No I never thought of that, b/c I don't think that it would help any(I could be wrong though). In regards to giving tapes airtime that show insurgents shooting at our own troops; I would just as soon not see those, and I don't care if they are Americans, El-Jizeera(or however you spell it), or French reporters. If the military wants to keep them for future incarceration purposes so be it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Holton F. Brown:
cupla things here,,
most of the reporters "imbedded" with insurgents are not american citizens .. taking into account hostage taking .. beheading .. and what has ahappened to other journalists taken by insurgent types .. it could be deadly ..
as for censorship .. ya gotta be kiddin' .. the first reaction by the american public to censorship would be:
"WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO HIDE??"
as for the marine .. and I'll be flamed for this .. screwed up when he shot the wounded prisner.. you don't just go and shoot wounded prisoners because you "think" he might be a threat .. I saw the tape .. i didn't see any "threatening" move .. and if shooting wounded is OK for us .. then what can we bytch about when our wounded are killed by insurgents ...

---

to some extent I agree with that statement, however I think that there needs to be some leniency shown here, and definitely no prison time or dishonorable discharge, given all the circumstances here. I think he should be taken off the front though for sure.

I have to agree with Holton on this. The Marine committed murder if what we saw was the truth.
What some seem to forget is that the insurgents were killed/wounded by a previous Marine patrol. So why did he pull the trigger? I guess only he knows.

Since they are known world wide to booby trap themselves, and their dead. I'd have shot him also, as would any logical thinking warrior.

quote:

---

All tactics of the insurgents are excused. Hide among civilians. Justified. Wear civilian clothes. Justified. Shoot from a mosque. Justified. Feign death to draw soldiers in (the way one Marine died the day before the incident). Justified. Wave a white flag as a ploy. Justified. Booby-trap dead bodies. Justified. That’s just Fallujah.

Moving outward — Deliberately killing Iraqi civilians daily. Justified. Bombing churches. Justified. Bombing cafes. Justified. Using schools and mosques as arsenals. Justified. Attacking the police. Just fine.

The rules of war don’t apply to the insurgents, only the Americans. And if one horrible act occurs at the hands of one American soldier, the world howls.

The insurgents’ constant inhumane tactics are acceptable. The American rules of engagement prohibited shooting unarmed combatants. This prohibition was followed by thousands of soldiers, thousands of times. After the shootout at the mosque in which the man was wounded, a call went to headquarters to send a medical team out to pick him up. It is American policy that wounded fighters are given good medical attention. Many are being treated now. A wounded American soldier found by the enemy fighters would be tortured to death after being paraded on Al-Jazeera. And that would be fine.

---

Referance

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soothsayer:
Since they are known world wide to booby trap themselves, and their dead. I'd have shot him also, as would any logical thinking warrior.


So you'd be guilty of murder also then huh?

quote:

---

All tactics of the insurgents are excused. Hide among civilians. Justified. Wear civilian clothes. Justified. Shoot from a mosque. Justified. _Feign death to draw soldiers in (the way one Marine died the day before the incident). Justified. Wave a white flag as a ploy. Justified. Booby-trap dead bodies. Justified. That’s just Fallujah._


That's not just Fallujah, It's partly the blame of out GREAT military strategists. They had us take the country way too fast without killing the Iraqi troops as they "melted in with the population". Stupid!! As I've said before they should have set up a FEBA and killed a few thousand first.

Moving outward — Deliberately killing Iraqi civilians daily. Justified. Bombing churches. Justified. Bombing cafes. Justified. Using schools and mosques as arsenals. Justified. Attacking the police. Just fine.

The rules of war don’t apply to the insurgents, only the Americans. And if one horrible act occurs at the hands of one American soldier, the world howls.


Could that be because we are supposed to be better than they are and more compassionate? Everyone has said for years that the US is the worlds police force.

The insurgents’ constant inhumane tactics are acceptable. The American rules of engagement prohibited shooting unarmed combatants. This prohibition was followed by thousands of soldiers, thousands of times. After the shootout at the mosque in which the man was wounded, a call went to headquarters to send a medical team out to pick him up. It is American policy that wounded fighters are given good medical attention. Many are being treated now. A wounded American soldier found by the enemy fighters would be tortured to death after being paraded on Al-Jazeera. And that would be fine.

