is it possible that the military pays out money for individuals killed by accident? Obviously, if this is hush money than you are right, but I think they probably pay people for accidental "collateral damage" as a matter of policy. And with respect to the Timing of the investigation and Time magazine you of all people here should know "post hoc ergo propter hoc."
the marines' initial report said that 15 iraqi civilians died as a result of a gunfight that was started by iraqis. does the us give out money every time iraqi insurgents kill one of their own people?
also, i think us taxpayers wouldn't be thrilled about paying $2,500 for every innocent iraqi civilian death...considering that over 100,000 iraqis have died since the start of the war.
is it possible that the military pays out money for individuals killed by accident? Obviously, if this is hush money than you are right, but I think they probably pay people for accidental "collateral damage" as a matter of policy. And with respect to the Timing of the investigation and Time magazine you of all people here should know "post hoc ergo propter hoc."
the marines' initial report said that 15 iraqi civilians died as a result of a gunfight that was started by iraqis. does the us give out money every time iraqi insurgents kill one of their own people?
also, i think us taxpayers wouldn't be thrilled about paying $2,500 for every innocent iraqi civilian death...considering that over 100,000 iraqis have died since the start of the war.
there was obviously a cover-up. lets move on.
We were taught never to use "obviously" or "clearly" to introduce our arguments, because it generally signals that one's argument is neither.
2) Rape/military - American soldiers, stationed in very peaceful places (let alone Iraq) rape women. Therefore, it should not be difficult, at all, the believe that sexual assault is happening in Iraq - whether of American servicewomen or Iraqi women. The question becomes not one of "is this happening?" but rather "how rampant?"
that was my point up top and why I asked for substantiation of the "US military raping thousands" allegation. I got crickets.
2) Rape/military - American soldiers, stationed in very peaceful places (let alone Iraq) rape women. Therefore, it should not be difficult, at all, the believe that sexual assault is happening in Iraq - whether of American servicewomen or Iraqi women. The question becomes not one of "is this happening?" but rather "how rampant?"
that was my point up top and why I asked for substantiation of the "US military raping thousands" allegation. I got crickets.
who's got time for substantiation? Obviously[/b] americans are clearly[/b] involved with these crimes.
we are talking about an incompetent administration.
what - was this on a talking points memo or something? I thought in light of their own disapproval ratings and scandals the dems shelved this bullet point. Or wait, that was "culture of corruption" wasn't it.
DUDE. I can't beleive I am getting drawn into this.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED OUTSIDE OF THE TOPPLING OF THE TALIBAN (which is already totally unraveled due to incompetence and skewed priorities).
Millions disenfranchised; millions without health care; mounting debt; crumbling public school system and social services; a foolish and deadly military adventure...and a bunch of GOP divorcees and wife-cheaters are currently trying to amend the Constitution to "protect" marriage.
WAKE THE FUCK UP. WHERE ARE YOUR PRIORITIES? PLAESE TO ADMIT COLLOSAL FAILURE OF CURRENT ADMINISTRATION. THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU SO WHY DO YOU SPEND YOUR TIME DEFENDING THEM!?!?!
We were taught never to use "obviously" or "clearly" to introduce our arguments, because it generally signals that one's argument is neither.
touche!! dawg, i'm not trying to get into a battle of the legal wits here. you jumped into this discussion and added your usual limbaugh/o'reilly speak without any factual support. if you wanna have a real debate, then please back up something/anything that you have said.
i'm actually interested in what you have to say, not cause i think you are right, but just because it fucking amazes me that someone with a high level of education actually believes in the bullshit that comes out of the white house. from my experience, anyone who still supports bush does so because they either have a selfish interest in seeing the GOP in office, or they are just plain ignorant about what is going on in the world.
