Official: Evidence points to unjustified killings by Marines

[MobBoss]

And I wonder what that investigation would have found?
Maybe some reprimands would be handed out, then denials by the administration of anything truly horrifying happening there. Then character assassination of any prisoners lucky enough to be released after the torture.

Your allegations are unfounded. It has been my experience, like Padma's, that the military does investigate such allegations quite completely. It is one of the reasons they have such high conviction rates in their court martials - they make sure of all their evidence before going to trial, unlike in civil/criminal courts.

Yeah, it took some balls by the marines in the clean up to say "this ain't right". But that doesn't happen very often. A soldier sees something like that, he would rather not turn in his brothers, he would just want to finish his tour, go home, and forget about it.

VERY incorrect. The vast majority of such "war crimes" are precisely the result of another soldier filing a report of such things. That is what soldiers are trained to do, not "forget about it and go home". Simply, you are just full of allegations of which you have no real first hand knowledge.

Am I right in understanding that out of the hundreds of zillions of US military personel only 755 did anything seriously against the rules despite being in two major combat zones? Despite many of them suffering from psychological problems?

Maybe I didn't understand the statistics!

You are not reading it correctly. There are several types of court martials, summary court martial only being the base type.

Also, there are not "hundreds of zillions" of military personnel. We have a tad fewer than that.

 

[MobBoss]

And how many of these convictions are for things like stealing or fighting with another soldier or desertion or things like that? I'm sure those crimes are harshly persecuted. The Muslim soldier who tried to blow up his fellow soldiers in Kuwait. I'm sure he's going to be very heavily persecuted. Probably get a death sentence.

Dig into the stats I gave you. It also gives the number of UCMJ non-judicial punishments that the military gives. That is a minor punishment given to non-capital offenses that can result in jail time, restriction, loss of rank and fines of up to two months pay. The military has more options than just Court Martials for everyone.

I'm not talking about those sort of things, but rather thing like this - crimes against humanity or crimes against non-US civilians. All I know is every single case I've seen has disgusted me in the way the military has handled it. My Lai, the Italian cable car incident, the rape of young girls in Okinawa, Abu Graib, and now this incident.

Once again with the My Lai.

Also, if you want to discuss specific cases please feel free. Include links and proofs and we will have a go at it. Btw, what was wrong with how the military handled Abu Graib? Those directly involved all got convicted and were sent to prison. That not enough for you?

I'm not saying the American military is a bunch of monsters. I understand perfectly well that it is a minority. However in no case have I ever seen the US military be open and proactive about it. Often very light punishments are given. There are no real investigations until the media cracks the story open. Information is not released. Coverups are not punished harshly.

Sorry, but you are simply incorrect here and provide only allegation with no basis of proof.

There is no attempt to see how far up the chain of command it goes. As soon as it involves non-American civilians you can almost see the walls come up. It's the whole attitude. Us vs them. The poor innocent military being persecuted by the nasty civilians.

The military has a duty to investigate such situations completely not only to protect those civilians involved, but also to protect its soldiers from unfounded allegations. I suppose you advocate just tossing a soldier onto the bayonets whenever someone makes an allegation, no investigation needed right?

Whenever these crimes come up I don't see much emphasis on the victims from the military institution but rather the emphasis is on making sure that we don't look at the military badly. Thus the inevitable torrent of excuses about how difficult it is to be a soldier.

Force protection seems to be the main military strategy in the courtroom as well. The goal being to protect the good name of the military. The military gives the impression of the victims being a very very distant second in their priorities.

More rhetoric without proof or basis of fact. I gave you a link so that you can see factually how many court martials and punishments the military doled out in 2004. We dont go to "great lengths" to make ourselves look good, but we do go to great lengths to investigate such crimes fully and completely prior to handing out punishments. To do any less would be greatly unprofessional.

 

[Padma]

There is no attempt to see how far up the chain of command it goes.

On the contrary, there is a second investigation going on into exactly that.

And I don't see a "victim mentality" in the military, either. I *do* see unfounded allegations and lack of understanding by those who have no real knowledge of how things work.

 

[.Shane.]

Also, if you want to discuss specific cases please feel free. Include links and proofs and we will have a go at it. Btw, what was wrong with how the military handled Abu Graib? Those directly involved all got convicted and were sent to prison. That not enough for you?

Its not. It should've resolved w/ Rumsfield and Gonzalez being tried as War Criminals since they wrote and approved the torture memo that was essentially what happened at AG.

 

[MobBoss]

Its not. It should've resolved w/ Rumsfield and Gonzalez being tried as War Criminals since they wrote and approved the torture memo that was essentially what happened at AG.

So, Rumsfield and Gonzalez are responsible for those who greatly exceed what was mandated? While I dont have the memo directly in front of me, its pretty obvious to all that the guilty from Abu Graib went further (in fact way too far) than any recommendation via Rumsfield or Gonzalez.

