tester

Here's an article from the Army Times that kind of puts it in perspective, at least for us, I think. Don't know if a person whose never toted a rifle and humped an ALICE would ever understand it though.

God help the Army that fights for an idea instead of an objective.
____________________________________________________

January 24, 2005

Marines battle hidden enemy with clear mission

By Gordon Trowbridge
Times staff writer

RAMADI, Iraq — Without warning, Pfc. Kristopher Cramer suddenly had to decide: Do I kill this guy?

Is he just some poor soul in the wrong place?

Or is he trying to take us all out?

It was yet another pop quiz in Counterinsurgency 101, where U.S. forces are constantly confronting enemies hiding among innocents, and innocents stumbling into a fate they don’t deserve.

Often this is a war fought in seconds. Some of its most important decisions are made not by generals, but by young privates facing a ghost enemy.

Cramer’s platoon recently was sweeping through a neighborhood just north of Ramadi’s heavily booby-trapped main highway. The unit was partly in a search for intelligence, partly in hopes of drawing insurgents out of hiding, mostly letting residents and rebels know the Marines were around and handing out candy and soccer balls to curious kids.

But as Cramer stood guard outside the gate of a home other Marines were searching, a maroon Hyundai sedan appeared around a nearby corner.

Cramer calmly stepped into the street and waved the car away.

That’s when the driver pumped the gas and his fast-approaching car became potentially one of the gravest threats to U.S. troops in Iraq: the innocent family car loaded with explosives.

Car bombs combine massive firepower with speed and stealth. It is easy to hide a half-dozen artillery shells in the trunk of a car, and easy to conceal that car in the bustle of traffic.

Cramer had little time to think. He stepped forward, raised his weapon, and listened to the sound of the speeding engine.

“I was going to fire a warning shot, but he was already past that,” Cramer said.

If he followed the standard procedure — warning shot, a shot to the tires, before finally firing on the driver — the car would already be on top of him. “I was wondering what the guy was doing,” Cramer said.

With no more than a few feet to spare, the middle-age Iraqi man slammed on the brakes, lifted his hands from the steering wheel then gingerly shifted into reverse and backed away.

“I’m continually amazed at the Marines’ bravery,” said Capt. Eric Dougherty. “That they’re willing to wait that extra second to make sure they don’t take innocent lives is amazing.”

This was a day like any other in infamous Ramadi, the sullen dusty capital of Wyoming-sized Anbar Province that stretches across western Iraq to the Jordanian border.

Just 40 miles east of Ramadi in Fallujah, Marines won a decisive battle in November clearing that town of insurgents in one of only a handful of traditional force-on-force confrontations since Baghdad fell in April 2003.

But now in Ramadi, it’s back to fighting with surgical precision: plucking insurgents from innocents, deciding in the span of a blink when to kill and when to ease off the trigger.

Restraint is difficult here, especially when anger and fear mingle and play off one another.

“If we took the reins off, we could roll this whole city over,” Cpl. Justin Oxenrider said. “But you can’t just take out anything that moves.”

Capt. Ed Rapisarda praised his men in Ramadi for adapting to the nightmarish scenario of urban combat that war planners thought they had avoided before the insurgency flared last spring.

“Everyone has adjusted to this lifestyle, grown accustomed to it, accepted it,” he said.

The learning curve is steep, and the lessons are constantly changing.

Marines say they’re learning to spot where insurgents might hide improvised explosive devices that blow up when a foot patrol or a convoy passes.

But the insurgents are adapting, too.

As the Marines set up observation posts along the main east-west highway that passes through Ramadi, the insurgents figure out the view from the posts and then place explosives in blind spots.

The result is a never-ending suspicion of the most seemingly benign objects.

“We have to treat every garbage bag, every pile of rocks or dirt mound, as a threat, because it is,” said 1st Lt. Zachary Buitenhuys.

Staying alive in Ramadi also requires a little luck.

A lot in the case of Oxenrider.