We were taught never to use "obviously" or "clearly" to introduce our arguments, because it generally signals that one's argument is neither.
touche!! dawg, i'm not trying to get into a battle of the legal wits here. you jumped into this discussion and added your usual limbaugh/o'reilly speak without any factual support. if you wanna have a real debate, then please back up something/anything that you have said.
i'm actually interested in what you have to say, not cause i think you are right, but just because it fucking amazes me that someone with a high level of education actually believes in the bullshit that comes out of the white house. from my experience, anyone who still supports bush does so because they either have a selfish interest in seeing the GOP in office, or they are just plain ignorant about what is going on in the world.
that is so wrong. I jumped in because of Miss Bassie's post of that war-crimes "panel of judges" news-item (and I use that term loosely). Im not trying to deny that there may have been a masacre in Haditha, or that there was probably a cover up at some level. I also dont think its fair to characterize anything I've said here as limbaugh/o'reilly. I try to be polite, I'm not agressive about what I think and I dont try to pass myself off as an authority on any topic (except maybe Brazilian music, sorry). I give my opinion and I state that clearly, I don't try to pass off my opinions as fact like many here do, or to cunt-paste rediculous articles as if they were some kind of gospel and then say "see ... see ....this proves that ...."
We were taught never to use "obviously" or "clearly" to introduce our arguments, because it generally signals that one's argument is neither.
touche!! dawg, i'm not trying to get into a battle of the legal wits here. you jumped into this discussion and added your usual limbaugh/o'reilly speak without any factual support. if you wanna have a real debate, then please back up something/anything that you have said.
i'm actually interested in what you have to say, not cause i think you are right, but just because it fucking amazes me that someone with a high level of education actually believes in the bullshit that comes out of the white house. from my experience, anyone who still supports bush does so because they either have a selfish interest in seeing the GOP in office, or they are just plain ignorant about what is going on in the world.
that is so wrong. I jumped in because of Miss Bassie's post of that war-crimes "panel of judges" news-item (and I use that term loosely).
- i'm to blame/thank!
the knee-slapper is we kinda ended up agreeing...kinda
that is so wrong. I jumped in because of Miss Bassie's post of that war-crimes "panel of judges" news-item (and I use that term loosely). Im not trying to deny that there may have been a masacre in Haditha, or that there was probably a cover up at some level. I also dont think its fair to characterize anything I've said here as limbaugh/o'reilly. I try to be polite, I'm not agressive about what I think and I dont try to pass myself off as an authority on any topic (except maybe Brazilian music, sorry). I give my opinion and I state that clearly, I don't try to pass off my opinions as fact like many here do, or to cunt-paste rediculous articles as if they were some kind of gospel and then say "see ... see ....this proves that ...."
you jumped in to the Haditha discussion by dismissing the idea that the govt covered up Haditha. maybe you have a short term memory but your "opinion" was, and i'm paraphrasing (but only slightly), "what did you expect the govt to put this on the front page of the new york times."
okay? and your right, you didnt try to pass off opinions as fact. you just tried to discredit my argument (which was based on facts which i posted in the form of a neutral timeline...not a "ridiculous article") with opinions not based on fact.
i think there was a cover up "at some level" but I just don't think it is some top-down management problem. Yes, one can draw the conclusion that the incident is an indication that the situation is out of control, but I could make the same argument that its an anomaly and that the individuals responsible are being held accountable and will be punished. As for the time line, I don't see a lag of several weeks or even months before making this public as evidence of a systematic cover up.
the military are trained to "break things and kill people" (as I heard a military sociologist describe the other day)
What did this dude get a PhD from the University of Oliver Stone?
That's bullshit. Sure, they are trained to fight wars, but they are also trained, among other things, to stick together under any and all circumstances (e.g. you are only as strong as the weakest in your company).
People in the military are overwhelmingly just like you and me verses somehow having a fundamentally different moral framework as a result of training. Put any of us in these dire situations like Iraq2 or Mogadishu that are/were poorly planned and poorly managed and you'd see some slippage.
Fatback,
He's a Vietnam War vet, teaaches at U Mass. But I think I should have put his quote into better context.