So, if subordinates break the law, why should someone like Rumsfield or Gonzalez be held accountable for someone else's criminal acts?

 

[.Shane.]

So, Rumsfield and Gonzalez are responsible for those who greatly exceed what was mandated? While I dont have the memo directly in front of me, its pretty obvious to all that the guilty from Abu Graib went further (in fact way too far) than any recommendation via Rumsfield or Gonzalez.

So, if subordinates break the law, why should someone like Rumsfield or Gonzalez be held accountable for someone else's criminal acts?

I think they wrote the memo justifying the abuse and that message was disseminated. And, its not just AG, but the European prisons, GitMo, etc... they all add up to a culture that Rummy facilitated and that Gonzalez tried to legally justify. IMO, they are war criminals and should be rotting in jail.

 

[Neomega]

It has been my experience, like Padma's, that the military does investigate such allegations quite completely.

There have been a few prisoners released from gitmo that detailed a few tortures and humiliations they endured, and they suffered the exact treatment I described.... poo-poohed away as some al-Queada sympathizer.

I am sure the gaurds in guantanamo have a little saying, "what happens in gitmo, stays in gitmo"

You are trying to tell me claims of torture are investigated thouroughly, I call B.S. There have been a lot more instances of torture than just those few incidents at Abu Gharaib.

There was teh General killed in Abu Ghariab by officers sitting on his chest... not much ever came of that.

Yeah, all of my allegations are baseless, true, but I am not an idiot. I find it very, very hard to believe the only instances of torture carried out in Iraq happened to be caught on camera.

 

[Padma]

I will never say that torture doesn't occur. But it is an aberration, not the norm. And it is punished when it is found.

As for released Gitmo inmates who allege they were tortured, of course they do. It is explicit in the "terrorist's handbook" that when released from prison/POW camp/whatever that you allege you were tortured. It is a PR move. Make your captors look bad. Put them on the defensive. It works.

Gitmo is off topic for this thread, but FWIW, the inmates there have it better than the guards....

 

[Neomega]

As for released Gitmo inmates who allege they were tortured, of course they do. It is explicit in the "terrorist's handbook" that when released from prison/POW camp/whatever that you allege you were tortured. It is a PR move. Make your captors look bad. Put them on the defensive. It works.

Gitmo is off topic for this thread, but FWIW, the inmates there have it better than the guards....

Gitmo is not off-topic, the topic has evolved to "does the military fend and cover for it's own"

I think the answer is yes.

And you used exactly what I said is used, that it's from "the terrorist handbook" to go on the attack... but what if his alegations are true?

I know for a fact, if Iraqis came out of Abu Gharaib, saying, "I was tortured in there, they attached wires to my nuts, and threatened to let attack dogs on me naked, and piled a bunch of men in an unholy naked triangle"

I know for a fact, that if there was no photographic evidence for this, that no-one would have been prosecuted, the prisoner making such outlandish claims would be branded an "al-queada sympathizer" and waved away as just sour grapes 'cuz he got caught fighting the insurgency, and he should be glad we even let him live.

Where is this going? This incident would have been covered up too, if someone had not come forward. Many Haditha's have happened I am sure, just no-one has come forward. I have read plenty of stories of Iraqi villiagers saying things just like Haditha occured in their own small towns, especially inthe Al-Anbar area, and on the border with Syria.

 

[MobBoss]

I know for a fact, if Iraqis came out of Abu Gharaib, saying, "I was tortured in there, they attached wires to my nuts, and threatened to let attack dogs on me naked, and piled a bunch of men in an unholy naked triangle"

Now wait a minute. So, some guy comes out and says this stuff. How in the hell do you know its true and a fact?

I know for a fact, that if there was no photographic evidence for this, that no-one would have been prosecuted, the prisoner making such outlandish claims would be branded an "al-queada sympathizer" and waved away as just sour grapes 'cuz he got caught fighting the insurgency, and he should be glad we even let him live.

In this I can directly refute you. That is not factual at all. There were eyewitness accounts and other proofs available to convict those responsible in the absence of such photographs. I assure you, a court martial conviction does not require incriminating photos in order to result in a guilty verdict. The photos from Abu Graib were simply just part of the evidence compiled against those who committed those crimes.

Where is this going? This incident would have been covered up too, if someone had not come forward. Many Haditha's have happened I am sure, just no-one has come forward. I have read plenty of stories of Iraqi villiagers saying things just like Haditha occured in their own small towns, especially inthe Al-Anbar area, and on the border with Syria.

Like that one story about the helicopters spewing white phos in a rain of death in Falluja? Course, that was before I pointed out that fact that there is no such thing as a white phos round used in helicopter gunships anywhere in our inventory.

Not everything you hear is the fault of the military. Yes, we have our share of criminals and do the best we can to weed them out. But a lot of stuff put out there is disinformation to simply to get the exact reaction that you have - extreme paranoia of the mlitary.