Oxenrider’s Kevlar helmet sports a dent near his right cheek, where an insurgent’s AK-47 round had lodged.

In late December, an enemy mortar round landed about 20 feet from him, but failed to explode.

The Marines occasionally long for the kind of traditional shootout they saw in Fallujah.

“This insurgency fight is against an element you can’t see, an enemy that knows the ground, he’s worked out his exact routes,” Rapisarda said. “He has logistics support you can’t see, and a population that’s usually either neutral or supports his cause.

“It’s frustrating at times that you can’t stand toe to toe with him. Because you know, every time, that you’ll win.”

So do the insurgents.

That’s why they’ll continue packing unassuming cars full of explosives, hoping at some point a Marine or soldier waits a few seconds too long.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
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.

---

Those are all valid points. that you made. From what I understand aid had been rendered to the wounded the day before, and a number of them were had field bandages on. When the Marine entered the mosque, a number of other Marines, along with the journalist were standing there. The Marine saw the Iraqi move. He said "You're not dead, you're only faking you're dead." - Then he shot him.

Would the bandages have told him anything? Based upon the hypothesis that you present to me, it would be reasonable for that Marine to shoot any wounded Iraq he saw who moved. I somehow think that's reaching a bit.

quote:

---

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.

---

Judge him? No - only the Marine Corp through legal due process gets to do that. Neither you nor I have the legal authority nor the evidence available to properly judge that young man.

Form an opinion? Yes - we all get to do that, and you have more of a base of experience to form an opinion than most - and you may also find that opinion easily colored by personal beliefs and biases.

The founding fathers believed it quite important that an informed citizenry be able to form and express opinions. That is why Freedom of the Press, and Freedom of Speech are to be found in the 1st Amendment.

quote:

---

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!

---

That's great! Just what I was saying about opinions....

quote:

---

Originally posted by Thud357l:
Here's an article from the Army Times that kind of puts it in perspective, at least for us, I think. Don't know if a person whose never toted a rifle and humped an ALICE would ever understand it though.

God help the Army that fights for an idea instead of an objective.

---

It's very obvious that the Administration, Don Rumsfeld, and his pack of Neo-Con Jackels at the Pentagon certainly had no idea of what they were getting these soldiers into...

Remember his saying that troop strength was going to be down to 30 - 40,000 by September of 2003?

They didn't have a clue - and certainly made it a point to ignore the State Dept's report on a post-war Iraq.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Cpl Hop:
RIML The dead fuq in question is not an Iraqi but a dirtball terrorist

---

The dead fug in question obviously broke laws by fighting from a Mosque...

This does not give us carte blanche to ignore laws of warfare, though we by all means can ferret enemy out of said Mosque..

Ron,

Yes, there were five wounded left from the day before. When this squad entered the Mosque, the Marines found a couple still moving and from the report, the others were not moving and looked dead. As the Marines were checking them, this one guy moved and the Marine in question, yelled a couple of times something to the effect that the guy wasn't dead, he's faking it and fired, putting what he had seen the day before into his foremost thought.

It wasn't like these Marines went into this Mosque and just shot all these terrorist. This Marine fired at what he considered a threat to himself and his fellow Marines via the lessons he had learned from his combat experience up to that point.

Seen this happen more than once on the battlefield and saw the same Marines help wounded enemy. The situation dictates the action!

Oh, and I, from a pure experience standpoint, can in my own way judge this action more than you can or have a better organized opinion!

quote:

---

Originally posted by pelsar:
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)

---

Pelsar -

As a police LT I've seen some other cops who were out & out chickenshidts, some overly aggressive nut case hot-dogs who'de stir up a mess in no-time flat, and some that were just dumber than a box of rocks.

There's no place for those types, as each will get their fellow officers hurt real quick..

They need to be adjusted, or weeded out - and fast.

With proper training, leadership, and supervision - we didn't have to ponder state and federal law when we went into a scene with a mental subject with a gun, or worse - it's as instinctive as the 'Weaver Stance' with my service revolver.

