Gary...AMEN! Dunno one single thing about having to supervise prisoners at camps, but watching the video of those young troops entering that building gives me the willies! Frags followed by flame throwers would have been my choice!

I do hope all of that CM Board have served with at least an equal experience to the yojng trooper they found guilty...

Yogi

Pelsar, I remember some time back reading about some Israelis who got into trouble for "peeing" on some dead enemy troops. I'm certain that is not SOP, but I really could not care less about such a story. I have one client who got to do some "island hopping" in the Pacific in '44 and he tells me it was there SOP to "kill em twice"...

Yogi

Did I miss something somewhere? Was that young Marine found guilty? Didn't think he was on trial yet.

Yogi
the whole thing strikes me "surrealistic"..some IDF troops got in trouble for having their picture taken with some of the terrorists they killed....the reactions from the "public" is getting so out of hand, even "double tapping"..making sure their dead before moving on was "shocking"....its as if reality and natural human reactions have been turned upside down.

pelsar;

Actually the reaction from the public in regards to this Marine was not particularly vociferous as compared to others.

What struck me was the many on the other site who referred to him as a "Hero" - for what appeared to be a rather lackluster performance. Some even thought he deserved a medal. I imagine a certain amount of this was certainly a pre-emptive reaction on their part.

quote:

---

Originally posted by AirborneHound:
Did I miss something somewhere? Was that young Marine found guilty? Didn't think he was on trial yet.

---

Not that I know of.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pelsar:
RIML
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.

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?

---

He judged himself. It's called 'mens rea' He immediately went over to the journalist and apologized. He made an inculpatory statement of remorse. That's on the record. I'm sure that will be looked at in a Court Martial.

quote:

---

He judged himself. It's called 'mens rea' He immediately went over to the journalist and apologized. He made an inculpatory statement of remorse. That's on the record. I'm sure that will be looked at in a Court Martial.

---

See RIML.. THAT I understand.

Sorry guys, but it strikes me that the ones here that are not exactly on this Marines side have never been in a up close and brutal, face to face constant fire-fight battle for any length of time, seeing their friends killed, wounded,and having to kill on a daily basis and I don't mean as a law enforcement officer (different situation). Why is that?

And you want to hold it over his head cause he said he was sorry he had to kill someone? Geez!!!

I've been there and I understand and know what this Marine was feeling, was seeing, was experiencing and I damn sure would want him on my six!

The only people who should judge him, in my opinion, are his fellow Marines who have done their time on the line!

If you lined up 100 grunts that fought in that battle, and asked each one what he would have done in that situation, I think I know what they would overwhelmingly say.

The military powers that be have seen fit to court martial the Marine. I'd like to think that this is not a knee jerk reaction to the media coverage, but there's no way to know.

Even if the court thinks he shouldn't have done it, I hope they have enough combat experience on the jury to put theirselves in his shoes as they make their judgement.

Even if they think he shouldn't have done it, that doesn't mean they have to convict him.

"Shit happens...and it happens even more frequently in combat. Not guilty!"

I think it would be a travesty if they convicted him.

I believe if the media hadn't been present, we never would have heard about this. Very unfortunate in many ways.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
Sorry guys, but it strikes me that the ones here that are not exactly on this Marines side have never been in a up close and brutal, face to face constant fire-fight battle for any length of time, seeing their friends killed, wounded,and having to kill on a daily basis and I don't mean as a law enforcement officer (different situation). Why is that?

---

It's not about 'sides' - and that is something that was never mentioned. It's about Due Process in view of a possible violation of the UCMJ.

Now you are mentioning a number of stressors:

Among these being constant fire fights, seeing one's friends killed, having to kill on a daily basis.

Now - if the shooting of the wounded Iraqi was of military necessity - then, the effect of these stressors in no way apply to the case at hand. - So why bring them up? If the shooting was not righteous - then those stressors would be considered as mitigating circumstances in a court martial.

quote:

---

And you want to hold it over his head cause he said he was sorry he had to kill someone? Geez!!!

---

Do I want to hold it over his head that he said it? No, but that is how it would be handled as evidence.

I'm a little confused here. On one hand - you're saying this person is exposed to stressors such as seeing his friends killed, which might lead one to believe their is a thirst for justice or revenge. On the other hand, he's saying his sorry. What is it??

quote:

---

I've been there and I understand and know what this Marine was feeling, was seeing, was experiencing and I damn sure would want him on my six!

---

That's assuming all persons placed in the same situation experience it in exactly the same manner. Psychologists tell us such is not the case.

quote:

---

The only people who should judge him, in my opinion, are his fellow Marines who have done their time on the line!

---

Sorry. The law disagrees with you on this.

