17-11-2004 03:58									#151
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin The version I saw cut out after the shot was fired. It showed nothing after that event.

It continues. The marines discover another "moving body", he avoid the same treatment by showing his wounded leg and offering info desperately

	17-11-2004 04:00									#152
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

I love the way Americans are comparing themselves to Saddam and Islamic fundies now.

	17-11-2004 04:06									#153
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

This story is really about loss of innocence. Most people have very unrealistic ideas about the reality of the battlefield. That is really why they support wars. That's why we have chicken hawks and the pro war cheer squad. If people knew what war is really like there wouldn't be any wars.

If I was wounded and overrun in my position I would consider myself very lucky to be taken alive. Its one of the most dangerous situations on the battlefield, especially when the enemy is booby trapping and leaving fanatical suicide bombers behind. I'm not surprised at all the soldier fired when the wounded man moved - better to shoot first than get blown up.

Get real people, grow up. This is the war many of you wanted. Don't blame the soldier or make excuses and turn away from its reality - especially if you wished for it.

	17-11-2004 04:08									#154
	Tired of ads?

OK just saw the video too on euronews. It was very clear. There was no panic, and it was no touch firing.. how do you say it, when you fire fast. No, it was very clear video, there's just no interpretation for it, unless you really look for it and believe in Santa. That was illegal killing 101. The individual must face punsihment. And no my panties are not in twist at all. I don't see this as the image fo the US army, unlike some others do. All I'ms aying is, the video now that I saw it was very clear, I don't knwo what black screens FOX showed, this one had no black screen, it was an execution. Don't shoot a man in that situation. At least not when someone is recording it on camera. Darwin wins once again.

	17-11-2004 04:50									#155
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse This story is really about loss of innocence. Most people have very unrealistic ideas about the reality of the battlefield. That is really why they support wars. That's why we have chicken hawks and the pro war cheer squad. If people knew what war is really like there wouldn't be any wars.

Wrong. I'd say that a number of the people who don't know anything about what a battlefield is like are against the war and screeching about this.

Oh sorry, am I interfering with your sanctimonious prattling? Go on. Bleat of how all those who don't agree with you are "chickenhawks" and a "pro war cheer squad" some more, please.

Odd, Pekka. I saw the video and went over it quite a few times and didn't come to your conclusion. Actually, considering that the one who was shot was way in the background of the video and there isn't a clear picture of what was going on, I'm wondering why it was so clear to you. Oh wait: it suits your prejudices.

	17-11-2004 04:55									#156
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Last Conformist In peacetime, people get murdered; this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Do we infer that's too no big deal?

Yes. For Exhibit A, the trial of Scott Peterson... worthy of national attention? No.

	17-11-2004 05:51									#157
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Sinapus Odd, Pekka. I saw the video and went over it quite a few times and didn't come to your conclusion. Actually, considering that the one who was shot was way in the background of the video and there isn't a clear picture of what was going on, I'm wondering why it was so clear to you. Oh wait: it suits your prejudices.

I know that coming to the same conclusion as Pekka can be quite loathsome, but how else other than "illegal killing" can you rationalise the shooting of a clearly wounded, unarmed man? Self defence? Justifiable homicide?

	17-11-2004 06:23									#158
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Pekka OK just saw the video too on euronews. It was very clear. There was no panic, and it was no touch firing.. how do you say it, when you fire fast. No, it was very clear video, there's just no interpretation for it, unless you really look for it and believe in Santa. That was illegal killing 101. The individual must face punsihment. And no my panties are not in twist at all. I don't see this as the image fo the US army, unlike some others do. All I'ms aying is, the video now that I saw it was very clear, I don't knwo what black screens FOX showed, this one had no black screen, it was an execution. Don't shoot a man in that situation. At least not when someone is recording it on camera. Darwin wins once again.

Pekka, I believe there was some discusion early in the tape about if those men were new prisoners or from the day before. If the marine was ligetimately confused about them being new prisoners then in light of the Marine Corp's warning to their men about the dangers of wounded insurgents conducting suicide attacks the Marine's reaction my be justified in a "fog of battle" sort of way. I'm not saying I agree with that but I am attempting to explore all options.