His point is that the military is the "spear" - their job, in Iraq, should have been to go in, defeat the enemy, mission accomplished. However, his point is that a "spear" is not adequately trained to be nation-builders, a policing force or diplomats, all of which the U.S. military, post-occupation, is now expected to be. So I think, in essence, he's completely agreeing with you. He's not saying the Marines are blood thirsty killers - he actually was very much defending the honor of the Corps in the interview I heard him with. He's instead saying the problem you have now is that the Marines were not trained to be an occupying force or nation builders. It's not a question of morality, it's a question of abilities.
by the way, I thought this show of Talk of the Nation addresses a lot of the issues around the connection between Haditha and the Bush Administration. I'm sure some will disagree with some of the conclusions but I think it'd be useful given the debates we're having here now.
And Keith - seriously man, you seem to always let Sabadababa bait you and you end up seeming angry and upset about it and more to the point: wasting your time. Just ignore him or accept that he's going to be a contrarian but honestly, you hurt your own cause by giving him more of a platform to spout whatever it is he's going to spout.
the lag time between something happening and keithvanhorn hearing about it, doesn't equal a cover up. Did you expect the military to take out a full-page ad in the New York Times magazine to tell everyone the day after it happened.
are u serious? stop speaking on topics you don't know shit about.
nov 19- incident happens in haditha after a car bomb kills a us marine.
nov 20- The Marines release a statement saying that insurgents attacked a joint U.S.-Iraqi patrol with small-arms fire after the blast, TRIGGERING A GUNBATTLE that left eight insurgents and 15 Iraqi civilians dead.
- Feb. 14: Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the commander of Multinational Corps Iraq, orders a preliminary investigation.
- March 9: Chiarelli directs further review of the incident by the Naval Criminal Investigation Service.
- March 20: The U.S. military says it's investigating possible misconduct by the Marines and confirms there is a videotape, which Time Magazine says shows the aftermath of the Marines' assault.
Haditha residents tell The Associated Press that American troops entered homes and shot dead 15 members of two families, including a 3-year-old girl, after a roadside bomb killed a U.S. Marine.
- March 21: The video taken by an Iraqi is aired repeatedly by Arab television stations showing bodies of women and children in plastic bags on the floor of what appeared to be a morgue. Men were seen standing in the middle of bodies, some of which were covered with blankets before being placed in a pickup truck.
- April 10: The military says Lt. Col. Jeffrey R. Chessani, Capt.
James S. Kimber and Capt. Lucas M. McConnell have been relieved of their commands in connection with problems in Iraq, including their battalion's actions during a firefight that left 15 Iraqi civilians dead.
- May 17: U.S. Rep. John Murtha says a Pentagon war crimes investigation will show Marines killed more than a dozen innocent Iraqi civilians "in cold blood" in the town of Haditha.
- May 18: Military officials say the criminal investigation into the firefight in Haditha is not complete, but they don't dispute a congressman's charges that the attack by Marines was far worse than originally reported.
So, where is the cover-up? What do you suppose happened between Nov 19 and February 14, do you think that the General just woke up one morning and pulled a preliminary investigation out of his ass? If anything it looks like the individuals involved and maybe some of their immediate officers tried to cover it up.
Better to keep your mouth shout and be thought an idiot than open it and prove it.
When the Marines lie to me and you and the American public and the world about how many people died, who died, and how they died, that is a cover up. That is what a cover up is.
It offends me that my goverment lies to me. That is why I was mad at Clinton over the Lewinsky thing. Clinton was impeached for that. Now you act like killing babies and covering it up is no big deal.
