Should the Marines just kill the husband of the pregnant woman now?

In honoring our troops, I think it's unfair to them that the media keeps reporting this crap. We are at war, and there will certainly be casualties that seem unreasonable. We have to remember that there are really no rules in war. Certainly, if the husband goes looking for revenge with a loaded weapon, then by all means he should be taken out.

Keep in mind that the soldier who pulled the trigger will have to live with this for the rest of his life and I can most surely attest that it isn't something he's proud of doing and feels great remorse!

 

Spoken like a true neocon. Propose the murder of another innocent, to try to solve the problem of the first one. This isn't a videogame, burritos, these are real people we are talking about. More killing doesn't give you a higher score.

 

If the soldier in question isn't going to be proud of this, what
*is* he going to be proud of?
.
_H*

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(unruhly @ May 31 2006, 08:13 PM) [snapback]263694[/snapback]</div>

I feel sorry for the person(s) who pull the trigger.

I like our troops, just not the person who send them to their death or force them to do things like this.

 

Note to self: Don't speed into US checkpoints. The marines there have big guns and no way to know if you have 2 pregnant women, or a load of explosives. They will assume it's a load of explosives.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ May 31 2006, 05:26 PM) [snapback]263701[/snapback]</div>

Always quick to judge I see.

Of course now, being that Samarra is in the heart of the Sunni Triangle, what are the chances this was much more than it looks like at first glance . . . . would you feel stupid?

A not too far fetched scenario for that part of the world: The pregnant woman's brother, who was the driver, has been a member of Al Qaeda in Iraq since its inception. Since things were not going well for their side, a new tactic was recently deployed - The use of innocent civilians as targets and shields for the propaganda war.

Seeing an opportunity which would become sensationalized, the brother volunteered to drive his pregnant sister to the hospital. Using his sister in this manner was of no great loss in his mind. The sister had married someone the family disproved and she was going to become a victim of a family Honor Killing anyway.

"I was driving my car at full speed because I did not see any sign or warning from the Americans. It was not until they shot the two bullets that killed my sister and cousin that I stopped," he said. "God take revenge on the Americans and those who brought them here. They have no regard for our lives."

So, ALL the bullets and warnings prior to the sister and cousin being shot didn't register with him? But THOSE TWO BULLETS DID????

Maybe it is the brother who needs to fear retribution from the husband.

Khalid Nisaif Jassim, the pregnant woman's brother, said American forces had blocked off the side road only two weeks ago and news about the observation post had been slow to filter out to rural areas.

Slow to filter out to rural areas??? YEAH, RIGHT!
Only two weeks? Plenty of time to set-up this scenario.

This is much more logical than “no airplane crashed into the Pentagon on 9/11.â€

 

Ok, well, burritos, unfortunately, it looks like your satiric intentions were lost to those on both sides. You might want to lay it on a little thicker next time, so that we can tell that you are joking. Of course, you would still have the serious support of the ultra-conservatives on this board, even if you suggested pre-emptive total annhilation of all life on Earth because a hundred years from now a gay Arab might spit on a flag and that might be the only way to stop it from happening

 

Due Process?
by ChosinMarineSon, May 31 2006 01:00 PM

I think I get it now! Saddam, Moussaui, the Beltway Snipers, Timothy Mcveigh, the "blind sheik" of NY, Ramzi Yousef, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the scum at Club Gitmo, and the rest of the World's debris are entitled to DUE PROCESS, but not United States Marines? Everyday in this country Liberals are willing to confer LEGAL RIGHTS on ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS and ILLEGAL COMBATANTS [terrorist scum who cover their faces and dont have the balls to wear a uniform]..but Marines?..no way man! The media breathlessly pants My Lai, My Lai over and over to program the sheeple who cant think for themselves. Wait for the NCIS [no Libs, not like the ones on tv, the real ones] to complete their investigation. If the Marines are guilty, The Uniform Code of Military Justice will deal with them like no civilian court could. But for me, I think the Marines have EARNED the right of DUE PROCESS!!!

 

I have no problem with giving Marines due process (before having them shot--just kidding). But chances are they will just a get a medal for Extreme Bravery In The Face Of Charging Unarmed Pregnant Women or something like that (maybe something like a Silver Star, but with a little pink plastic fetus attached).