---

http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=54740&d=20&m=11&y=2004&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion

---

I don't like or agree with a lot of the crap that the insurgents do and get away with but just because they are scum doesn't mean we lower our standards.

quote:

---

I don't like or agree with a lot of the crap that the insurgents do and get away with but just because they are scum doesn't mean we lower our standards.

---

It is not 'lowering standards' to play by the home teams rules. Besides, not being a recognized military force, they are not protected by the 'rules of war.' They are masked criminals, and should be treated as an illegal armed force.

Just my opinion, does not make it right or wrong. However shooting somebody to ensure the saftey of myself, and my men is what war is about. 'Specially since a 'faker' killed a Marine the day before, I am sure they were told to ensure that 'dead are dead' in the mission briefing. Or maybe not, I don't know, however it does seem logical..

If the fellow would have given a sign that he was alive, I am sure the Marine would not have shot him. However, there is no crime in shooting a dead body.

Glad I humped the jungle in NAM! Would have been better to simply use up frags that were getting a bit dated via tossing them into that mosque, then plug ANYONE still moving in there. But, that's hindsight!

They SHOULD have removed the cameraman's video tape and burned it...end of story.

Yogi

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soothsayer:
Since they are known world wide to booby trap themselves, and their dead. I'd have shot him also, as would any logical thinking warrior.

---

If he was booby trapped before he was dead, he'd still be booby trapped after he was dead.

So we're gonna use that logic and shoot every wounded out there??

Not in my world, we ain't!!

quote:

---

Originally posted by RIML:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soothsayer:
Since they are known world wide to booby trap themselves, and their dead. I'd have shot him also, as would any logical thinking warrior.

---

If he was booby trapped before he was dead, he'd still be booby trapped after he was dead.

So we're gonna use that logic and shoot every wounded out there??

Not in my world, we ain't!!

---

If you have been following this from day one, you would know that there were other wounded in that mosque. Others moved, and let the patrole know they were alive. This one did not. Fact is the Marine was not sure if he was dead or not, and did not want to take the chance of getting blown to bits by checking for a pulse.

Think of it, lean in, the 'dead guys eyes open', and he screams God is Great as he splatters you/himself/reporter/your men around that mosque. Nope, he took the proper precautions in my opinion.

If he were alive, he should have moved/moaned, if he was dead, what is the problem? That is the rub. nobody knows if he was alive, or dead.

Just my opinion RIML, nothing more, nothing less.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soothsayer:
If you have been following this from day one, you would know that there were other wounded in that mosque. Others moved, and let the patrole know they were alive. This one did not. Fact is the Marine was not sure if he was dead or not, and did not want to take the chance of getting blown to bits by checking for a pulse.

Think of it, lean in, the 'dead guys eyes open', and he screams God is Great as he splatters you/himself/reporter/your men around that mosque. Nope, he took the proper precautions in my opinion.

If he were alive, he should have moved/moaned, if he was dead, what is the problem? That is the rub. nobody knows if he was alive, or dead.

Just my opinion RIML, nothing more, nothing less.

---

As a matter of fact, I have followed the event - from day one. Read the entire thread, and threads on other sites. Also saw the video, read the journalist's story - and pondered long and hard.

If he's indeed booby trapped - one does not want to get close enough to view the eyes. But they already knew they had been wounded the day earlier, which is not a "You get to shoot them for Free Ticket" simply as someone has been booby-trapped in the past.

Nice try - but no cigar. And that Grunt knew all along he screwed up, when he realized a journalist was there, then immediately apologized. Sounds like he was having a case of the "Hot Dogs" - then realized he was being watched. Has a chilling effect on one when they're screwing the pooch. Been there, done that.

And that reference you posted by Jane Novak - what a bunch of tripe!!

That young Marine is lucky he'll get a lot more due process than that Hors de Combat Iraqi he wasted...

RON,
Where's the profile on these prolific Posters? Read a book and become a Combat VET. Man, MIKEY!

No problem RIML, as stated, just my opinion and nothing more. Not the first, nor last time my opinion was disagreed with.

