PDA

View Full Version : Support the Troops: Charge them with murder?


Ugly Duck
06-25-2006, 12:01 PM
WTF? This is how we support our troops? 7 marines & 1 navy guy charged with friggin murder? I'm agin it.... dishonorable discharge - yes, murder charges - no. We trained these guyz to kill. Then we stuck them in the middle of a sectarian guerilla war in a city full of people where they can't tell who is who. The seemingly innocent can turn around and shoot them in the back. In a climate like that, there will be fuggups. Troops will overreact and break rules of engagement. Anomolies to the engagement plan should be expected. When it happens, the culprits should be disciplined, punished, kicked out. But to bring them up on murder charges like they were in the middle of a gang war instead of a freakin civil war..... that is just wrong. Our boyz deserve better than that. We stuck them in that hellhole, lets not fry them like common criminals when things go wrong. This really pisses me off - I protest!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459928/

Nightwish
06-25-2006, 12:10 PM
There's a difference between mistaking a civilian for an enemy combatant and shooting them by mistake ... and dragging an unarmed civilian out of his home, into the street, and shooting him in cold blood. The article alleges that it is the latter which happened, and if that's the case, that's murder, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if it was soldiers or civilians doing it, it's murder. I'm sure a lot more details will come out once this goes to trial, but if the allegations in the article are true, then the charges are more than appropriate.

jAZ
06-25-2006, 12:15 PM
I'd say that this sort of charge sounds acceptable.

Ugly Duck
06-25-2006, 12:19 PM
There's a difference between mistaking a civilian for an enemy combatant and shooting them by mistake ... and dragging an unarmed civilian out of his home, into the street, and shooting him in cold blood. I agree with that difference. My take is that the climate of the Iraqi quagmire makes it inevitable that soldiers will snap and break the rules of engagement. Our remedy for the inevitable should not be treating soldiers in the midst of urban warfare like they were in a turf battle on the streets of LA. We have unleashed a very efficient killing machine in Baghdad, but all components of the machine don't run perfectly at all times. I say its wrong to charge them with murder when they kill too much.

HC_Chief
06-25-2006, 12:32 PM
There's a difference between mistaking a civilian for an enemy combatant and shooting them by mistake ... and dragging an unarmed civilian out of his home, into the street, and shooting him in cold blood. The article alleges that it is the latter which happened, and if that's the case, that's murder, plain and simple. It doesn't matter if it was soldiers or civilians doing it, it's murder. I'm sure a lot more details will come out once this goes to trial, but if the allegations in the article are true, then the charges are more than appropriate.

Yep.

On a somewhat similar note, I'm getting a bit tired of hearing how our military does a great job of policing itself. We know it to be true... but reaffirmation seems to me like a calculated PR move to counter nutjobs, both domestic and abroad. No matter what we do, those nutjobs will still scream "abuse!", "murder!". There is no pleasing them. There is no convincing them. So why waste cycles on it?

Nightwish
06-25-2006, 12:40 PM
I agree with that difference. My take is that the climate of the Iraqi quagmire makes it inevitable that soldiers will snap and break the rules of engagement. Our remedy for the inevitable should not be treating soldiers in the midst of urban warfare like they were in a turf battle on the streets of LA. We have unleashed a very efficient killing machine in Baghdad, but all components of the machine don't run perfectly at all times. I say its wrong to charge them with murder when they kill too much.
This is one we're gonna have to wait until all the facts come out. Could be that they got information (accurate or faulty, who knows?) that this guy was Al Qaeda, or was supplying insurgents, or somehow had inside ties to Al Qaeda or somebody like them. Or they may have believed he was party to sniping US troops. With what little information we have right now, it's a gray area.

SBK
06-25-2006, 03:31 PM
Michael Savage has been all over this case.

The sick thing about it is that the charges were "claims" by the insurgency folks. It's pretty sick.

A big THANK YOU for the work they've done the gov't has given these poor boys.

Adept Havelock
06-25-2006, 03:36 PM
Michael Savage has been all over this case.

The sick thing about it is that the charges were "claims" by the insurgency folks. It's pretty sick.

A big THANK YOU for the work they've done the gov't has given these poor boys.

Michael Savage has about as much journalistic credibility (outside of some sad RWNJ's) as his D/S master Dan Savage.

You probably think Lt. Calley got a raw deal too...

SBK
06-25-2006, 03:43 PM
Michael Savage has about as much journalistic credibility (outside of some sad RWNJ's) as his D/S master Dan Savage.

You probably think Lt. Calley got a raw deal too...

Note, HE'S NOT A JOURNALIST. He's a talk show host. I know you don't think it, but there is a big difference.

Adept Havelock
06-25-2006, 04:40 PM
Note, HE'S NOT A JOURNALIST. He's a talk show host. I know you don't think it, but there is a big difference.

Of course there's a difference. Most people wouldn't recognize a real journalist if it walked up and bit them. They certainly won't find many in this country.