And I'd also like to point out that neither the pregnant woman, her companion, nor any of their family members are neccesarily "terrorists" just because they are muslims who live in Iraq with a poor opinion of the American troops occupying their country.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(unruhly @ May 31 2006, 05:13 PM) [snapback]263694[/snapback]</div>

Is there any point at which the "honor our troops" mantra should not silence criticism of war crimes? Keep in mind that these troops you would like to honor are often some of the lowest, crudest, immoral sons of bitches you'd ever want to meet. Ordinary soldiers have always been so, and that's why armies have officers. That's also why we have courts martial. And the bastards who kill innocents can feel all the remorse they like as they serve their life sentences for murder. Covering up the truth honors no one.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DanP @ May 31 2006, 11:51 PM) [snapback]263838[/snapback]</div>

I think you mean the Far Left, No?

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DanP @ May 31 2006, 11:51 PM) [snapback]263838[/snapback]</div>

First off, there is a big difference between war crimes and civilian casualties encountered in the battlefield. So no, a war criminal should not be honored.

Secondly, it sounds to me as if you've never served in an all volunteer military unit. Today's soldiers are highly trained and in no way reflected by the words you have chosen as stereotypical. All humanity has it's "Bad Apples", the military is no different, and it'd be my guess that their bad applease are at a lower percentage than the rest of the world's population.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DanP @ May 31 2006, 08:51 PM) [snapback]263838[/snapback]</div>

Spoken like someone who has absolutely no friggin' clue.

I feel much safer walking on ANY US military base at night by myself than I do in ANY large city in the world . . . OK, except for Tokyo, Yokohama, Sapporo, etc.
I would rather risk my life trusting a US soldier picked at random than I would a random civilian. And I can guarantee that 99% of active and former military would say the same thing.

The US military does not have officers to keep “Ordinary soldiers†in line. Officer give orders, and the senior enlisted see to it that they are carried out. Disciplinary action is normally handled at the lowest level the situation warrants.

Yours is the most clueless post I have read in a long long time . . . and you are competing with a rarefied bunch of clueless tard types here in FHOP.

Just where do you get your information? <_< [please do tell, I need a good laugh]

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(burritos @ May 31 2006, 07:47 PM) [snapback]263682[/snapback]</div>

Before you pass judgement on others why dont you give it a try.

Go to Iraq, put on a United States Army uniform (first take off your Barka), stap on a armored vest, sling a loaded M16 over your shoulder, and man a checkpoint.

Now, as a car is approaching you at 30 miles an hour and not stopping --- make a decision as what you are going to do............

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(unruhly @ May 31 2006, 05:13 PM) [snapback]263694[/snapback]</div>

There are, in fact, laws governing the conduct of war. There are international treaties, which most neo-conservatives reject as being somehow illegitimate, but there are also U.S. laws and there is the U.S. Uniform Code of Military Conduct which governs the conduct of war and is legally binding on all soldiers and other military personnel.

It is telling that the very same people who shout "Law and Order!" so loudly are so quick to say that U.S. laws of warfare do not apply in time of war!

While Burritos' original post was clearly intended to make a point about the immorality of the U.S. occupation of Iraq, it is true that incidents like this account for the ever-increasing opposition to the occupation, and the never-ending supply of resistance fighters.

Put yourself in the place of the husband of the murdered woman: Imagine that Canada has invaded and occupied the U.S., and a Canadian soldier has just shot and killed your pregnant wife. How likely would you be to say, "Oh, that's okay. She was probably driving too fast. It was an innocent mistake." ? More likely you'd join the resistance and kill as many of the occupiers as you possibly could!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Jun 1 2006, 07:57 AM) [snapback]263954[/snapback]</div>

There are laws governing the conduct of way - read them. They include not wearing civilian clothing. They include not using innocent civilians as shields - to begin with.

Stop mixing up morality of and the legal conduct of war. The Iraqi's themselves still want us there - that is the only poll that counts - and the poll of the members of the US military that actually serve who want to serve.

and try this out for size - this requires that you place yourself in the shoes of the US soldier at the checkpoint and we all know how hard that would be for you to do - but give it a shot now (pun intended)...

Put on a US Army uniform. Strap on armor protection around your anterior and posterior thorax. Place the helmet on your head. Sling a fully loaded M-16 over your shoulder. Add a little heat and some constant threat of danger. NOW.... A car is approaching your checkpoint. It fails to slow down and is now coursing through the obstacles towards your position. Its speed remains constant and it is not responding to well defined instructions that have been in place for years to slow down. It is headed at you. What are you going to do... You now have 15 seconds to make a decision.... If you dont decide soon you will be within its LETHAL blast radius IF it is loaded with explosives. What do you do>>>>> let us know what you would do time is up