What about the grief of the children?

[aloharocky]

That depends on who you ask. A soldier doesn't lose or win, he just shows up, does his job, and hopes the politicians make the right decisions. In the case of Kennedy, he fucked up. And as far as Marines looking bad, that's bullshit. They do a job that no-one else does, or can do. I hope they clear this Marine of wrongdoing

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by aloharocky

I hope they clear this Marine of wrongdoing

he shot an unarmed man laying at his feet. If that is not wrongdoing, then I'm stumped to figure out a better definition for the word. Bush claims to be fighting a war against terror,this Marine should not be allowed to get away with terrorist-style execution.

[aloharocky]

Clinton bombed an aspirin factory full of civilians. Were you as outraged then?

[thegladhatter]

The unarmed civilian was in the wrong freaking place! He should NOT have been there.

I think WAY too many people are WAY too quick to pass judgement on this guy.

[aloharocky]

Originally Posted by thegladhatter

The unarmed civilian was in the wrong freaking place! He should NOT have been there.

I would think that the is good reason for "unarmed civilians" to be found in the buildings. They are called AMMO BEARERS. They are the lookouts, spies, spotters, water-bearers, radio operators, bombers, etc. But if you think they are "innocent" when staying behind after having days to leave the area, then I want to sell you some real estate.
I also question the media's use of the term "unarmed." Does that mean no weapon, or no weapom in sight? What about grenades? How does the media know that the ammo wasn't expended and the weapon thrown out the window, much less a soldier that is in a firefight. The guy that reported this had better watch his back, that's for sure. Man, I wish they would start the draft, and we could say good-bye to a lot of the whiners. Let them try combat on for size.

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by thegladhatter

The unarmed civilian was in the wrong freaking place! He should NOT have been there.

Fundamental difference of opinion.The Marine should not have been there.The guy he MURDERED has every right to be in his own home town in his own home country, even if he is defending his country from a land grab of monstrous proportions.

[T4 Primera]

Am I the only one to notice that every body in that building that wasn't US military was barefoot?

I know the significance of that, but how many others do?

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by T4 Primera

Am I the only one to notice that every body in that building that wasn't US military was barefoot?

I know the significance of that, but how many others do?

Well spotted,T4. Would lend support to any argument that the murder victim and the other occupants were not some random bunch of 'insurgents' who had gone to Fallujah looking for a fight.

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by aloharocky

Clinton bombed an aspirin factory full of civilians. Were you as outraged then?

YES. Perhaps you haven't figured it out yet, but most of the opposition to Bush has nothing to do with the party he represents, but the criminal actions that he represents.

[YogsVR4]

The Korean war never ended. Its still ongoing - there is just no current firing going on.

The incident is being investigated. There was a second lieutenant convicted of killing an Iraqi civilian a short time ago. I didn’t see anything about that in here. Only because there is a video clip that people are all up in arms.

Let the investigation continue and see what the results are. Condemning him with only that one piece of video footage is premature but it is your entitlement.

I wonder if one of the children from fallujah, or afghanistan, or a bunch of other places, whose whole family was killed as a result of US bombing, then killed a US president, would their extenuating circumstances and grief be taken into account in their trial? or would it be deemed as politically motivated and not really their fault?

Now that was dumb piece of circular logic.

oh and before i get any more intelligent responses like "asshole" (that took a lot of thought Z28Josh), "Fuck You" Murco, or "Fuck Off" thegladhatter . I'm just asking a question, if you don't have anything worth saying remember... its better to shut the fuck up and let people think you're stupid than open your mouth (or your keyboard) and prove it.

Perhaps you should heed your own advice.

[Raz_Kaz]

Originally Posted by T4 Primera

Am I the only one to notice that every body in that building that wasn't US military was barefoot?

I know the significance of that, but how many others do?

When you enter the mosque, you are suppose to take of foot-wear for prayer. But that is of little evidence because some can protest on the case that he may not have had shoes in the first place.

[TRD2000]

Originally Posted by thegladhatter

The unarmed civilian was in the wrong freaking place! He should NOT have been there.

I think WAY too many people are WAY too quick to pass judgement on this guy.

and in 1938 a bunch of jews were sure as hell in the wrong place then...

JFK was in the wrong place....

and sure as shit someone built those buildings in the wrong place...

...you were fine judging then though huh hatter?

[TRD2000]

why is everyone saying innocent civilian? all i saw was UNARMED!

it was my understanding that the person shot wasn't necessarily civilian or innocent, read the part about how a couple of days earlier the mosque was taken by force. 10 killed, 5 wounded. The wounded were meant to be picked up, but weren't. (left to die) then a few days later theres reports of people in there so they go to investigate. out of the 5 wounded, one is still alive and breathing. unarmed because they had already shot him and cleared the building. so they shot him again. ok so some is speculatation.

had they picked up the wounded in a humane and decent time frame then this would not have happened.

[fredjacksonsan]

Originally Posted by Raz_Kaz

When you enter the mosque, you are suppose to take of foot-wear for prayer. But that is of little evidence because some can protest on the case that he may not have had shoes in the first place.

Good point, and you could second guess this aspect for some time.

Maybe his comrades took his boots since he was wounded and couldn't use them anymore.

Maybe his comrades took the boots to make sure he wasn't positively identified as a combatant by his military style footwear.

Maybe he was badly wounded and almost dead already, head 1/2 gone or something like that, and the Marine did him a service by putting him out of his misery. (Assuming I'll get a statement that the Marine wasn't a doctor, etc)


The above is speculation, but AlohaRocky has a point. The people in his example may have been planting a mine. The problem with Vietnam and now Iraq is that (regardless of gov't policies and right or wrong) the combatants on the ground are fighting for their lives. US personnel wear uniforms to be identified. The insurgents don't wear uniforms. In many cases in Vietnam, the VC would fade away and later be picking rice or going about their business. The villagers WERE the VC, they just decided to stop fighting for awhile. I believe it's the same in Iraq, the insurgents choose when and where to strike or fight or ambush, and then fade into society until the next time they have an opportunity.

It's guerrilla warfare, and the lines between right and wrong blur for the non-guerrillas, as EVERYONE they meet is potentially a deadly adversary. Did the Iraqi have a pistol or explosives on him? I haven't heard the media say.

-edit- and of course, the Iraqi in the mosque could have been a devout and innocent worshipper. If so, why did he not run when the battle started?

[TRD2000]

Originally Posted by aloharocky

If you were there, you might understand it. I once fired on five "unarmed" civilians, because it looked like they were either planting rice, or mines. I called for arty, but they delayed, wanting me to be sure of what they were doing. Luckily, a Korean army major came along and immediately called a Korean artillery unit to fire, which they did, relieving me of the duty. The "innocent civilians" were vaporized. Did I feel bad about it? NO. It's just the way it is. Shit happens. Save the touchy-feely stuff for campus. It doesn't work in the real world.

did he mention Vietnam somewhere else?

see i guessed he was talking about Korea. perhaps during the war, but from the level of maturity and gun hoe-ness, i GUESSED he had been stationed on the border between north and south. Also the US artillery showing a degree of caution seemed strange for a war situation.

so where was it rocky?