Larry Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Oh, the calls to wait for an investigation are well founded. (Don't know why I'm thinking of Duke lacross team right now.) Barring other evidence, I'll take the word of a US Marine. Supposedly, in this case, there's evidence that says otherwise. That means there should be an investigation. (It doesn't mean they've been convicted.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fergasun Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I don't get the facts on this... What makes everyone so sure it was US Marines? Are we positive these weren't done by insurgents in order to frame the Marines? Is there any evidence that the Marines did anything other than lie about the way the civialians died? Perhaps they thought it was a road-side bomb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz1972 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/07/national/07thompson.html?ex=1294290000&en=8704597229a070d3&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss this has happened b4,in vietnam,hugh thompson deserved the medal of freedom for his actions.ANYONE READ THIS ARTICLE? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s0crates Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I can't remember who said it, but it bears repeating: "If we kill the innocent, we become the enemy." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboDaMan Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 It's a war of occupation. Unfortunately, there are no civilians, really...only Charlies!This wanton disregard for innocent life sounds familiar.Saddam, is that you? I hope like hell that this story is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TradeTheBeal! Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 This wanton disregard for innocent life sounds familiar.Saddam, is that you? I hope like hell that this story is wrong. No, it's me..George. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webnarc Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 ANYONE READ THIS ARTICLE? Yeah, I've read a bunch of stuff on it. It's depressing actually. War is bad, but what people can do to other people during a war is brutal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webnarc Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I don't get the facts on this... What makes everyone so sure it was US Marines? Are we positive these weren't done by insurgents in order to frame the Marines? Is there any evidence that the Marines did anything other than lie about the way the civialians died? Perhaps they thought it was a road-side bomb. The fact that they lied should raise suspissions. The rules of engagement basically allow of anything to happen so they shouldn't have to lie about anything. IF the US forces knew it was insurgents who did it, they'd be telling the truth about it. It shouldn't come as a surprize to anyone that innocent people are being murdered in a war zone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redskins Diehard Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 The fact that they lied should raise suspissions. The rules of engagement basically allow of anything to happen so they shouldn't have to lie about anything.IF the US forces knew it was insurgents who did it, they'd be telling the truth about it. It shouldn't come as a surprize to anyone that innocent people are being murdered in a war zone. Please post the rules of engagement so we can all know what they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webnarc Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Please post the rules of engagement so we can all know what they are. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_engagement http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Operation_Provide_Relief.Rules_of_Engagement.jpg If you want the specifics, please post them when you find them. The thrust of my arguement is that defense is an appropriate justification for killing. Therefore show the actions to be defensive and you are in the clear. This doesn't appear to be happening with this incident. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tizzod Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 This is a VERY touchy situation. I can't imagine what it's like for those Marines out there on the street, fighting someone out of uniform who blends in with regular civilians, thinking literally anyone could be trying to kill them. Their nerves and stress levels must be at the breaking point. I personally believe that no Marine, especially a decent sized group of Marines, are going to line random women and children up against a wall and shoot them. I'm sorry, I just don't see that happening. I realize it did in Vietnam, but this is another day and age. We still have people with consciences, at least one in a group. Hopefully all the facts will come out at some point (yeah, good luck!) and we will know the truth. I just don't see how it would benefit the country and the world for the reporting of it to be slanted against the Marines. That would do tons more harm than good, and I can't figure out why it's continually done. I thought we were all supposed to be on the same side. I believe that facts, good or bad, should ALL be reported, not just the gruesome, supposedly bad stuff all the time. Gruesome, supposedly bad stuff that a lot of times turns out to be embellished. The vast majority of us cannot even come close to imagining what those soldiers are going through day in and day out. As for me, I'm with them, until concrete, cold, hard truth proves to me otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
