Both sides seemed to have decided that the conventional rules of war don't apply. In this context, I don't see that the US soldier did anything exceptionally immoral. I mean, what's the difference between bombing the town and killing indiscriminately, and shooting a combatant point blank? The real fallout from this incident has to do with the propaganda war. Any sympathy the US might have gained due to the murder of a popular aid worker might be offset by this video. If you agree with the war or not, the US has the task now to establish security for the Iraq people. It's a catch-22, or if you prefer, quagmire, we can't bring security without a certain amount of brutality, maybe early on this was possible, but Bush failed then, and we can't leave Iraq totally without civil war breaking out, and the subsequent establishment of a theocracy which might be worse than Saddam.
then "down with the whole religion" huh?...... of course not Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! down with the religious fascists of course the US has killed alot more innocents than Muslims ever have 1) don't be painting Muslims and Muslim fascists with the same brush. you gotta separate the two. 2) hey, 9/11 was not enough, so let's give them another chance to make the number equal! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! there's a great opportunity coming up: Osama has received religious approval to use a nuke on an American city, and is now trying not only to acquire one but to smuggle it in and detonate it. a great chance to make the number of innocent deaths more equal.
Oh, did'nt know about the touching thing. Still it maybe was too barbaric for even those bastards to hack her head off.
You didnt know about it because it isnt true.....if it was would she had been working in Iraq for the last 3 decades?
then we can agree i guess I know this dude....I am Muslim Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! [/QUOTE] Well Osama better hurry up if he wants to catch up with the US huh?.....isnt it sad that he would need a nuclear weapon to catch up?
Whatever happened to the idea that soldiers are prepared to die for ideals and principles? Whats the deal with principles in the US at the moment? It's just that I keep getting mixed messages. "The people you liberate will witness the honorable and decent spirit of the American military." GW Mar 19th 03 'honorable and decent'? When I look at the members of the United States military, I see the best of our country and I am honored to be your commander in chief. GW May 1st 03 If thats the best.... And from the same speech. Men and women in every culture need liberty like they need food and water and air. Everywhere that freedom arrives, humanity rejoices and everywhere that freedom stirs, let tyrants fear. So thats the freedom and liberty to shoot injured people in the head then is it? 'let tyrants fear..' and those at your mercy too? We've also seen images of a young American facing decapitation This vile display shows a contempt for all the rules of warfare, GW May 24th 04 So there are some rules then? Wonder what they are? Look America, I have no real problem with you killing people you even have a habit of killing your own when it suits you. Just don't be strutting around pretending that you have 'honour' or 'dignity' or any of that other stuff that Walt Disney and GW Bush try to ram down our throats while sticking a hand in our pockets. Your no better than the Arabs and your the last fuckin' nation on the planet that should be trusted with 'Bringing peace to the middle east'. I despair Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Dee Cee
Yes. let some other nation do the liberating. without even firing a single bullet. in fact, all the soldiers of that honourable nation will trade their guns for press kits and crayons so they could look good in the press and draw pretty pictures to send to the head choppers and Halabja / Taliban murderers.
Yes. let some other nation do the liberating. without even firing a single bullet. in fact, all the soldiers of that honourable nation will trade their guns for press kits and crayons so they could look good in the press and draw pretty pictures to send to the head choppers and Halabja / Taliban murderers. I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice. Abraham Lincoln Fire the bullets if you wish but at least make an effort to be better than those your firing them at. Otherwise how can the rest of us tell the difference between you? Dee Cee
I have always found that mercy bears richer fruits than strict justice that's a topic for debate, not an absolute correct statement. and it depends on the situation but at least make an effort to be better than those your firing them at it's really not that hard. all the US army has to do is not cut aid workers' heads off, not plant bombs on busy market streets targeting shoppers, and not throw people feet-first into wood shredders Otherwise how can the rest of us tell the difference between you? some can't, even though the difference exists. seems like you can't... maybe more unwilling than unable
Oh and it would be a big help too if the US military didn’t attack other countries to replace their dictator. Being on offense, the US is responsible for all war-related deaths in Iraq, even those beheaded by the other side. Presumably they would not have been beheaded had the US not attacked for a nefarious purpose.
to that all i can say is that there is nothing that the human mind cannot rationalize. one can even rationalize that it was right for bin-Laden to attack the twin towers, or that it is ok to hit your wife "in some cases" so accordingly, it is possible to rationalize that Bush is responsible for beheadings of hostages, and not Musab al-Zarqawi and his group or any other terror gang. i say that it's the Wahabi madrassas are to blame.. but that's just my opinion...