	17-11-2004 06:25									#159
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Gibsie I know that coming to the same conclusion as Pekka can be quite loathsome, but how else other than "illegal killing" can you rationalise the shooting of a clearly wounded, unarmed man? Self defence? Justifiable homicide?

Clearly wounded, yes. Clearly unarmed, no. The question is did that Marine know that those prisoners had already been checked for weapons? If he didn't then he has a case but if he did then he is bound to go to jail.

	17-11-2004 06:37									#160
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Chemical Ollie I would believe there have been worse crimes that are not on TV. I read an account posted in the other Falluja thread about refugees getting mowed down while they tried to escape swimming across the river.

To be fair Psyops air dropped millions of leaflets and conducted countless hours of radio broadcasts to explaining the proper proceedures for civilians to be identified or for insurgents to surrender. These people ignored those directives and so, rightly in my mind, were deemed to be likely retreating insurgents. You may also recall that for one month prior civilians were ordered to leave Fallujah as the city would be declared a war zone and that no one would be able to asure their safety. These people ignored both the warning and the directive on proper proceedures.

These proceedures are in place so that persons who want safe passage can be identified and those persons who wish to continue combat can be told apart. That these people refused to follow proceedures which surely they must have known (as the city was saturated) is inexcusable on their part. I see that as suicide after all this is a war zone.

	17-11-2004 06:43									#161
	Support Apolyton

The whole thing reminds me a a South Park "quote"

As long as you shout "Maybe, possibly he's a suicide bomber" then you can kill pretty much anyone.



What are we fighting for again?

	17-11-2004 06:51									#162
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I think there is difference between enemy trying to surrender and enemy faking death. In WWII, it was common practice for Japanese to fake death and then ambush the Americans as they passed. After a few of these kinds of lessons, US soldiers routinely made sure the dead Japanese were dead.

	17-11-2004 07:04									#163
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Gibsie I know that coming to the same conclusion as Pekka can be quite loathsome, but how else other than "illegal killing" can you rationalise the shooting of a clearly wounded, unarmed man? Self defence? Justifiable homicide?

Ah, that's your problem: you're treating it as a law enforcement problem and not war. No wonder you're confused. Sorry, but killing someone who appears to be faking death on a battlefield where similar behavior has been used to kill your comrades sounds rather prudent.

Again, judging from the camera view I'm wondering how you can apply the word "clearly" to it. You can barely see the guy in the background. Since I wasn't in that room, I don't see how I can "clearly" presume wrongdoing. That, apparently, won't stop you, but I can't do much about your prejudices.

Who knows? Maybe next time it'll be actual POWs being forced to dig their own graves and getting shot in them. Then I'd definitely call that illegal, and I'm sure you'll be all giddy about the whole thing.

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Clearly wounded, yes. Clearly unarmed, no. The question is did that Marine know that those prisoners had already been checked for weapons? If he didn't then he has a case but if he did then he is bound to go to jail.

Actually, it doesn't matter if they were checked before. Insurgents went back in and started firing from it again, requiring the building to be re-cleared and requiring a re-check of the people who'd been there before. Also, they weren't taken prisoner. The Marines disarmed them, gave some basic aid and moved on. They were NOT taken into custody, so the folks calling them "prisoners" are either confused or deliberately lying.

	17-11-2004 07:07									#164
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Zulu Elephant The whole thing reminds me a a South Park "quote" As long as you shout "Maybe, possibly he's a suicide bomber" then you can kill pretty much anyone. What are we fighting for again?

Is it that hard for you t6o believe that there was more going on then was showen in that short clip? Don't you think it is wise to let the JAG's Office take a look at all of the evidence before condemning a man? That is the proper legal procedure in these cases. Let's let legal procedures be followed.

	17-11-2004 07:13									#165
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Sinapus They were NOT taken into custody, so the folks calling them "prisoners" are either confused or deliberately lying.

I'd say this is a salient point though a weak one. They had minders for at least the last 12 hours and the minders did search them. The key part is did those minders explain to the Marine exactly what the status of those insurgents was before events unfolded? Did they explain the insurgents had been checked for weapons? Did they explain exactly how wounded the men were? Did the Marine have reason to believe that insurgents had been facking death or surrender in order to continue attacking US Forces?