That said, he is attempting to spew what he believes to be "news", thus my commentary on how accurate or truthful it's liable to be. :shrug:

Logical
06-25-2006, 06:07 PM
WTF? This is how we support our troops? 7 marines & 1 navy guy charged with friggin murder? I'm agin it.... dishonorable discharge - yes, murder charges - no. We trained these guyz to kill. Then we stuck them in the middle of a sectarian guerilla war in a city full of people where they can't tell who is who. The seemingly innocent can turn around and shoot them in the back. In a climate like that, there will be fuggups. Troops will overreact and break rules of engagement. Anomolies to the engagement plan should be expected. When it happens, the culprits should be disciplined, punished, kicked out. But to bring them up on murder charges like they were in the middle of a gang war instead of a freakin civil war..... that is just wrong. Our boyz deserve better than that. We stuck them in that hellhole, lets not fry them like common criminals when things go wrong. This really pisses me off - I protest!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459928/:clap::clap::clap:

DanT
06-26-2006, 04:12 AM
WTF? This is how we support our troops? 7 marines & 1 navy guy charged with friggin murder? I'm agin it.... dishonorable discharge - yes, murder charges - no. We trained these guyz to kill. Then we stuck them in the middle of a sectarian guerilla war in a city full of people where they can't tell who is who. The seemingly innocent can turn around and shoot them in the back. In a climate like that, there will be fuggups. Troops will overreact and break rules of engagement. Anomolies to the engagement plan should be expected. When it happens, the culprits should be disciplined, punished, kicked out. But to bring them up on murder charges like they were in the middle of a gang war instead of a freakin civil war..... that is just wrong. Our boyz deserve better than that. We stuck them in that hellhole, lets not fry them like common criminals when things go wrong. This really pisses me off - I protest!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459928/


These troops, like all Americans, are entitled to a capable and competent legal defense, but if the charages are true, then they are guilty of murder. I disagree with Ugly Duck. Murder is murder and it's important that everyone responsible for the deliberate taking of human life be held responsible, not coddled.

The part of the conflict between Iraq and the USA that was managed by the first President Bush spawned such figures as Timothy McVeigh and John Allen Muhammad. The part managed by the second President Bush has exposed American troops to even longer periods of violence, much of it between regular troops and irregulars dressed as civilians. In my mind, it's likely that at least a handful of our troops will come back from Iraq disturbed and/or bloodthirsty enough to want to kill American civilians. A respect for the law and its vigorous enforcement protects innocent life, which could well include our own.

CHIEF4EVER
06-26-2006, 04:47 AM
WTF? This is how we support our troops? 7 marines & 1 navy guy charged with friggin murder? I'm agin it.... dishonorable discharge - yes, murder charges - no. We trained these guyz to kill. Then we stuck them in the middle of a sectarian guerilla war in a city full of people where they can't tell who is who. The seemingly innocent can turn around and shoot them in the back. In a climate like that, there will be fuggups. Troops will overreact and break rules of engagement. Anomolies to the engagement plan should be expected. When it happens, the culprits should be disciplined, punished, kicked out. But to bring them up on murder charges like they were in the middle of a gang war instead of a freakin civil war..... that is just wrong. Our boyz deserve better than that. We stuck them in that hellhole, lets not fry them like common criminals when things go wrong. This really pisses me off - I protest!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459928/

I don't know if you have ever served or not but I find your take to be one of ignorance (as in 'not knowing'...no insult intended). Troops are trained to kill and Infantry troops most of all (I know, I was one for 11 years), true. But the environment they are in does not justify excesses like murder. Allowing this to occur unpunished is detrimental to the effort in general and to good order and discipline in particular. Going by your reasoning, Malmedy was excusable...My Lai was excusable...etc. If they committed murder as outlined under the UCMJ, they need to be punished in accordance with the UCMJ. Failure to do so makes the UCMJ a toothless code and turns soldiers into an undisciplined mob.

BucEyedPea
06-26-2006, 06:04 AM
In my mind, it's likely that at least a handful of our troops will come back from Iraq disturbed and/or bloodthirsty enough to want to kill American civilians.
According to a student of mine, former National Guard, this is already happening. I have no numbers or figures, but she told me that there have been "more than a few" (her words) of former military back from Iraq that have shot their wives; many others have come back disturbed, that things have not been easy for them ( there's another student, former military in Iraq, in another class that is reportedly a basket case and needs his hand held in class)...and that it's not being reported. She said there is a radio station that does discuss it though. I'll have to ask her for which one it is.

oldandslow
06-26-2006, 09:28 AM
WTF? This is how we support our troops? 7 marines & 1 navy guy charged with friggin murder? I'm agin it.... dishonorable discharge - yes, murder charges - no. We trained these guyz to kill. Then we stuck them in the middle of a sectarian guerilla war in a city full of people where they can't tell who is who. The seemingly innocent can turn around and shoot them in the back. In a climate like that, there will be fuggups. Troops will overreact and break rules of engagement. Anomolies to the engagement plan should be expected. When it happens, the culprits should be disciplined, punished, kicked out. But to bring them up on murder charges like they were in the middle of a gang war instead of a freakin civil war..... that is just wrong. Our boyz deserve better than that. We stuck them in that hellhole, lets not fry them like common criminals when things go wrong. This really pisses me off - I protest!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13459928/

I don't know if you have ever served or not but I find your take to be one of ignorance (as in 'not knowing'...no insult intended). Troops are trained to kill and Infantry troops most of all (I know, I was one for 11 years), true. But the environment they are in does not justify excesses like murder. Allowing this to occur unpunished is detrimental to the effort in general and to good order and discipline in particular. Going by your reasoning, Malmedy was excusable...My Lai was excusable...etc. If they committed murder as outlined under the UCMJ, they need to be punished in accordance with the UCMJ. Failure to do so makes the UCMJ a toothless code and turns soldiers into an undisciplined mob.

From this Former Combat Engineer (yeah, we are the ones that cleared the mines for the infantry), I want to echo Chief4ever's statement.