Fresh US War Crime : Marines kill four wounded iraqi prisoners !!

i read the article...since he filmed one incident..i guess everything ELSE he SAYS will be taken as the truth..the japs booby trapped their dead and they would 'fake' surrender.....how do you think they were treated??? what would the public say if u.s.troops made surrendering iraq troops strip down to thier underwear before they got within 20yards of u.s.troops???standard practice in WW2....no calls for heads to roll back then...has something changed???

drbryankkruta- I didn't understand just what you were getting at, but my main thrust is that war is a nasty and brutish business...you kill your enemy before he has the chance to kill you...it really is as simple as that - kill or be killed. It is within that context that I made my post (indeed all of my posts).

Originally posted by Amuk

Originally posted by drbryankkruta
Look I have lived with vets from every single war of the modern post 1940s military and even those from nam say this is a crime.

I have been in Combat and if I thought that wounded man was the SLIGHTEST threat to me or ANYONE else I would have killed him in a second. As has been mentioned several times it easy to sit in your home and pass Judgement on the acts of scared children In the middle of something you would NEVER understand unless you have been there

So in effect since I am repeating the words told to me by your fello vets isnt
good enough very fine then the vets are lying to me I guess, now are you willing to call your fello vets liers, these are crimes , these soldiers knew they were crimes and pulled the trigger anyway hense the editting of videos in modern battles field coverage and the cover ups that follow or better yet those that people are deprived of seeing cause they knew crimes where going to happen and media wasnt allowed to be there to document. Sounds like a plan to me, hell I'm not a vet of combat and I have Navy recruiting experience but I'm setting at home judging fine with me, If that works for you and everyone else then let the murders keep going on on your watch but, while I breath they wont go un-contested on my watch. They teach all of us Honor, Duty, and Pride......criminal behavior was nowheres in that training period......

My husband, an ex marine, says that during VietNam, this never happened. If the enemy was wounded and wasnt armed they would help them and he never heard of anyone killing point blank someone who was hurt and unarmed.
Guess times have changed since then

I will repeat what I said

IF I THOUGHT THE GUY WAS A THREAT I WOULD HAVE KILLED HIM IN A SECOND.

If they KNEW he wasnt a threat then yes it was a crime. If I was unsure I would have shot him.

You never answered my question,

If the last two or three wounded were booby trapped and killed those who tried to help them WOULD YOU HELP THE NEXT ONE?

Why do you not place ANY blame on those booby trapping the wounded?

Originally posted by ZeroDeep
Does anyone read the links?

In his report, Sites said the man who was killed didn't appear to be armed or threatening in any way, with no weapons visible in the mosque.

Sites said he saw the marine raise his rifle and fire point blank at the head of a man, who was slumped against a wall in a mosque.

Once again, we are getting more and more reports of war crimes, and these puesdo-patriots will howl in thier defence no matter the circumstance with some subjective dogma of 'war fare pysche'.

How do you justify war-crimes in Abu Ghraib ? Were those thousands of pictures do to pyscological trauma?

We are condemning soldiers who commite these crimes, simple as that.

Deep

Come, on this is no war crime. He was an enemy combatatant and was treated as one. Nothing wrong with it. What war crimes in Abu Gharib. Actually that prison was too much of a good place for them to be in my opinion. They should have been shot on the spot.

I will have to agree with some of the other posters here. This is war. Whether we like it or not are warriors have to make some tuff choices. Do you take that chance and get that close to the enemy and than he blows himself up killing your friends and yourself or do you take him out. I myself would take him out. You can say that is harsh, but thats the way war is. I have friends that were SF in vietnam and they ran into the same things. You know what they did they took them out. This is not a conventional war. This is a gorilla war. Things are not nice. They don't play by the rules so we have to adjust to their tactics, if you don't you lose. That means alot more of our warriors coming home in bodybags. Thats not something I want to see more of. We know this war was wrong, but we are there now and we just can't walk away and say see ya later. We owe it to the the people there to finish what we started and help them rebuild their country, since we are blowing it to pieces. imo

Originally posted by Amuk
I will repeat what I said
...............

forget it amuk your making a point to someone who reads minds....knows exactly what they are thinking and everything...must be those four degrees kicking in. Let�s see four degrees close to the fifth; navy recruiter.....knows what everyone is thinking. even more important he's a sme he lived with some people who knew the guy that saw something once. Hey at least he's not like a few of the other posters who just got finished defending an admitted war criminal, and now they are flipping around.....but they support the troops, wait I think I can hear the spittle warming up as I write.