Your total and complete lack of any moral center makes me want to puke.[/b]
We were taught never to use "obviously" or "clearly" to introduce our arguments, because it generally signals that one's argument is neither.
touche!! dawg, i'm not trying to get into a battle of the legal wits here. you jumped into this discussion and added your usual limbaugh/o'reilly speak without any factual support. if you wanna have a real debate, then please back up something/anything that you have said.
i'm actually interested in what you have to say, not cause i think you are right, but just because it fucking amazes me that someone with a high level of education actually believes in the bullshit that comes out of the white house. from my experience, anyone who still supports bush does so because they either have a selfish interest in seeing the GOP in office, or they are just plain ignorant about what is going on in the world.
that is so wrong. I jumped in because of Miss Bassie's post of that war-crimes "panel of judges" news-item (and I use that term loosely). Im not trying to deny that there may have been a masacre in Haditha, or that there was probably a cover up at some level. I also dont think its fair to characterize anything I've said here as limbaugh/o'reilly. I try to be polite, I'm not agressive about what I think and I dont try to pass myself off as an authority on any topic (except maybe Brazilian music, sorry). I give my opinion and I state that clearly, I don't try to pass off my opinions as fact like many here do, or to cunt-paste rediculous articles as if they were some kind of gospel and then say "see ... see ....this proves that ...."[/b]
So your opinions are not based on facts. That explains a lot.
i think there was a cover up "at some level" but I just don't think it is some top-down management problem. One thing that bothers me about GW Bush and his supporters is your hatred for our military.
You don't think that any Civilian in this administration could be involved in a cover up. You don't think any military brass could be involved in a cover up.
You think that only the lowly troops you all hate so much must have done it.
Those troops you don't think should have proper body or vehicle armour.
In your world view it is them that have screwed things up in Iraq.
They were working on their own at Abu Garib according to you.
I heard Bush say at his press conference that he has talked to the families of the "kids" who have died in Iraq. KIDS![/] Bush thinks kids are dying in Iraq. The average age of those killed in Iraq is 27. They likely are married and have children. Yet you guys dismiss them as just kids.
I have just one question about this whole thing....
If the media in our country is overwhelmingly Conservative...
And the Bush Administration controls what they report..
Why would Time Magazine print this story....even if it was 6 months after it happened?
Why would they EVER print it??
Are they an Independent, Un-Biased or Liberal magazine???
Or are they just not under the control of the Bush Administration??
And before the obligatory "I know how you think" bullshit begins let me say this.
I support our SOLDIERS and hope they can accomplish what they have been charged to do with minimal death and bloodshed on both sides.
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum.
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
Killing innocent, un-armed non-combatants should be treated the same way.
Having our government report that these scumbag soldiers committed heinous crimes can be a difficult and sensitive endeavor for both the morale of the other troops and the support of the citizens of both America and Iraq.
If our governemnt "covered up" these crimes in the Media, BUT arrested, tried and doled out appropriate punishment for these criminals I would not have much of a problem with it.
If these crimes were covered up and condoned by our Government I'd be ashamed and angry.
Our government, unlike any of our enemies, has shown they are willing to try and punish their own soldiers.
I have just one question about this whole thing....
If the media in our country is overwhelmingly Conservative...
And the Bush Administration controls what they report..
Why would Time Magazine print this story....even if it was 6 months after it happened?
Why would they EVER print it??
Are they an Independent, Un-Biased or Liberal magazine???
Or are they just not under the control of the Bush Administration??
The Right swears up and down that the mainstream media is in the hands of the Left. The Left swears up and down that the mainstream media is in the hands of the Right.
It's just a lot more complicated than suggesting that the media is anyone's pocket. At any given time, with any given story, you can spin the media in either direction. That's not enough to base an iron clad accusation on.
I have just one question about this whole thing....
If the media in our country is overwhelmingly Conservative...
And the Bush Administration controls what they report..
Why would Time Magazine print this story....even if it was 6 months after it happened?
Why would they EVER print it??
Are they an Independent, Un-Biased or Liberal magazine???
Or are they just not under the control of the Bush Administration??
The Right swears up and down that the mainstream media is in the hands of the Left. The Left swears up and down that the mainstream media is in the hands of the Right.
It's just a lot more complicated than suggesting that the media is anyone's pocket. At any given time, with any given story, you can spin the media in either direction. That's not enough to base an iron clad accusation on.
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum.
