because you have very poor synthesis and emotionally charged posts.

Do I think they should face tougher penalties? Yes. I also think their charges should not be dismissed so arbitrarily, due to the mountain of evidence against them. You can't even answer any of the questions posed to you in this thread. All you have done in this thread has been to troll and attempt to flame.

I have pointed out the idiocy of your posts, which you attribute to trolling and flaming. Again, extremely poor synthesis on your part.

I still pity you though.

I'm mortified. :fright:

Q have you ever herd of the laws of war?
how about the geniva convention?
International laws of human and political rights?
The international criminal court?

All of these things set down what can and cant be done in a war zone. Shooting indiscriminatly is banned and so is DELIBRATLY SHOOTING NO COMBATANTS

What's your point? Are you too joining the bandwagon with pitchfork in hand?

That's because you have very poor synthesis and emotionally charged posts.



And you cannot answer simple questions.

I have pointed out the idiocy of your posts, which you attribute to trolling and flaming. Again, extremely poor synthesis on your part.
Still can't answer the question Q? Still don't have an opinion?

Tsk tsk, whatever are you doing here then?

I'm mortified.
I always pity those less fortunate them myself Q.

Still don't have an opinion?

No, really, you can't be THAT dense, can you?

No, really, you can't be THAT dense, can you?

Ah my little stalker returns.

And you still cannot answer the questions or have an opinion?

Either that or you are screaming for attention. Which one is it, I wonder? Both?

And you ... have an opinion?

Yes, you are that dense.