[edit on 18-11-2004 by keholmes]

Originally posted by Amuk
You never answered my question,

If the last two or three wounded were booby trapped and killed those who tried to help them WOULD YOU HELP THE NEXT ONE?

Why do you not place ANY blame on those booby trapping the wounded?

Yes , and if the goverment would use those explosive dogs they have over their to do a clearing then this would greatly minimize the deaths of our boys and the person who was unable to prevent themselves from getting bombs planted on them, yes their are some who do want to kill one more soldier before they die but this was not the case that man was obviously unable to move and bearly breathing and was sitting up and visably not armed and bledding thru the nose and mouth indicating internal hemoraging this man was that was killed by four soldiers was murdered period.

drbryankkruta-

I am still having a problem figuring out just what it is you are saying, but I will repeat my theme, which is that US forces should kill as many insurgents as possible, as efficiently as possible, as rapidly as possible, and with no regrets whatsoever.

Originally posted by SgtNFury
drbryankkruta-

I am still having a problem figuring out just what it is you are saying, but I will repeat my theme, which is that US forces should kill as many insurgents as possible, as efficiently as possible, as rapidly as possible, and with no regrets whatsoever.

My statement is to point out as you lay it out with no further description negates the possibility of taking prisoners or allowing wounded insurgents to continue living when they cant fight anymore.....you are to set on killing the concept of war is to resolve issues by the violence that has been forced. but if the violence stops from one party the way you state it they should be killed any way and spat on afterwards, rules of engagement are what Im trying to get you to realize in your them you just keep avoiding it.

SCREW rules of engagement..The enemy we are fighting knows no rules and doesn't fight by ours..What do they do with our wounded? Drag them through the street, disembowl them, Hang em, burn em, CUT THEIR HEAD OFF? Geez that marine gave him the easy way out if you ask me..

Originally posted by seraph
SCREW rules of engagement..The enemy we are fighting knows no rules and doesn't fight by ours..What do they do with our wounded? Drag them through the street, disembowl them, Hang em, burn em, CUT THEIR HEAD OFF? Geez that marine gave him the easy way out if you ask me..

And this is the exact reason we have soldiers in prison right now, these peopleno matter their actions have the right to survive when they are not a direct threat to your life. If they are unable to survive without help as human beings we are required by God and common human laws to offer aid, If they are bound blind folded and chained it is required by God and human law that we dont harm them, even God at times has condoned war, but only as far as you kill those who are trying to kill you, I dont think he made an ammendment to the Ten basic laws he gave us that allows us to not try to save lives even in war. He said forgiveness and dont not murder.

If you hate he says you are wrong as well, under your and your fello supporters of kill em all you are not keeping with the Laws of God or man and , murder is the killing of a person without cause, a wounded and helpless person does not offer cause they cant do anything. If they are surrendering and already prisoners then the other offenses also offer not cause for death, torture, and sexual assault. These are the laws in fact the military swore to uphold and if they violate the laws why are we fighting to keep those laws active in the world if they want to kill like this or abuse like this and sexually assault like this then they shouldnt have sworn to uphold the laws, they should be here with the others of us not fortunate enough to be able to be serving right now to uphold the laws, and believe me I wish I was able to go, but can not, even as a Chaplain I would safely say if a threat came to me I would respond with the same or greater force.


I would not however soil the country name and people I swore to serve by doing crap like people like you and others seem to justify despite the violation of laws.






[edit on 19/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

SCREW rules of engagement..The enemy we are fighting knows no rules and doesn't fight by ours..What do they do with our wounded? Drag them through the street, disembowl them, Hang em, burn em, CUT THEIR HEAD OFF? Geez that marine gave him the easy way out if you ask me

After reading this statement and realizing your Sig name, Amitabha, i'am quite confused? Since when does someone ask for Buddha to bless you, then make such violent remarks as this?

........

And after all of Shakyamuni Buddha Sutra's regarding the great virtues of Amitabha, the name is used in such context.

I think the good Dr has done a good job in conveying the fact that this "insurgent" was unarmed and not a threat, no need for further commentary.

Deep

Yes , and if the goverment would use those explosive dogs they have over their to do a clearing then this would greatly minimize the deaths of our boys and the person who was unable to prevent themselves from getting bombs planted on them, yes their are some who do want to kill one more soldier before they die but this was not the case that man was obviously unable to move and bearly breathing and was sitting up and visably not armed and bledding thru the nose and mouth indicating internal hemoraging this man was that was killed by four soldiers was murdered period.