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
This is what I am talking about. When soldiers are placed in impossible situations, and receive inadequate leadership, bad things are bound to happen.
Instead of realizing that and placing the blame with leadership where it belongs you attack the troops.
The marines were on patrol in a very hostile area. They were not given proper support or armour. One of their own died. Some snapped and went house to house killing everyone. With proper support and leadership this may have been avoided. The official reports covered all this up.
Instead of blaming those responsible for our troops you blame the troops. Your explanation is that they must be Black just like the street gangs in American cities. A convenient way to give the military brass and civilian leadership an easy pass.
Try supporting the troops, and not the chicken hawks.
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum.
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
Instead of blaming those responsible for our troops you blame the troops. Your explanation is that they must be Black just like the street gangs in American cities. A convenient way to give the military brass and civilian leadership an easy pass.
WHAT!!!!! The city I live in has Black, Hispanic, Asian and Aryan street gangs!!
Your statement that... "My explanation that they must be Black"[/b] is offensive and a lie.....sort of like the lies that you claim offends YOU when our Government spews them.
And to make excuses for criminal behavior by saying the Leadership "MAY" have failed is absolute bullshit.
Are you saying that these soldiers didn't KNOW that killing and raping innocent people was wrong??
And that poor leadership drove them to commit heinous crimes??
I would be hard pressed to believe that US soldiers are raping Iraqi women for the following reasons:
1) Iraq is not like any other major combat situation the U.S. has been involved in to my knowledge. This is not like Vietnam where US soldiers actively congregate in civilian areas during their time off. US soldiers are in their camps/forts or out in the field doing force protection or counterinsurgency sweeps most of the time. Iraqi civilian areas are VERY dangerous for any American soldiers or otherwise right now. The Green Zone in Baghdad might be the only place where soldiers could congregate with Iraqi women.
2) If Iraqi women had been raped it would've probably been made public through 1) The internet by Sunni insurgents who have extensive web networks boasting about their activities if it had been Sunni women, 2) If it were Shiites the various militias would've probably gotten involved.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I very much doubt it.
There are accusations that Iraqi women detained at Abu Gharib were raped by U.S. servicemen but the source of the story is questionable at best since they suggest that photos of the rape (a gang rape at that) have been circulated in collusion with, I quote, "USA Jewish pornographers."
I would be hard pressed to believe that US soldiers are raping Iraqi women for the following reasons:
1) Iraq is not like any other major combat situation the U.S. has been involved in to my knowledge. This is not like Vietnam where US soldiers actively congregate in civilian areas during their time off. US soldiers are in their camps/forts or out in the field doing force protection or counterinsurgency sweeps most of the time. Iraqi civilian areas are VERY dangerous for any American soldiers or otherwise right now. The Green Zone in Baghdad might be the only place where soldiers could congregate with Iraqi women.
2) If Iraqi women had been raped it would've probably been made public through 1) The internet by Sunni insurgents who have extensive web networks boasting about their activities if it had been Sunni women, 2) If it were Shiites the various militias would've probably gotten involved.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I very much doubt it.
Motown.......If our enemy wanted to create propaganda that would make our troops look bad.....how would/could they do it??
There are accusations that Iraqi women detained at Abu Gharib were raped by U.S. servicemen but the source of the story is questionable at best since they suggest that photos of the rape (a gang rape at that) have been circulated in collusion with, I quote, "USA Jewish pornographers."
And you best believe that there is some idiot somewhere on the Internet right now making an argument and using the above story as one of their "facts".
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum.
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
Instead of blaming those responsible for our troops you blame the troops. Your explanation is that they must be Black just like the street gangs in American cities. A convenient way to give the military brass and civilian leadership an easy pass.
WHAT!!!!! The city I live in has Black, Hispanic, Asian and Aryan street gangs!!
Your statement that... "My explanation that they must be Black"[/b] is offensive and a lie.....sort of like the lies that you claim offends YOU when our Government spews them.
And to make excuses for criminal behavior by saying the Leadership "MAY" have failed is absolute bullshit.