However, we are both men enough to realize that just because our opinions are different on this, does not mean they are different on the picture as a whole.

Thanks for not resorting to lame azz name calling just because we happen to disagree. And I'll nut up and call it a wash on this argument.

IMHO once both arguments are on the table, and neither can still agree, the circle is complete, and it's time to move on.

-manly handshake, buying beer-

I totally agree with you there soothsayer! Unless one can continue to at least bring a little something new to the argument, or at least a new perspective, what is the point of rehashing the same ole same ole until it becomes nothing more than a series of ad hominem attacks?

I have a feeling though that as time goes on that we will hear more in the news about this and there will be more to talk about then..

quote:

---

Originally posted by mikeyr8:
RON,
Where's the profile on these prolific Posters? Read a book and become a Combat VET. Man, MIKEY!

---

Mikey;

I had twenty years of having to make that hard decision - plenty times I could have legally blown someone away, but didn't quite think it right.

Nope...when that Gyrene approached the Journalist immediately after the shooting and apologized - he knew it wasn't righteous.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: RIML,

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soothsayer:
Thanks for not resorting to lame azz name calling just because we happen to disagree. And I'll nut up and call it a wash on this argument.

IMHO once both arguments are on the table, and neither can still agree, the circle is complete, and it's time to move on.

-manly handshake, buying beer-

---

Soothsayer - That's the purpose of these boards. I usually don't go into the name-calling mode until someone else strikes first...

when in doubt....shoot.
the kind of guys i like with me, are the agressive ones, the ones who will watch my back. Thats not to say there wont be decisions to make in that gray area of "combatent vs wounded vs non combatent. But when I look at the guys with me...I dont want the intellectual who will be pondering what is right and what is wrong.....

So looking back at this kid, perhaps if we do a second by second analysis, dive into the culture of war, figure out the values for that area of the world for a western army, we can come to a very intellectual decision on whether it was right or wrong...except that it is purly an intellectual exercise and not part of the real world.

He killed somebody he probably didnt have to....or maybe he did because he didnt know...maybe after his reaction his brain kicked in to question what he did, the thing is, he has been trained to react and not think (at least no all the time).Those kind of decisions/reactions can never have a single right or wrong answer. In a different building probably in the same battle, another wounded enemy was killed, but that one had a grenade in his hand, waiting to go off-and that story will never be told beyond the units involved.....

Pelsar..


you would be one of the few people that i know..and the ONLY one i have met online that i would trust to know when the need is to shoot..'when in doubt'.

given all of what i know from all the posts you have made on the forums i have been at.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soothsayer:
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=54740&d=20&m=11&y=2004&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion

---

quote:

---

A Double Standard Too Glaring to Ignore
Jane Novak, Arab News

What a glaring double standard. The Arab world is enraged over the shooting of a wounded, unarmed Iraqi insurgent by a uniformed US soldier.

There is no similar outrage for Margaret Hassan. Is it because she was an Anglo, a woman, or because a Muslim killed her?

The video of the soldier shooting is proof, we are told, of America’s evil. And the kidnapping, torture and murder of Mrs. Hassan is then proof of what? That America is evil! Muslims wouldn’t do that unless evil America forced their hand.

---

Do we know yet who killed Margaret Hassan? Was a video of the killing ever released, as with previous victims? It would have been the greatest of home goals for Zarqawi's mob if they had been responsible, and he himself called for her release. There's a story there waiting to be told...

See that is a man so evil won't even do a small (to him) act of kindness to increase his own power..

fry his azz.

quote:

---

Do we know yet who killed Margaret Hassan? Was a video of the killing ever released, as with previous victims?

---

Would it matter to you?

Nick Berg's video was released, as was Daniel's, and more than you think you know about..

Why resist the thought that the scum called 'insurgents' did not kill her?

Answer me this.

Why is Sadr walking around free when there was physical, testimoney, and video evidence of criminal acts?

Other words. We found tourcher chamers, we found weapons, we found decapitated bodies, we found this angel of mercy, we found our own countrymen, we found men the US trained to hunt this scum, we found civilians, we found CARNAGE!

He walks free.. We piss about an alleged murdered insurgent.. Bust our humps over naked pyramids..

Fry Sadr, keep your ranks!