quote:

---

Originally posted by Amvet91Alpha:
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.

---

amvet..thanks for the compliment...but I've never been in that situation or that kind of environment (how long were they in constant combat in an urban area, taking building by building?)

I just dont like "second-guessing" or playing lawyer to a combat soldier within a combat environment.

Stephen Ambros, author of citizen army had a very good comment about that, that only another combat soldier can judge the actions of a combat soldier, as only they can understand the environment and mentality.

Well said Pelsar. I read everybody's arguement on the post, and realized that there are to many specifics, and I would have, and should haves. Have I ever been in combat? NO. Have I ever had my best buddy blown away next to me b/c some coward is faking he is dead? NO. So then how is it my place to judge if this troops action is incorrect? It isn't. The accusations made were accusations made b/c it is a hot topic, but that is the only reason why. Kudos to the Marine for possibly saving his commrades life, and even if he was just trying to be a hardass. . .then so be it. . .it is war, and war is chaotic. Remember who we are fighting. . .they aren't an army they are terrorists, and the same type that flew planes into two symbols of my country. Kill them all.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Joe:
Remember who we are fighting. . .they aren't an army they are terrorists, and the same type that flew planes into two symbols of my country. Kill them all.

---

I agree with your post for the most part, I don't know if the Marine was "hot dogging" it or if he truely felt he was doing the right thing. But..

if we start just "killing them all" in this type of manner then we might as well just pull out of Iraq and let them figure shit out for themselves. This is the attitude that we are fighting against and if we start playing that game then we are no better then them and can't show them anything about the "right" way to run a country.

Den in regards to the "hotdogging" statement I had read that in a previous post. . .so thats what I meant when I referred to it.

Sometimes I let my emotions run high when talking about our enemies, and I 100% understand your statement. In regards to my statement about "kill them all," I was referring to the terrorists; which I can confidentely say I have no problem wishing they ceased to exist.

glad to see you specified 'terrorists' with that statement.

Pelsar...It's a pleasure to read your words! YOU know enough about both cultures to handle yourself!!!

Also, the other night, I was watching GARY COOPER's "Trial of Billy Mitchell" and it sure raised goosebumps on me body, thinking about the chest-thumpers over on Da Far Side beating their breasts about so-called "respect" of the chain-of-command!!!

NO ONE should have been on that Court-Martial Board who hasn't faced the tiger in the eye!!!

Yogi

yogi I haven't seen or even heard of that movie..relevant to this situation? if so I am going to have to track it down..

AmVet...It would serve you WELL to do EXACTLY THAT!!! Also, Col. Mitchell WAS found GUILTY of "insubordination", BUT, was THEN and LATER
recognized to be FAR, FAR more worthy than the ASSHOLERS on his board of court-martial....

Yogi

I am DEFINITELY going to have to track it down then. thanks.

I know what your saying, and I don't want you to think that my post is in anyway sensitive to terrorists, insurgents, or whatever we are calling them now.

I am however sensitive to the "cause" that we are fighting for. Since the WMD and the immediate threat on the USA haven't really come through for us all we have is the fact that we got rid of saddam. Since this is all we have now I can just imagine the perception that Iraqis have of the USA there, seeing the torture and abuse of prisoners and the killing done by this Marine and god knows what else they see or percieve. Then how are we better than saddam. In their eyes we are no different than the regime we are there to get rid of.

I know this is a bit over dramatic. In no way whatsoever am I trying to compare are troops to saddams regime, but I do want to protect the mission, and the actions of this Marine and a few select others undermine are mission. And I believe that us standing up for the action's of this Marine also undermines the mission.

quote:

---

And I believe that us standing up for the action's of this Marine also undermines the mission.

---

actually no...by standing up for the marine, and even those soldiers at the prison, the message remains clear and concise....we're standing firm. We're telling the terrorist, the arab regimes that protect/feed/supply them that were 'badassed mutherfukers" so you had better watch out. And that is good during a war.

not much is gained in being nice in a war. The rules, provided the other side adheres to them keeps some sort of civilized behaviour within the field of battle. However, in these case the "other side does not. So the rules are just for us, so that our soldiers keep, as much as possible the democratic human values that are part of western democracy. What they, the terrorists and their supporters, think about us, is irrelevant.

and when our guys screw up, as in the prison, they should be punished, because what they did, was not consistent with our values.

The marine? in combat, killing an enemy combatent....within the environment of a larger battle? we make sure that the enemy knows that killing them is what its all about...play with our rules (fake surrenders, etc)...our rules then become flexible as well. Thats the first lesson of democracy: being responsable for your actions.

There is no appeasing an enemy that takes advantage of "our rules".

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

Pelsar:

I can see your point of view, but you fail to see mine. If we are going to accomplish the mission in Iraq, Iraqis are going to have to trust us. They will have to see that our system is better then the system that saddam gave to them.

If the people in Iraq see American Soldiers torturing, abusing, and executing prisoners, then they are seeing the same thing they have seen for the last 30+ years. The only difference for them is who is in charge and who is doing it.