It is neither okay for the wife to be beaten or for her to retaliate by shooting her abuser. But the latter is certainly more understandable. Bin Laden self-represents the people killed, injured, and oppressed by the US. He provides a consequence to Americans for the horrific abuse they have caused others.
one can even rationalize that it was right for bin-Laden to attack the twin towers, or that it is ok to hit your wife "in some cases" Very true otheadp. And today your rationalising the execution of the injured. What will you be rationalising tomorrow I wonder? Dee Cee
You would have crushed the American revolution in the seventeen hundreds if you had been alive in those days. Except those unlawful combatants were Americans revolting against the Brits. So who would you have supported ...the Brits or the American patriots....ummm....or to move to today....how about the US ..or the Iraqi patriots??? Oops, I forgot. Anyone from Iraq opposing the American invasion of their country is a "terrorist". Some people have an unquestioning, unwavering faith in "authority". Lots of germans supported the Nazis in WWII with that same unwavering faith.
People seem to think that they were attacked from the mosque went in and Cleaned up. Slightly misleading i think. The mosque had ALREADY been cleared by a first team of Marines and the "PRISONERS" disarmed and lined out for pick up by someone later if they were still alive. It's not playing possum it's not a suicide bomber its someone who's been neutralised and already made safe by a troop of marines. THATS what i think is making this an issue. After all the "he's done" comment when a marine on camera after hosing a house looks into the window and casually pops a round into the guy squirming on the floor inside didn't raise that much anger, some disgust from people who haven't seem the true face of war maybe but no realy outcry. This is the same thing except it's not someone who's just been hit through target and may still be a risk its a group of guys already neutralised and made safe being excecuted. Standard practice and the marines not trained to differntiate, probably. But the fact still is that politics don't put that side of war to the people they tell us it's all clean and nice and make these rules for it that they are supposably drilling into these marines to follow so when one is seen to act outside these rules and on camera the politicians have 2 options. a) Admit it's standard practice to finish off wounded enemy not the humanitarian spin they like to put on it. b) Lynch the guy that got filmed and carry on as normal.
I think thats a little unfair DeeCee, remember these guys are in a war situation, and the worse sort.House to house clearing is THE most dangerous form of combat. They were in a room with dead or dying fanatics, if there dying they'll want to take a few infidels with them so booby traps and last stand suicides are on the cards. They had NOT secured the building, how do they know there is'nt a room full of enemy in the next room, or explosives rigged everywhere.Believe me i saw a bit of action but nothing like these guys are dealing with. There nerves will be fried, they would be on a hair trigger ( this is the main reason for friendly fire) How long does it take to come through a door ? half a second? the guy groaning on the floor next to you could be pulling a pin from a frag grenade under his blanket, you could all the while be under attack from others around the area with RPG's, sniper fire, rapid fire from a multitude of directions. There is very little time to think- wrong decision, BANG your dead. Another factor was the guy who shot him was wounded from the day before. He had been shot in the face. Think about that. You were so very nearly dead. you were wounded in a very similar situation that you now find yourself in now. Again. Would your morals stand up to that sort of stress in that situation? Or would you do like every soldier i know and served with? and thats take out the threat to your life. I think that you would have the same reaction as all soldiers, you will have an overwhelming desire for self preservation, and if that means he dies, well he dies. Thats just my slant on things and i've always read your posts. You always come across as a very caring human being. Most soldiers are as well, but sometimes you don't have the luxury of time and situation on your side :m:
This is why I was against embedding journalists from the very beginning. In spite of the fact that the Marine did absolutely nothing wrong in accordance with the Laws of Land Warfare, you have this ten second video clip circulating the internet, eliciting all kinds of kneejerk reactions from keyboard-wielding "experts" who take a sentence from the Geneva Conventions out of context (while not reading anything else) and think they've found an all-damning stick to shake at the US military. This was a completely legitimate action that was thoroughly justified and authorized under any and all pertinent regulations. If anybody cares to try and prove me wrong, you can be my guest.
Regardless whether it's "thoroughly justified and authorized under any and all pertinent regulations," it's still obviously wrong. At the least the Marine should be shunned forevermore by reasonable people, for he's demonstrably a thug.