Unable to prevent having a bomb on them, what world do you live on? Sucide bombing is a freaking sport over there

So the ones that booby trap the wounded have NO BLAME whatsoever? Those that pretend to surrender and then ambush are blameless to I guess, hell I guess that old woman shot herself in the back of the head JUST to make them look bad, right?

I am glad you could instantly tell that the man was unarmed wounded and barely alive and could not pose any threat whatsoever from a 20 second film clip.

To be honest I dont give a # what God wants If I think he's a threat he's dead. You are more than welcome to go through a war zone full of dead and dying some booby traped and some not checking wounded and dead. Sense you can instantly determine with 100% accuracy not only the health status but whither the man is armed or not or booby trapped or not I am sure you would be a welcome addition to any squad. Of course when you make that FIRST mistake they will be shipping you home in a bag. Hopefully you dont get your squad mates killed in the process.

[edit on 19-11-2004 by Amuk]

Originally posted by ZeroDeep


I think the good Dr has done a good job in conveying the fact that this "insurgent" was unarmed and not a threat, no need for further commentary.

Deep

Thank you, Zero I wasn't trying to get praise on anything , but I am glad that someone can see what I am tryig to say. I wish those who show reverance for th kill them all policy could understand me as well.

I think our soldiers are very good for the greater part so you military guys have my praise, love and respect for the hard decisions you make to take lives when they are justified, it those who kill without justification that harm us all with their betrayal of their oath and their duty as human beings.

I would sadly say, that unfortunately the good done here by the freeing of people from dictators and terrorist will be scared by the sins of a few who got caught up in their own fowlabilities. I for one am sadden for those who are trying to do the right thing being forgotten for the favor of the ill conceptions of war that has cause so many injustices. I hope to keep reminding people that the few that feel and act this way dont over shadow those who are just and trying to do a hard task the right way ,


GOD Bless those would serve with pride, dignity, and honor, and realize that murder is not war, abuse and rape are not war. Keep up the good work those of you who dont act the way those who have samed all man kind have. And go safely thru your difficult duties and come home in one piece and alive, we miss you all.

Originally posted by Amuk
How many of these do you think we have? One per squad? Platoon? Company? Should the advance be stoped while you bring a dog to sniff every wounded or dead?

Quite honestly I would go as far as one for every 4 squads which is no where near enough but, can you say that this is a bad idea as opposed to murder out of fear of being blown up by someone who might be blowing up while you treat them. I think the pace that I have seen at the time of this killing was not hastened enough that more care should have been given to verify the person was not a bomb. If no dog is availible leave one or two medics who would like to volunteer to check it out and have everyone else to stand at a safe distance, one medic can train a gun on the suspect for cover and do a head shot if hostile movement happens while the other treats and checks for ordanence....both of these ideas are far better than murder.

If the Insurgents dont want there wounded shot the best way to insure that is not to fake surrendering and then blowing themselves up and booby traping there dead and wounded. Till they stop this screw them AND there wounded.

This is true to a point but it is our obligation to try to spare lives if we can despite the callus views of people who dont even try to extract their wounded for treatment, they are the murderers for placing the boms , we should not lower ourselves to their level.

If the last couple wounded you saw were booby trapped and killed those that tried to help would YOU try to help the next one?

YES without question, it is my moral spiritual and legal obligation to preserve life if even I am trying to save the enemys life.

[edit on 19/11/2004 by drbryankkruta]

A violent remark? Hardly..

Simply stating the obvious, The insurgents are not fighting by our rules! Our soldiers are in a combat zone and are on pins and needles, and are a bit jumpy with the tactics the insurgents are using. The soldiers out there are merely trying to survive, and not be the next casualty of war on the 9 o'clock news.

Now if the Marine shot that person KNOWING he was unarmed or perhaps trying to surrender..HE IS WRONG..But we don't know that. That is why there is an investigation. I'll wait until an official report, and UNTIL then in my eyes, he is a soldier trying to survive. While some of you are ready to Hang him for that simply amazes me and at the same time act as if you do not see the atrocities commited by the other side. Wow.

It's so easy, as an earlier poster mentioned, to sit here and play armchair general in our nice cozy homes and pass judgement on their actions..while they are the ones being shot at risking their lives in a hostile environment. Must be nice.