Are you saying that these soldiers didn't KNOW that killing and raping innocent people was wrong??
And that poor leadership drove them to commit heinous crimes??
Friggin amazing!! Good point about the street gangs. I will retract that unfair attack and offer my apologies. It was not nice. I was angry.
It is not bullshit to say that there was a failure of leadership in Haditha specifically and Iraq in general. It is bullshit to say that there was not. No one's life is more controlled than a soldier. Soldiers who commit crimes while on duty, as in Haditha or Abu Garib, are victims of failure of leadership.
I am saying that leadership allowed and covered up the killing of innocents in Haditha. I am saying that the leadership encouraged the rape and abuse of prisoners at Abu Garib.
I do not believe that you would truly believe that our troops are out of control street gangs who signed up for the military so that they could rape and kill because they love raping and killing.
Unlike Shabadaba, my beliefs are based on facts. It is known that stress, poor support and poor leadership will lead to the events we have witnessed. I have never heard that US street gangs are joining the army so they can rape and murder. Sounds like something you got from Bill Oreilly.
You do a disservice to humanity when you confuse war crimes with street crimes. They are not the same.
If you support the troops, like you say you do, you wouldn't blame them for the crimes of their superiors.
beautiful, the race card gets played - completely out of context - which serves to both weaken your argument here, as well as the issue of race. By the way, I believe the majority of combat troops are white.
Comments
also, i think us taxpayers wouldn't be thrilled about paying $2,500 for every innocent iraqi civilian death...considering that over 100,000 iraqis have died since the start of the war.
there was obviously a cover-up. lets move on.
We were taught never to use "obviously" or "clearly" to introduce our arguments, because it generally signals that one's argument is neither.
that was my point up top and why I asked for substantiation of the "US military raping thousands" allegation. I got crickets.
who's got time for substantiation? Obviously[/b] americans are clearly[/b] involved with these crimes.
DUDE. I can't beleive I am getting drawn into this.
PLAESE TO NAME ONE GOOD THING THIS ADMINISTRATION HAS ACCOMPLISHED OUTSIDE OF THE TOPPLING OF THE TALIBAN (which is already totally unraveled due to incompetence and skewed priorities).
Millions disenfranchised; millions without health care; mounting debt; crumbling public school system and social services; a foolish and deadly military adventure...and a bunch of GOP divorcees and wife-cheaters are currently trying to amend the Constitution to "protect" marriage.
WAKE THE FUCK UP. WHERE ARE YOUR PRIORITIES? PLAESE TO ADMIT COLLOSAL FAILURE OF CURRENT ADMINISTRATION. THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU SO WHY DO YOU SPEND YOUR TIME DEFENDING THEM!?!?!
touche!! dawg, i'm not trying to get into a battle of the legal wits here. you jumped into this discussion and added your usual limbaugh/o'reilly speak without any factual support. if you wanna have a real debate, then please back up something/anything that you have said.
i'm actually interested in what you have to say, not cause i think you are right, but just because it fucking amazes me that someone with a high level of education actually believes in the bullshit that comes out of the white house. from my experience, anyone who still supports bush does so because they either have a selfish interest in seeing the GOP in office, or they are just plain ignorant about what is going on in the world.
that is so wrong. I jumped in because of Miss Bassie's post of that war-crimes "panel of judges" news-item (and I use that term loosely). Im not trying to deny that there may have been a masacre in Haditha, or that there was probably a cover up at some level. I also dont think its fair to characterize anything I've said here as limbaugh/o'reilly. I try to be polite, I'm not agressive about what I think and I dont try to pass myself off as an authority on any topic (except maybe Brazilian music, sorry). I give my opinion and I state that clearly, I don't try to pass off my opinions as fact like many here do, or to cunt-paste rediculous articles as if they were some kind of gospel and then say "see ... see ....this proves that ...."
the knee-slapper is we kinda ended up agreeing...kinda
you jumped in to the Haditha discussion by dismissing the idea that the govt covered up Haditha. maybe you have a short term memory but your "opinion" was, and i'm paraphrasing (but only slightly), "what did you expect the govt to put this on the front page of the new york times."
okay? and your right, you didnt try to pass off opinions as fact. you just tried to discredit my argument (which was based on facts which i posted in the form of a neutral timeline...not a "ridiculous article") with opinions not based on fact.