Ron,

You cannot put a civilian or police situation into the context of what was happening to this Marine or what he had been through for the last three weeks at least prior to this situation. It ain't the same!

I enjoy your opinions and I value your service to this nation both as a Sailor and a Police Officer, but this is out of your area of expertise and trying to put this into a civilian and police context won't cut it!

Ron....this time the BTDT counts for everything....(just as it does in police work)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
Ron,

You cannot put a civilian or police situation into the context of what was happening to this Marine or what he had been through for the last three weeks at least prior to this situation. It ain't the same!

I enjoy your opinions and I value your service to this nation both as a Sailor and a Police Officer, but this is out of your area of expertise and trying to put this into a civilian and police context won't cut it!

---

i've been reading your posts for i guess its been about what, 2 years now? A lot of them have to do with what "could have been if"...or if only etc. Things based mainly on belief of which can't be proven otherwise...but this issue is very different.....

(btw, i didnt mean the "hotdogging soldier' (thats a new one for me)..just the variations one sees in a squad, some are a bit more agressive than others, some more hesitant

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

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
Ron,

You cannot put a civilian or police situation into the context of what was happening to this Marine or what he had been through for the last three weeks at least prior to this situation. It ain't the same!

---

I didn't - not in this context of what the Marine had been through, but in response to Pelsar's comment on "ponders the geneva convention" - that should be thoroughly ingrained by the time that young man is deployed.

quote:

---

I enjoy your opinions and I value your service to this nation both as a Sailor and a Police Officer, but this is out of your area of expertise and trying to put this into a civilian and police context won't cut it!

---

Much of what is discussed on this forum, and over at Military.Com may be out of a person's particular area of expertise - but that in no way should prohibit a person from discussing a subject.

You state that this cannot be put into a civilian or police contect. I differ. The necessity to make "Life and death" decisions, while under the effect of stressors, does have some commonality between the two contexts - police and military. Legal and moral ramifications, stressors, neccessity, clear field, etc. There are differences in how these are applied, however, and these, also, can be explored.

And when a cop uses deadly force - he will be initially be reviewed by other cops - then may be judged by others - not in the law enforcement community. Your Marine actually has more protections that that. He would be judged at a Court Martial - by Marines.

So don't believe for one moment that there are not similarities.

the geneva convention...
good point, i believe in police work the law is very much part of your work...I cant recall even once getting a lecture on what the geneva convention says I can or cannot do, and its relevancy.

Perhaps our honorable officers get some info (I'll ask)

Discussions we've had out of our own initiative, but no more than that...and the marines?

Geneva convention:

In the Marines you get a class on it in recruit training. Being deployed into a hostile environment, the Rules of Engagement are the topic covered.

Police work and a military battle are not the same thing. Police are trained to take people captive. The Marines train their infantrymen to locate, close with and destroy the enemy in battle.

This Marine made the right choice, given the situation that he and his Marines had endured up to this point. There is no instant replay or time for second guessing here!

The only ones I see second guessing this Marine are those that haven't been in his shoes!

quote:

---

Originally posted by LinuxMWB:

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.

---

Such a reasoned and well thought out commentary.

Who is this that has hijacked the Linux moniker?

As a vet with no combat BTDT,I would imagine it's a bitch fighting in a war with your hands tied behind your back??
It's not ironic,it's tragic!!
We(The US military) are not terrorists,yet we are held under a microscope,Geneva Convention and all,to an extreme!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
Geneva convention:

In the Marines you get a class on it in recruit training. Being deployed into a hostile environment, the Rules of Engagement are the topic covered.

Police work and a military battle are not the same thing. Police are trained to take people captive. The Marines train their infantrymen to locate, close with and destroy the enemy in battle.

---

Huh?? I was under the impression that the Marines were trained to take captives if they had surrendered or if, they were wounded and out of the fight.