Our only chance when these things happen is to ensure that those responsible are punished (which is what is happening) and that the people of Iraq understand that this is not what America stands for and is not the reason that we are in Iraq.

When people in Iraq understand that we are there to help and not to hinder then the insurgents will grow less and the people will be more willing to help us. Its all about the mission.

quote:

---

but you fail to see mine. If we are going to accomplish the mission in Iraq, Iraqis are going to have to trust us. They will have to see that our system is better then the system that saddam gave to them.

---

Den I do understand your point....and its a balance between "protecting our own" vs "showing the iraqis how wonderful we are. I understand.

I'm going to add a third element to this discussion, as so far its been the "bad guys values, vs the US forces. Now lets thrown in the arab culture, part of the iraqis. Very important to them is loyalty...not as we see it but fiercly so, 1000x stronger. When the US is "betrays" its troops in the field, i.e. putting them on trial, i would argue that the iraqi in the street, who has yet to really grasp the intricacies of western democracy, doesnt understand it, makes him uneasy...and wonders about these americans. ......I doubt 80% (but this is just a wild guess) have little understanding of justice, trial by jury etc. And what we dont understand makes us very uncomfortable.

so, not only is it a diservice to the troops in the field, it may actually hurt the overall mission...

Pelsar,

You are 100% correct. For those that have not been under the gun up close and personal, in the heat of battle, to question the actions of this Marines, is nothing but living in a fantasy world.

As you know, the only thing that these animals understand is that of strength. We either show them we are willing to change our tactics and adapt on the battlefield and that we will not accept their way of fighting without changing ours, or they win.

pelsar:

That is one hell of a valid point!!!

I guess it comes down to trusting the 'powers to be' to make the right decision.

and I hope that we will be able to protect our own and accomplish the mission when all is said and done.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
Pelsar,

You are 100% correct. For those that have not been under the gun up close and personal, in the heat of battle, to question the actions of this Marines, is nothing but living in a fantasy world.

---

Got to disagree with you there. We're a democracy with a free press. We get to question the the actions of that Marine - and form an opinion based upon the evidence at hand. That doesn't mean being in a fantasy world. That means living in America.

quote:

---

As you know, the only thing that these animals understand is that of strength. We either show them we are willing to change our tactics and adapt on the battlefield and that we will not accept their way of fighting without changing ours, or they win.

---

Besides understanding strength, they also understand how to capitalize upon our mistakes (such as that marine's actions may very well have been - or appeared to have been) and to use this to foment negative reactions and attacks against us and our interests.

Remember the old adage? It only takes one "Oh fugg!" to wipe out a hundred "Attaboys"

RIML you are right. Along w/ most everybody else. It is all perception over there. Our greatest strength is our strength, but the insurgents, and Iraqis that would like to see us fail perceive it as our weakness. They use instances like these to make this great nation seem timid, and weak b/c we had to resort to abusing prisoners, or shooting unarmed insurgents.(their perception)

As RIML said we are America and have the right to discuss such issues under a magnifying glass w/ critisism. . . but like some of you said it isn't nessecarily right. I would just as soon the reporters over there leave what happens in combat in combat... but we know that will never happen.

to discuss it...sure....its an event that questions our values, and very much a part of democracies. but to judge that marine?...I won't nor can I believe any one can. The "rules" have been thrown out by "the home team" that means the those marines have to adjust, as is quite common in war, he was "adjusting" to a new reality.

the problem with many discussions on the subject is that too many times those doing the discussion have absolutly no idea what they're talking about...but then that never stopped anybody anyway (facts and knowledge that is)

quote:

---

Originally posted by pelsar:
to discuss it...sure....its an event that questions our values, and very much a part of democracies. but to judge that marine?...I won't nor can I believe any one can. The "rules" have been thrown out by "the home team" that means the those marines have to adjust, as is quite common in war, he was "adjusting" to a new reality.

---

Adjusting tactics is one thing - but it appears you're trodding towards what many have broached as similar to 'moral relativism' - and I don't believe this reality is new.

quote:

---

the problem with many discussions on the subject is that too many times those doing the discussion have absolutly no idea what they're talking about...but then that never stopped anybody anyway (facts and knowledge that is)

---

And members of different forums and sites have never let their lack of experience or knowledge ever get in the way of emotional discussion. It just so happens that this particular subject would be more liable to evoke a rabid 'STFU' than, let's see, a discussion on the relative merits of stem cell research.

Quite often folks are called upon to make judgements in areas that they know nothing about. It's called the jury system.

RIML
moral relativism....well morality is always relative to time and place. Remember the plane crash in the andes years ago, the survivors "munched on" some of those who died....

that reality is actually very old, its our new found "morals" in our new world which is trying very hard to state that morals are not relative thats not realistic.... were not quite there yet.

the jury system is great within the civilian realm, but less so in a combat zone. Though i do believe in such cases the army prefers a jury of combat vets.....still, placing a soldier in that kind of posistion is asking the impossible...hes being ask to predict the future based on past events that he has either witnessed, heard about or was briefed about....and react accordingly.

that same reaction in a different building will make him a hero....and another a murderer.....

how can he be judged?