Fatback,
He's a Vietnam War vet, teaaches at U Mass. But I think I should have put his quote into better context.
His point is that the military is the "spear" - their job, in Iraq, should have been to go in, defeat the enemy, mission accomplished. However, his point is that a "spear" is not adequately trained to be nation-builders, a policing force or diplomats, all of which the U.S. military, post-occupation, is now expected to be. So I think, in essence, he's completely agreeing with you. He's not saying the Marines are blood thirsty killers - he actually was very much defending the honor of the Corps in the interview I heard him with. He's instead saying the problem you have now is that the Marines were not trained to be an occupying force or nation builders. It's not a question of morality, it's a question of abilities.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5442144
And Keith - seriously man, you seem to always let Sabadababa bait you and you end up seeming angry and upset about it and more to the point: wasting your time. Just ignore him or accept that he's going to be a contrarian but honestly, you hurt your own cause by giving him more of a platform to spout whatever it is he's going to spout.
Better to keep your mouth shout and be thought an idiot than open it and prove it.
When the Marines lie to me and you and the American public and the world about how many people died, who died, and how they died, that is a cover up. That is what a cover up is.
It offends me that my goverment lies to me. That is why I was mad at Clinton over the Lewinsky thing. Clinton was impeached for that. Now you act like killing babies and covering it up is no big deal.
Your total and complete lack of any moral center makes me want to puke.[/b]
So your opinions are not based on facts. That explains a lot.
One thing that bothers me about GW Bush and his supporters is your hatred for our military.
You don't think that any Civilian in this administration could be involved in a cover up. You don't think any military brass could be involved in a cover up.
You think that only the lowly troops you all hate so much must have done it.
Those troops you don't think should have proper body or vehicle armour.
In your world view it is them that have screwed things up in Iraq.
They were working on their own at Abu Garib according to you.
I heard Bush say at his press conference that he has talked to the families of the "kids" who have died in Iraq. KIDS![/] Bush thinks kids are dying in Iraq. The average age of those killed in Iraq is 27. They likely are married and have children. Yet you guys dismiss them as just kids.
You make me sick.
If the media in our country is overwhelmingly Conservative...
And the Bush Administration controls what they report..
Why would Time Magazine print this story....even if it was 6 months after it happened?
Why would they EVER print it??
Are they an Independent, Un-Biased or Liberal magazine???
Or are they just not under the control of the Bush Administration??
And before the obligatory "I know how you think" bullshit begins let me say this.
I support our SOLDIERS and hope they can accomplish what they have been charged to do with minimal death and bloodshed on both sides.
Some soldiers, like any gathering of humans, are scum.
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
Killing innocent, un-armed non-combatants should be treated the same way.
Having our government report that these scumbag soldiers committed heinous crimes can be a difficult and sensitive endeavor for both the morale of the other troops and the support of the citizens of both America and Iraq.
If our governemnt "covered up" these crimes in the Media, BUT arrested, tried and doled out appropriate punishment for these criminals I would not have much of a problem with it.
If these crimes were covered up and condoned by our Government I'd be ashamed and angry.
Our government, unlike any of our enemies, has shown they are willing to try and punish their own soldiers.
The Right swears up and down that the mainstream media is in the hands of the Left. The Left swears up and down that the mainstream media is in the hands of the Right.
It's just a lot more complicated than suggesting that the media is anyone's pocket. At any given time, with any given story, you can spin the media in either direction. That's not enough to base an iron clad accusation on.
Agreed
There have been reports of members of American Street Gangs infiltrating our Armed Forces and perpetuating the same crimes in Iraq that they do in our cities.