Originally posted by seraph
Now if the Marine shot that person KNOWING he was unarmed or perhaps trying to surrender..HE IS WRONG..But we don't know that. That is why there is an investigation. I'll wait until an official report, and UNTIL then in my eyes, he is a soldier trying to survive. While some of you are ready to Hang him for that simply amazes me and at the same time act as if you do not see the atrocities commited by the other side. Wow.

It's so easy, as an earlier poster mentioned, to sit here and play armchair general in our nice cozy homes and pass judgement on their actions..while they are the ones being shot at risking their lives in a hostile environment. Must be nice.

Okay then you need to look more closely I saw the man slumped to his left slightly unresponsive and if you look closer he has obvious signs of internal injuryies with heavy hemoraging coming from the nose and mouth . Now look even closer you can see the blood from the nose if mimicking an arterial bleed out where in as the heart pumps a steady flow of blood is discharged on contraction of the heart an slows when exspansion of the heart, now add to that the man made no hostile action even as he was seconds from being shot even though those around him had a hostile intent in their tone and didnt even attempt to attack as the first shot rang out, which should have been instinctive for someone who had planned to kill someone with himself.

Now the biggest note to an unjust kill , no explosive were mentioned or shown to justify the kill, in past history they have always been more than glad to provide visual proof on kills where in a wounded person was killed before he could kill someone with his bomb.

Or how about this , in my training I was taught if you head shot someone and dont hit the base of the brain stem in the first shot , your dead because the instant reaction in death is contraction of the muscles of the extremities, and again if the person was intending to blow himself and others up it is very unlikely that the person hit by luck just the right place on the first shot and yet there was no explosion IE no trigger device was held in the hand of the victim, there is an acception to the no head shot policy, if an armed person has a gun with a finger on the trigger or on a bomb trigger and is unconscious the body does not respond the same way. if the body is in an unconscious state it is less likely to respond at all it draws to fetal more likely than anythings else.

So again the unconscious state leads us back to a crime again killing an unarmed, not threatening wounded person who was unable to defend himself and that leads to murder.

Originally posted by drbryankkruta

Originally posted by seraph
Now if the Marine shot that person KNOWING he was unarmed or perhaps trying to surrender..HE IS WRONG..But we don't know that. That is why there is an investigation. I'll wait until an official report, and UNTIL then in my eyes, he is a soldier trying to survive. While some of you are ready to Hang him for that simply amazes me and at the same time act as if you do not see the atrocities commited by the other side. Wow.

It's so easy, as an earlier poster mentioned, to sit here and play armchair general in our nice cozy homes and pass judgement on their actions..while they are the ones being shot at risking their lives in a hostile environment. Must be nice.

Okay then you need to look more closely I saw the man slumped to his left slightly unresponsive and if you look closer he has obvious signs of internal injuryies with heavy hemoraging coming from the nose and mouth . Now look even closer you can see the blood from the nose if mimicking an arterial bleed out where in as the heart pumps a steady flow of blood is discharged on contraction of the heart an slows when exspansion of the heart, now add to that the man made no hostile action even as he was seconds from being shot even though those around him had a hostile intent in their tone and didnt even attempt to attack as the first shot rang out, which should have been instinctive for someone who had planned to kill someone with himself.

Now the biggest note to an unjust kill , no explosive were mentioned or shown to justify the kill, in past history they have always been more than glad to provide visual proof on kills where in a wounded person was killed before he could kill someone with his bomb.

Or how about this , in my training I was taught if you head shot someone and dont hit the base of the brain stem in the first shot , your dead because the instant reaction in death is contraction of the muscles of the extremities, and again if the person was intending to blow himself and others up it is very unlikely that the person hit by luck just the right place on the first shot and yet there was no explosion IE no trigger device was held in the hand of the victim, there is an acception to the no head shot policy, if an armed person has a gun with a finger on the trigger or on a bomb trigger and is unconscious the body does not respond the same way. if the body is in an unconscious state it is less likely to respond at all it draws to fetal more likely than anythings else.

So again the unconscious state leads us back to a crime again killing an unarmed, not threatening wounded person who was unable to defend himself and that leads to murder.

Now if your report is true..Which seems you've done some research (just went back and read some previous posts)..THEN the actions of the Marine is WRONG!

Now I'm not a Kill em Kill em all advocate..If this mess in the MiddleEast can somehow be fixed through non-violent means then I'm all for it..But the way things are going and there hatred towards the U.S. seems to grow everyday, it doesn't seem like it's going to happen anytime soon.. I just pray that the soldiers out there fighting return home safely. They have my support!