My personal belief is that this looks like a wrongful killing but there is still the possibility of a reasonable doubt.

	17-11-2004 07:16									#166
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

i'm willing to wait for the investigation results. but the "terrorists" won't. the "blood maddened thugs" will probably give less thought than the young marine responsible for the incident.

	17-11-2004 07:21									#167
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

"Pekka, I believe there was some discusion early in the tape about if those men were new prisoners or from the day before. If the marine was ligetimately confused about them being new prisoners then in light of the Marine Corp's warning to their men about the dangers of wounded insurgents conducting suicide attacks the Marine's reaction my be justified in a "fog of battle" sort of way. I'm not saying I agree with that but I am attempting to explore all options."

Right, and I don't disagree with that so much. I'm trying to figure out if this is justifiable in the eyes of the military laws.

Now, you can say and give orderds that 'there has been people faking and then attacking', but that really doesnt' change the situation, where the laws say you can't shoot wounded unarmed person. It just doesn't change it, and even if commander tells you otherwise, it just doesn't change it. The only thing you can do is 'be advised'. Not 'take no prisoners'. I mean you can order that too, but it's still illegal even though it sounds stupid because after all it's war. But that's the way it goes. Now if there could be a rule, that since enemy has used these kind of attacks before, and that you could counter it with just shooting faking enemy, then you can shoot anyone and just say you thought they were faking, and it doesn't matter if they were or not. That's no pretext to any procedures that are sane . I mean, of course you can have this happening, and most likely it happens even with the people whose **** don't stink but I'm pretty sure you can't shoot in that situation and expect to be released. Like I said, the video in this demand is very clear and sound.

Because you can't execute prisoners, or wounded enemy if you THINK they MIGHT be faking it. You do, but when you get caught, *CLONG* and the bars close.

	17-11-2004 07:23									#168
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Is it that hard for you t6o believe that there was more going on then was showen in that short clip? Don't you think it is wise to let the JAG's Office take a look at all of the evidence before condemning a man? That is the proper legal procedure in these cases. Let's let legal procedures be followed.

I wouldn't want to draw a hard conclusion from that clip either. I had many questions after seeing it and as your following post illustrates, there are many good questions to be asked. As awful as war is, it got appreciably worse for everyone in that mosque that day.

Sadly, the real impact will be the emotional/propaganda coup for the insurgents. Right or wrong this clip will be damaging.

	17-11-2004 07:33									#169
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin Is it that hard for you t6o believe that there was more going on then was showen in that short clip? Don't you think it is wise to let the JAG's Office take a look at all of the evidence before condemning a man? That is the proper legal procedure in these cases. Let's let legal procedures be followed.

You're right. My post was directed at those on this thread who seem to be jumping to justify what he did even in worst reading of the situation

	17-11-2004 07:38									#170
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: In peacetime, people get murdered; this shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Do we infer that's too no big deal?

Yes. I guess you're not too aware with the western values yet, kid.

	17-11-2004 07:44									#171
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

My personal inclination is to say the man is guilty but that there were extenuating circumstances which would call for a lighter sentence. I will await the courts decision, however.

	17-11-2004 07:53									#172
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Pekka No, it was very clear video, there's just no interpretation for it, unless you really look for it and believe in Santa. That was illegal killing 101. The individual must face punsihment.

I want to bring another perspective into this.

Consider: "The individual must face punishment."

I ask: "Which individual?"

The one that shot the guy? His superior who failed to properly instruct him / prepare him? Commander in chief of the Army for putting soldiers in these situations? President of the USA for starting this mess?

	17-11-2004 07:57									#173
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin My personal inclination is to say the man is guilty but that there were extenuating circumstances which would call for a lighter sentence. I will await the courts decision, however.

Oerdin you've been to Iraq and I highly value your opinion on this matter so I'll ask you too.

If we presume these things happen much more often -- which I believe is very likely -- at which point, at what number of similar incidents should a higher functionary be tried?