Any soldier who rapes anyone/thing should be tried as a criminal in the U.S. Court System.
This is what I am talking about. When soldiers are placed in impossible situations, and receive inadequate leadership, bad things are bound to happen.
Instead of realizing that and placing the blame with leadership where it belongs you attack the troops.
The marines were on patrol in a very hostile area. They were not given proper support or armour. One of their own died. Some snapped and went house to house killing everyone. With proper support and leadership this may have been avoided. The official reports covered all this up.
Instead of blaming those responsible for our troops you blame the troops. Your explanation is that they must be Black just like the street gangs in American cities. A convenient way to give the military brass and civilian leadership an easy pass.
Try supporting the troops, and not the chicken hawks.
Instead of blaming those responsible for our troops you blame the troops. Your explanation is that they must be Black just like the street gangs in American cities. A convenient way to give the military brass and civilian leadership an easy pass.
WHAT!!!!! The city I live in has Black, Hispanic, Asian and Aryan street gangs!!
Your statement that... "My explanation that they must be Black"[/b] is offensive and a lie.....sort of like the lies that you claim offends YOU when our Government spews them.
And to make excuses for criminal behavior by saying the Leadership "MAY" have failed is absolute bullshit.
Are you saying that these soldiers didn't KNOW that killing and raping innocent people was wrong??
And that poor leadership drove them to commit heinous crimes??
Friggin amazing!!
1) Iraq is not like any other major combat situation the U.S. has been involved in to my knowledge. This is not like Vietnam where US soldiers actively congregate in civilian areas during their time off. US soldiers are in their camps/forts or out in the field doing force protection or counterinsurgency sweeps most of the time. Iraqi civilian areas are VERY dangerous for any American soldiers or otherwise right now. The Green Zone in Baghdad might be the only place where soldiers could congregate with Iraqi women.
2) If Iraqi women had been raped it would've probably been made public through 1) The internet by Sunni insurgents who have extensive web networks boasting about their activities if it had been Sunni women, 2) If it were Shiites the various militias would've probably gotten involved.
I'm not saying it couldn't happen, but I very much doubt it.
Motown.......If our enemy wanted to create propaganda that would make our troops look bad.....how would/could they do it??
And you best believe that there is some idiot somewhere on the Internet right now making an argument and using the above story as one of their "facts".
WHAT!!!!! The city I live in has Black, Hispanic, Asian and Aryan street gangs!!
Your statement that... "My explanation that they must be Black"[/b] is offensive and a lie.....sort of like the lies that you claim offends YOU when our Government spews them.
And to make excuses for criminal behavior by saying the Leadership "MAY" have failed is absolute bullshit.
Are you saying that these soldiers didn't KNOW that killing and raping innocent people was wrong??
And that poor leadership drove them to commit heinous crimes??
Friggin amazing!!
Good point about the street gangs. I will retract that unfair attack and offer my apologies. It was not nice. I was angry.
It is not bullshit to say that there was a failure of leadership in Haditha specifically and Iraq in general. It is bullshit to say that there was not. No one's life is more controlled than a soldier. Soldiers who commit crimes while on duty, as in Haditha or Abu Garib, are victims of failure of leadership.
I am saying that leadership allowed and covered up the killing of innocents in Haditha. I am saying that the leadership encouraged the rape and abuse of prisoners at Abu Garib.
I do not believe that you would truly believe that our troops are out of control street gangs who signed up for the military so that they could rape and kill because they love raping and killing.
Unlike Shabadaba, my beliefs are based on facts. It is known that stress, poor support and poor leadership will lead to the events we have witnessed. I have never heard that US street gangs are joining the army so they can rape and murder. Sounds like something you got from Bill Oreilly.
You do a disservice to humanity when you confuse war crimes with street crimes. They are not the same.
If you support the troops, like you say you do, you wouldn't blame them for the crimes of their superiors.
Again, I apologize for implying you are racist.
I hate cellphones too!