airborneskins Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_of_engagementhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Operation_Provide_Relief.Rules_of_Engagement.jpg If you want the specifics, please post them when you find them. Your first link didnt show the ROE, however it did define the term. The second link was from 1992. I am sure that we can all agree that the ROE have changed since then. I believe that what Redskins Diehard was stating is that the ROE are not clear for all situations. The commanders can give you ROE based on what he was briefed. Neither you or I know what was briefed and what wasn't. With this situation, an IED was set off on thier convoy. This IED happened to kill one of thier fellow Marines. I dont know if you have ever been in a convoy that was hit by an IED, but I can tell you that It is pretty much CHAOS for the first few minutes after the hit. These Marines did not know where the guy was that set off the IED. I am not saying that The Marines are not at fault here, rather I am saying that you dont know if you would have reacted differently. :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 huh? I support the troops, but I sure as hell won't support them if they have committed massacres. If that makes me unpatriotic or unamerican then so be it. Of course, most of our troops aren't like this even if the reports are true. Presuming that the allegations are true - and we cannot conclusively state that until due process has been completed - then you should edit your statement to say: "I sure as hell won't support this particular group". It's unfortunate that you've - intentionally or not - equivocated these alleged actions with the collective conduct and performance of the entire US military. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Um, are you honestly saying that cold-blooded murder of a dozen unarmed women and children is "just doing their jobs"?!?!?!?!?!You and I appear to have differing opinions of what "their jobs" are. Um, are you the prosecutor, judge, and jury all wrapped into one? Ever heard of due process, Mr. ACLU? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Presuming that the allegations are true - and we cannot conclusively state that until due process has been completed - then you should edit your statement to say: "I sure as hell won't support this particular group". It's unfortunate that you've - intentionally or not - equivocated these alleged actions with the collective conduct and performance of the entire US military.:doh: Your capacity for reading what you want to read is astounding. His last sentence, which you even quoted, clearly distances this group from the rest of the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Your capacity for reading what you want to read is astounding. His last sentence, which you even quoted, clearly distances this group from the rest of the military. No. His statement is poorly worded, and inconclusive. Which is it? I don't support the military any longer due to the alleged actions of 24 Marines or not? I am simply suggesting that he restate it. :doh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 No. His statement is poorly worded, and inconclusive. Which is it? I don't support the military any longer due to the alleged actions of 24 Marines or not? I am simply suggesting that he restate it.:doh: "Of course, most of our troops aren't like this even if the reports are true." That isn't inconclusive Oakton. You should apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thiebear Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 It's a war of occupation. Unfortunately, there are no civilians, really...only Charlies! Wow, Bush administration lying to the American people? You can't be serious!!!!! So once again a journalist reports the news, conservative talk media lambastes them for "fabricating" and then it turns out the journalist is being accurate. Wan't talking to you Liberty... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 I hate BS so I'm going to ask you a straight forward question. Should marines face the punishment (real punishment not a slap on the wrist) for killing innocent civilians without just cause? Yes or No. If they did it without just cause then yes if there was just cause then no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 Presuming that the allegations are true - and we cannot conclusively state that until due process has been completed - then you should edit your statement to say: "I sure as hell won't support this particular group". It's unfortunate that you've - intentionally or not - equivocated these alleged actions with the collective conduct and performance of the entire US military.:doh: Where did you learn to read? Here let me hold your hand and walk you through this "I support the troops, but I sure as hell won't support them if they have committed massacres. " If soldiers committ massacres I won't support them, the vast majority of our soldiers are not like this even if this allegation is true, I even point his out in the next part. "Of course, most of our troops aren't like this even if the reports are true." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 If they did it without just cause then yes if there was just cause then no. Exactly. I agree 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seabee1973 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Um, are you honestly saying that cold-blooded murder of a dozen unarmed women and children is "just doing their jobs"?!?!?!?!?!You and I appear to have differing opinions of what "their jobs" are. And are you so sure they were unarmed? That Marine capt got Aquitted of charges for killing a 10 yr old after the media reported an innocent boy was killed turned out that innocentr boy pointed a gun at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OaktonSkins/BushFan Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Where did you learn to read? From your mamma... "I support the troops, but I sure as hell won't support them if they have committed massacres. "If soldiers committ massacres I won't support them, the vast majority of our soldiers are not like this even if this allegation is true, I even point his out in the next part. "Of course, most of our troops aren't like this even if the reports are true." So, if the 24 are guilty then you will blame the US military in a collective fashion? Or just the 24? It's not my fault that your language lacks definition, and is subject to interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dfitzo53 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 So, if the 24 are guilty then you will blame the US military in a collective fashion? Or just the 24? It's not my fault that your language lacks definition, and is subject to interpretation. I don't understand why you're playing this silly game. You're apparently the only one having any trouble with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosperity Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 I don't understand why you're playing this silly game. You're apparently the only one having any trouble with this. Don't worry about it, he is really not intelligent enough to be worth talking to. Let the baby keep crying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.