	17-11-2004 08:12									#174
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

VetLegion, well, I have to still stress out that IF the video shows all that matters. So yes, they must look all the evidence and things and not just the video, I only saw the video on news. There could be something else to it too, but I don't think he is completely innocent judging by that video alone. But.... I'm no judge and I have no evidence so, I don't know the case.

Anyway, as far as responsiblity goes, that individual who shot the guy. Then we must look who his closest superior is, and how he is responsible for the individual shooting. It goes all the way up until there is no clear show of responsibility. And no, President is not the one responsbiel for this shooting. But an officer or two might be punishable as well, though not as tough as for this individual, if he is indeed 100% guilty. Can be anything from slap to the wrist all the way to getting kicked out of the army I'd predict. But I predict slap on the wrist for the superiors, and then jail time for the individual.

	17-11-2004 08:20									#175
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Just saw more of the tape as they were entering the building and these guys knew these Iraqis were wounded and left by another unit for pick up. It doesn't look good because that changes the status of the Iraqis from battlefield wounded to captured prisoners, albeit too wounded to need guards 24/7. But it also appears to be a legitimate mistake brought on by the circumstances.

Also, the soldier who fired said the Iraqi was faking death and another soldier confirmed that he was breathing re-inforcing the shooter's perception of a threat. But I have to ask, these guys were just told there were Iraqi wounded in the building awaiting pick up. WTF! How could they see a wounded and breathing Iraqi and believe that was out of the ordinary? The Iraqis were left there by a unit that treated their wounds, of course wounded (and breathing) Iraqis were there! Oh well, put me in that situation and I would see Saddam clones coming at me from every direction, I'd be blasting away too.

	17-11-2004 08:26									#176
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Sinapus Oh sorry, am I interfering with your sanctimonious prattling?

Hardly - "when I was an infantry officer I shot the F*cking enemy wounded and ordered my men to put a round in every body they came across."

I don't have a problem with this.

	17-11-2004 08:30									#177
	Tired of ads?

At which point do these killings stop being accidental or collateral and can be said to be the real purpose of the war?

Say that Bush did plan the invasion solely to opress and kill Iraqis, how would it play out? By having American soldiers do so. So how can you exclude it a priori?


Lest someone thinks I am pulling their leg. There is a very clear analogy with my own country and a recent war here. But here:

- for the numerous cases of atrocities where the individual soldier(s) who commited them could not be identified afterwards -- very high officials were indicted. Such as Army Chief of staff.

- for the aggregate destruction, chaos and crimes of war president of the country was going to be tried (but he died so he wasn't).

I will also mention that here the war was conducted on our own territory in our own country.


So I ask -- if in a small country very highly positioned officers get tried for soldiers' "errors", and if here the aggregate of such events is (rightfully) questioned for being purposeful policy -- than why different criteria for USA?

	17-11-2004 09:27									#178
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: At which point do these killings stop being accidental or collateral and can be said to be the real purpose of the war?

When we have proof.

quote: if in a small country very highly positioned officers get tried for soldiers' "errors", and if here the aggregate of such events is (rightfully) questioned for being purposeful policy -- than why different criteria for USA?

I'd agree with that on the Abu Ghraib scandal, they didn't climb the ladder of command because that policy came from high up even though they nailed some of the little people. But this case doesn't look like the results of a policy, just some less than bright bulbs put in a really scary situation. They sure wouldn't allow reporters to film such a policy in action...

	17-11-2004 13:15									#179
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Oerdin --- You may also recall that for one month prior civilians were ordered to leave Fallujah as the city would be declared a war zone and that no one would be able to asure their safety. These people ignored both the warning and the directive on proper proceedures. These proceedures are in place so that persons who want safe passage can be identified and those persons who wish to continue combat can be told apart. That these people refused to follow proceedures which surely they must have known (as the city was saturated) is inexcusable on their part. I see that as suicide after all this is a war zone.

So, did you set up refugee camps to house the civilians while you bombed their homes? Or did you expect them to take care of themselves, walking in the desert, eating scorpions and drinking river water? Why would anyone leave his home if he has nowhere to go?

	17-11-2004 13:20									#180
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse Hardly - when I was an infantry officer I shot the F*cking enemy wounded and ordered my men to put a round in every body they came across. I don't have a problem with this.

You were in combat?