Murtha owes them an apology
By Charles Bird Posted in War — Comments (24) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Now that the lead prosecutor has recommended that all murder charges be dropped, Democratic Congressman Jack Murtha owes those Marines an apology for saying that they killed civilians "in cold blood". As I wrote here, if there is anyone to blame for this sorry episode, it's our high command for jerking those Marines around in the first place.
getting through the disgusting amount of blubber he wears--could we watch him run himself into glass doors repeatedly?
would work & I'll donate.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
The USMC issue bayonet from the 1913 Springfield rifle? That would be long enough, and it would only be fitting to use a Marine bayonet.
but I was thinking more in terms of a 18 inch tanto sword.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
Here. I'm also including a timeline of his misstatements.
The article acknowledges that the murder of civilians did occur, but that negligent homicide would be a more apt punishment. Letting those responsible for this (especially the higher-ups rather than the troops on the ground) get away scot-free would severely compromise our mission in Iraq. Getting the public on our side and peeling away the support for extremism is a crucial prerequisite for victory to be attained; such incidents serve to undermine their confidence in us and allow the terrorists to win a significant propaganda victory by saying, "They call us terrorists, but they're the ones killing dozens of Iraqis in cold blood with impunity."
We're well over our idiot quota for today. You comment is so stupid it deserves no further response.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
but what would you expect in a war zone? This is little different from the house-to house, building-to-building fighting in WWII that resulted in many civilian casualties. What is different in Iraq is that the JAG's have hamstrung our troops and their mission in ways that were never contemplated during WWII. It is not a question of higher-ups getting away with something. What we need is for our troops to be able to do their jobs without the requirement for a legal opinion before they engage the enemy.
As for the terrorists winning a propaganda victory by claiming we're "the ones killing dozens of Iraqis in cold blood with impunity", I guess that means Murtha is a terrorist, too.
The Article 32 officer concluded that no murder occurred. Taht is why he has recommended that murder charges not be pursuded. If you can't fathom the difference between an allegation of negligent homicide and murder then I don't think you should be posting on the subject.
Already charges have been dismissed against several other Marines, the company commander of the unit, and the battalion judge advocate. Currently the only recommendations for courts martial are a dereliction of duty charge against the battalion commander LTC Chessani and this against SSG Wuterich. Neither of which have been approved by LTG Mattis.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
What's different between WWII and Iraq is that for victory to be achieved in Germany, the cooperation of the German people was not necessary -- simply crushing the German war machine was our goal. However, we have already crushed the Iraqi army ("mission accomplished"); what's needed is gaining the trust of the Iraqi populace ("hearts and minds"). We're not going to win that (and, consequently, the war) unless we show far more respect for Iraqi life -- of course it's incredibly hard for the troops to show such an extreme level of restraint day in and day out, knowing that an insurgent may lie in wait anywhere. But that's integral to our mission.
And, by the way, there's no love lost for me on Murtha or his stance on the war in Iraq; however, he happens to be right. The reason this war is not over -- and the reason that Murtha and the terrorists in Iraq can deliver the same message -- is because we haven't been doing our job properly in Iraq. We need the faith of the Iraq people to win, not big guns; and our troops will be in even more danger if, through incidents such as Haditha, the terrorists can poison the Iraqi populace against us. That's simply unacceptable.
i agree about the difference between Iraq and WWII. I just wonder if it's ever going to be possible to make them want to do things the way we do. If they came over here and tried to make us run our government the way they do we'd never stop protesting! It's a different culture there.
to the exclusion of everything else if you think we don't have the "faith of the Iraqi people" or that we don't show sufficient "respect for Iraqi life". You won't find a story like this in either of those two rags, and I could find you hundreds more like it, but just one should lay to rest the notion that we are not gaining the trust of the Iraqi populace.
http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6838&I...
I didn't say anything about the "faith of the Iraqi people" or that we don't show respect for them. I do think there will always be insurgents though because no one wants to be told how they should live, how their government should function, etc. If someone came over here and did that to us I'd fight it forever.
As stated in your post above:
"...we need the faith of the Iraq people to win."
and
"...unless we show far more respect for Iraqi life...",
(suggesting that we don't show sufficient respect)
Haditha and your abu Ghrab on us.
aQ murders several hundred civilians, sometimes targeting women and children, every month with car bombs.
We let them use Mosques for sniper cover and arms storage while aQ blows up sacred religious sites.
Your arguments hold substantially less water than your head holds air.
Murtha is an antiAmerican, unpatriotic hater of the the US military and a scum bag of the first order. Hopefully he'll show up at a Marine parents function sometime and we won't hear from the SOB ever again.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.
It is quite interesting that we have Neocons and Vets eating their own. I've seen insects do exactly the same thing. Is that who the American Vets are?
Murtha is a respected, decorated former Marine who served with honor. Now he is "off the Reservation", so the jackals feel the urge to attack him, and eat one of their own.
Some of his comments are over the top, but many posts (like the one above) are pretty over-the-top, too. He has the right that so many Vets have died to preserve: to say frankly that we have not done the best job of either executing the war or caring for the 25,000 Vets who have already been wounded. Or the Vets can be like Rush L. and keep cannibalizing Vets who are telling a different story than your own.
Prospero
nice to see that you value Murtha's right to bloviate over the right of Marines to a fair trial.
Is that what those of us who actually wore a freakin uniform defended? I can say with mathematical certainty I didn't.
Door. Butt. Way out. etc.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
You'll note that I didn't question his patriotism or his military service. I questioned his exceedingly poor judgment in saying that his fellow Marines committed premeditated murder, without even waiting for a trial before coming to such a conclusion. Worse, this is a sitting member of the U.S. Congress saying this. What I'm strongly suggesting here is that he should own up to his own words and make right.
The "prosecuter" also said that he did not think a charge of negligent homicide will stand up in court.
My preference would be ritual suicide.
____
CongressCritter™: Never have so few felt like they were owed so much by so many for so little.