 

[Neomega]

Here is one I rememebr reading many, many months ago:

the new Iraq ambassador, Al-Sumaidaie said his cousin was murdered by marines, now that the Haditha investigation is moving, he is speaking out:

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/TSR_IraqiAmbassador_Exclusive.wmv

I remember reading the families account on this one too, long ago. It was never reported in Main Stream American press.

 

[VoodooAce]

Gitmo is not off-topic, the topic has evolved to "does the military fend and cover for it's own"

I think the answer is yes.

And you used exactly what I said is used, that it's from "the terrorist handbook" to go on the attack... but what if his alegations are true?

I know for a fact, if Iraqis came out of Abu Gharaib, saying, "I was tortured in there, they attached wires to my nuts, and threatened to let attack dogs on me naked, and piled a bunch of men in an unholy naked triangle"

I know for a fact, that if there was no photographic evidence for this, that no-one would have been prosecuted, the prisoner making such outlandish claims would be branded an "al-queada sympathizer" and waved away as just sour grapes 'cuz he got caught fighting the insurgency, and he should be glad we even let him live.

Where is this going? This incident would have been covered up too, if someone had not come forward. Many Haditha's have happened I am sure, just no-one has come forward. I have read plenty of stories of Iraqi villiagers saying things just like Haditha occured in their own small towns, especially inthe Al-Anbar area, and on the border with Syria.

It is in the 'terrorist handbood' to make such claims, just as there is another 'handbook' that says, "Deny, deny, deny until you can't deny it anymore".

Why are people so upset that people are so upset that our troops could do such terrible things? Just because you're a military appologist doesn't mean we're upset with you....or the military in general. Just those that do this sort of thing, and those that would cover it up.

Or are you just upset that this wasn't covered up well enough?

 

[blackheart]

The entire argument basically boils down to this:

We don't believe the military is capable of investigating its own "grave wrongdoings" with impartiality.

By "grave wrongdoings" I don't mean crimes of the individual soldiers, but events that make the entire organization look bad, such as this massacre, My Lai, Abu Ghraib, etc.

 

[Verbose]

As for released Gitmo inmates who allege they were tortured, of course they do. It is explicit in the "terrorist's handbook" that when released from prison/POW camp/whatever that you allege you were tortured. It is a PR move. Make your captors look bad. Put them on the defensive. It works.

Gitmo is off topic for this thread, but FWIW, the inmates there have it better than the guards....

They suffer neurological damage and psychological trauma from it, do they?

(Which is, for the sake of example, a reference to the state on release of the one Swedish citizen to be incarcerated, for two years, at Gitmo. At least the neurologists running their tests tend to be hard to fool here.)

 

[malclave]

And that is exactly what I said. You quoted me, said "not exactly, and then rewrote exactly what I said.

No.

You wrote that the three officers were reassigned for badmouthing the Iraqis.

What I (and the article's author) wrote was that Captain Kimber was reassigned for subordinates badmouthing the Iraqis in a media interview.

I'll have you know, it is highly irritating for people to quote me, and not even read what they are quoting before they decide to start arguing.

I can sympathize. I also find it annoying when people don't read the actual text before arguing.

 

[MobBoss]

Or are you just upset that this wasn't covered up well enough?

Voodoo that is pretty insulting to people like Padma and I who have time after time said that such criminal behavior needs to be investigated fully and if verified, then fully punished.

To be honest, its smacks of slander and libel and frankly should be beneath you.

 

[malclave]

The entire argument basically boils down to this:

We don't believe the military is capable of investigating its own "grave wrongdoings" with impartiality.

And who is going to investigate "with impartiality"? The people who put out stuff like the Jesse Macbeth video in order to smear the military?

 

[Rik Meleet]

And who is going to investigate "with impartiality"? The people who put out stuff like the Jesse Macbeth video in order to smear the military?

Investigators of the International Court of Justice in Den Haag or the War Crimes Law would have be good choices as both courts were erected to trial warcriminals.

 

[blackheart]

And who is going to investigate "with impartiality"? The people who put out stuff like the Jesse Macbeth video in order to smear the military?

Well gee, if you want to go be stringent about it and complain about propeganda you go do that.

But as Rik said, war crime tribunals are a good place to look.

 

[Bronx Warlord]

Damn shame really but I understande why it happened. I can almost see the events unfold when I close my eyes. IMHPO the NCO's lost control here and young men with the wieght of constant combat operations on there shoulders did what Marines are trained to do. They killed.

I'm pretty amazed that somehow... amazingly... not one of the people in this city knew there was a bomb there, or said anything about it to the patrol. Prehaps this whole incident could have been avoided.

Did the Marines take fire after the IDE went off? Did someone make a mistake in were the fire was comming from and did they order an assault against the wrong location? hundreds of questions here having been in situations like this hundreds of times.