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by AirborneHound:
I think it would be a travesty if they convicted him.

I believe if the media hadn't been present, we never would have heard about this. Very unfortunate in many ways.

---

If a certain John Q. Public hadn't been around, the Rodney King debacle would have gone completely un-noticed.

You may be of the "Let's stick our heads in the sand and pretend bad shidt don't occur" School of Denial - but I sort of like to know what our government is doing out there...

quote:

---

He judged himself. It's called 'mens rea' He immediately went over to the journalist and apologized. He made an inculpatory statement of remorse. That's on the record. I'm sure that will be looked at in a Court Martial.

---

yes, he judged himself, that we do all the time..but it doesnt give others the same right(and his mistake was feeling bad about it and telling a newsman-a mistake a kid makes, with little experience in life) And as I mentioned earlier, it could be "after the fact" when he had a few more seconds, did his own internal "questioning" set it. Again this is stuff we do all the time to oursleves, but this does not give that same privilage to others.

Actually I was glad to hear that John Q public didnt do a public lynching of the marine. I don't doubt for a second that, his type of action happened time and time again, sometimes justified other times not....and other times they "werent shot-to the regret of other marines (who were then wounded/killed).....again, theres no way of actually knowing which times they are justified and which times they arent.

we've gone through a whole host of ROEs over here....from no shooting until fired upon, to only returning "accurate fire" (yea define that one if you please) to only "large rocks" are life threatening (guess the physics of small rocks moving fast as having a force has been changed...)

none of them were really applicable in real live on the ground situations...

Riml,

All the stressors I mentioned had a definite affect on what was going on in the mind of this Marine. The day before the shooting, this Marine witnessed a fellow Marine, his buddy, get killed via a 'dead booby-trapped terrorist' and he had also been wounded in the face. He had been in constant combat for three weeks up to this point. His squad went into the Mosque where a fire-fight had taken place the day before and found several wounded and dead terrorist lying around. One he thought was dead moved and he did what he was trained to do: react immediately to a situation that may put his life and his fellow Marine's lives in danger. He reacted by remembering what had happened the day before and made the decision that it wouldn't happen again. He covered the six of his fellow Marines by taking out a very potential problem, ie, he killed the enemy in a hostile environment up close and very personally.

Someone sitting here, at home in front of their computer, who has never walked in the shoes of a grunt on the battlefield in an ongoing firefight, has no right to judge him or say he was wrong.

The fact that after the fact he felt bad about doing it means what? That he felt bad about having to kill somebody is all it shows. Seen it many, many times. Hell, I damn sure felt it myself, but I still did my friggin job!

Just the opinion of someone who has walked that walk!

quote:

---

Originally posted by RIML:

quote:

---

Originally posted by AirborneHound:
I think it would be a travesty if they convicted him.

I believe if the media hadn't been present, we never would have heard about this. Very unfortunate in many ways.

---

If a certain John Q. Public hadn't been around, the Rodney King debacle would have gone completely un-noticed.

You may be of the "Let's stick our heads in the sand and pretend bad shidt don't occur" School of Denial - but I sort of like to know what our government is doing out there...

---

RIML The dead fuq in question is not an Iraqi but a dirtball terrorist

quote:

---

RIML The dead fuq in question is not an Iraqi but a dirtball terrorist

---

True enough... IMHO.. the 'boggle' is if the enemy was alive or not. He was given 'orders' to indicate he was alive; which others followed.. There was a question about it, and from previous fake dead insurgents, he took the proper precautions.

However.. this IS my OPINION!! I can't back it no more than it can be backed as wrong.. In some circles blowing up your children is acceptable.. So shooting a dead body is not a crime im my book.

If he was playing dead? Was he really dead? Nobody knows..

However, not to seem blind to debate. I understand RIML's point.. The soldier should not have apologized for an act he thought was rightous.

However, if he rejoiced would the outcome be different? If he just 'jadedly moved on'? Who knows what the head lines would read.

Seems.. America can't seem to catch a break.

RIML....
who would you rather have with you in your squad...that kind of guy...or someone who is going to hesitate? (and ponders the geneva convention for entering mosques?)

as we say in here in the IDF...its a "no brainer" and that is why "any law" may infact not be applicable as it doesnt relate to the reality on the ground. (laws must be reasonable...i'm sure thats somewhere in the books)

hey linux..welcome...and as far as the US not getting a break..(you guys have got it easy!)

dont get me wrong, I'm not advocating wild shooting etc, but attempting to place the incident within the reality of the environment...he may have go to trial, due to the publicity, but it would be a sham if hes not acquitted etc (yea I know, i just appointed myself judge, jury and lawyer)

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

Circle is complete..

-manly handshake, buying beer-