Police, besides being trained to take people into custody, are also trained to neutralize deadly threats made to themselves or others by the use of firearms. This may involve shooting, and killing, a person. I was a State Certified (Illinois) Police Firearms Instructor - the curriculum involved not only the actual physical aspects of shooting and marksmanship, but also the legal and ethical.

quote:

---

This Marine made the right choice, given the situation that he and his Marines had endured up to this point. There is no instant replay or time for second guessing here!

---

Wrong - there may not be time for instant replay - but you can bet there will be review, second guessing, and "woulda, shoulda, coulda's" for years to come.

quote:

---

The only ones I see second guessing this Marine are those that haven't been in his shoes!

---

Perhaps because you haven't looked far enough afield? You sure wouldn't find it back at Mil.Com. Most of the folks there thought he should get a medal, which was really beyond my comprehension. Which medal would you give someone for making such a mistake???

quote:

---

Originally posted by saipan:
As a vet with no combat BTDT,I would imagine it's a bitch fighting in a war with your hands tied behind your back??
It's not ironic,it's tragic!!
We(The US military) are not terrorists,yet we are held under a microscope,Geneva Convention and all,to an extreme!

---

Because that's what seperates us from Saddam, et al. If we're the same as he and his ilk, then we have no business 'liberating' Iraq... We should hold ourselves to a higher standard.

Believe me, we ran into the same issues with police work, where it seems the criminals got all the breaks. There's a lot of frustration there.

If we sink to the same level, we may as well close up shop, scrap the Constitution, and realize we're all just friggin' animals....

Ron,

Sorry pal, but you are way off the mark here. The Marine didn't make a mistake. he killed an enemy soldier who was pretending to be dead as had happened the day before when his buddy was killed.

The Police are trained to kill as a last resort. The Marines are trained to kill as a first resort.This wasn't a police situation, it was a combat situation. To continue to put this into your police situation shows just how far removed from the idea of a combat situation.

You're doing nothing but playing barracks lawyer from the position of a Monday morning QB in an environment you have no experience in while trying to apply a civilian/police agenda to it.

I want dedicated Marine trigger pullers on my six in a combat situation. I would want a trained police officer in a civilian/police situation.

Sorry Ron, but you have never experienced close ground combat in a pitched battle for any length of time as a grunt. You have patrolled the streets of America and dealt with some of its criminal elements. Two far different animals. You are there to enforce the law and bring in the bad guys. The Marines are there to locate, close with and destroy the enemy. Plain and simple!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Stanley:
Ron,

Sorry pal, but you are way off the mark here. The Marine didn't make a mistake. he killed an enemy soldier who was pretending to be dead as had happened the day before when his buddy was killed.

---

No evidence that he was pretending to be dead - but plenty of evidence that he had been wounded the day before - treated - and then left in that condition for twenty-four hours after. Which the Marine didn't know - but others who were in the mosque before that marine got there evidently didn't perceive him as a threat.

I'm not finding him guilty - but you're sure finding him innocent.

quote:

---

Sorry Ron, but you have never experienced close ground combat in a pitched battle for any length of time as a grunt. You have patrolled the streets of America and dealt with some of its criminal elements. Two far different animals. You are there to enforce the law and bring in the bad guys. The Marines are there to locate, close with and destroy the enemy. Plain and simple!

---

You keep bringing this up - but that's not the point. Plenty of folks have discussed police incidents over at mil.com - though they have no experience at that. That's what forums are for - to discuss these things.

AirborneHound...Brain Fart on my part...I'm still ruminatin' on the other weird Courts-Martial that are over with...

Yogi

First: Yes other Marines entered first and they saw a few they thought were dead and a couple that were still moving (wounded). This Marine enters with others and sees one thought dead begin to move, yells, he's faking being dead and fires. He had the same situation the day before that killed his buddy and wounded others and himself.

Yes, I see him as a grunt who did what needed to be done under the situation to ensure his safety and the safety of his fellow Marines. Plain and simple! I damn sure would not sit here and second guess him in that situation as I have been in that situation several times!

Off to work--continue this later!

Second: I damn sure never talked about police situations that I never participated in. Not in my job description as this isn't in yours.