Iraqi massacre?

[Eulux]

Fairly recent developement...or something similar.

This happened about half a year ago, but is now being reported in the mainstream media...that after a bomb explosion killed the driver of a humvee the remaining three marines went on a killing spree...the marines claim 18 were killed by the bomb as well, but some media states it could have been up to 24...

one investigation has ruled out that the civilians were killed by the bomb, but were "collateral damage" of the marines returning fire on...civilians. supposedly they were shot at, but there is no evidence to support this. the fellow civilians claim that the marines weren't fired upon...infact 19 of the 24 were in their own houses. of this 19 there was only one with a gun...in their house. the deathtoll includes eight women, one child and an old man in a wheelchair.

now...I'm going to assume that this was retribution. my question is...were they justified?

thoughts?

[ComfortablyNumb]

I really do not know. I think people should let the military finish their investigation before condemning the soldiers fors their actions, and with the media getting their dirty little hands in their I doubt the military will try very hard to cover-up/protect those soldiers if it turns out their actions were unjustified.

[Armalite]

I've heard of this. Of course noone knows what happened. Gimme linkage. BTW soldiers are in the army. Marines are Marines.

edited for my own fucking reasons.

[Eulux]

meh...don't know a link offhand, I just read papers and magazines...lemme find one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5039420.stm

google loves me.

[Armalite]

now...I'm going to assume that this was retribution. my question is...were they justified?

thoughts?


Well, to get back to your question, I'd first have to say that I don't know what really happened, and couldn't tell you at this point even if I did. As the investigation is still pending, it woud be inappropriate. However, as a Marine, I can tell you that such behaviour violates every thing I was tought in boot camp, MCT, the schoolhouse, and continue to tought by my superiors. This kind of behaviour makes us all look bad, and damages any goals that may be set by individual Marines and the Corps as a whole in Iraq. One Marine's fuck ups are paid for by those Marines to his left and right. It is drummed into every Marine's head that Marines never kill non-combatants, medical personnel, the wounded, or anyone who surrenders. If an enemy is shot in the chest and falls, weapon out of hand, to the deck and cries for help it MUST be given at the earliest convenience. Obviously we tend to our own wounded and finish up the fight first, but aid will be rendered. The killing of innocent(or not so innocent, if want to argue that) civilians is an intolerable breach of discipline and professionalism. If these Marines are found guilty, they deserve everything they get.

[madscientist]

I have a friendsin the marines who has told me something pretty different from that...

[madscientist]

Ugh, and yet another friend is getting shipped off, this time to Sadr City...

[Eulux]

there was this one marine who worked with me for a while, and he always carried pictures of all his kills in his wallet. one was a kid...I have nothing against the marines, but it doesn't matter how much you drill some people, they will always be themselves and sometimes that isn't too great of a thing. While I can understand the marines being upset by the death of one of their own right in front of them, I still don't believe it gives them the right...but perhaps my opinion would change if I was there...

this was just to generally get a feel of opinion for an "outrage" of iraq.

[madscientist]

Yeah, that sounds like the stories I've heard. Exactly like them.

I know someone who's enlisting right now because he honest to god wants to kill people. He has given no other reason.

[Armalite]

I know what you are talking about. We call them moto pics or videos. We all keep them. I think your are misinterpreting them. It would be very difficult to describe the psychology behind it. There is a reason why we pump ourselves up and try to achieve a carnage loving attitude. It's basically there to act as a buffer to the stress of combat. My PME told my platoon about an incident when he was in OIF I where he and the rest of his machine gun section fucking annihilated a train of buses with heavy macine gun fire. I mean perforated the fucking things. The force of the rounds impacting actually moved the buses sideways. When they went to investigate the buses, they found them full of refugees, mostly children, trying to get the fuck out before the shit hit the fan. No one but a sick maniac enjoys this kind of thing, but sometimes things happen. No one knew what was in the bus, they just knew it was out of place, suspicious, and a possible threat. War is bad. But you can't blame the military. Blame the politicians.

[Eulux]

I blame both depending on the situation...

[SilentOctober]

You say not to blame the military...and while I'm not going to right now place direct blame anywhere, I have to ask...why not? I mean, if you sign up for the marines, you have pretty good fucking idea of what youre signiing up for. Maybe not the reality of the horror of war, i have no concept myself of that particular reality, but I know damn well that were I to join the military, they are teaching me to use that gun for a reason. Also, are soldiers completely blind to the possibility of political corruption? Do you not, in the military, point the gun and pull the trigger at whatever target your commanded to take? Fuck if I know, no experience right? But if I don't want to clean up shit, I won't be a janitor. If I don't want to kill people or invade countries, I won't join the military.

Not speaking of right or wrong mind you, despite what my opinion obviously leans toward. Honestly asking for a reason not to blame the people commiting these acts if I think they are wrong to be committing.

[Armalite]

People don't join the military with political corruption in mind. They join the military with personal reasons or some abstract patriotism in mind. And by the way, obeying illegal orders, like firing on who ever they tell you to when clearly not warranted, is itself illegal and punishable under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It is the duty of every member of the Armed Forces of the United States to disobey and report any illegal order to higher authority. By not doing so, a Marine would bring discredit and dishonor upon himself and everything the Marine Corps is supposed to stand for. We take this stuff very seriously. When incidents like this happen, people like the Commandant of the Marine Corps will do things like come out to every major command and make speeches to make sure everyon knows what I stated above. I know you think its bullshit, but I take that shit pretty serious.

[SilentOctober]

Incidents like massacers aside, innocent people die as a byproduct of war. Soldiers are the instruments that politicians use to work whatever agenda (corrupt/noncorrupt) that the war is happening to force. I'm pretty sure any soldier that signs up for the military understands that, I've never talked to anyone that didn't, so in my mind, soldiers are aware that at their hands innocent people must die. If not at their hands personaly, than by the same machine that they are enlisted to run. This reality doesn't seem to me like the kind of thing that could escape any rational man's mind, therefore is accepted by the people siging up to commit/potentially commit/attribute to these acts.

[Armalite]

And once again, the individuals who commit such acts should be found and punished according to the UCMJ. As should all authorities who issue such orders.

[Stone]

Then Bush & Co should be arrested for the illegal and unjust war on Iraq.

[piewalker]

This thread brings the My Lai (or pinkville) massacre of vietnam to mind.
Like Armalite says, U.S Marines are taught to carry moto pics and enjoy shooting the enemy, but the severe consequences of shooting a civilian are also drilled into them, and I'm guessing that under pressure things can get pretty confusing and fucked up. The vehicles the marines were in had just blown up and the driver killed. If I've interpreted the marines mentallity rightly, then I'm guessing that they're fully prepared to shoot at the enemy, but with no enemy in sight they lost it.

In vietnam the marines were informed that a number of Viet Cong were hiding in the village My Lai. They were to raid the village at 7 A.M when all villagers would be at market and anyone left were Viet Cong. When the marines arrived not one sigle shot was fired against them, but they were so hyped up about the raid, and so convinced that anyone in the village was a threat, that they opened fire.

Of course, neither of these incidents can be justified, but I'm trying to interprate the mentallity of the marines in these situations.

All this being said, I may well just be talking out of my ass, so correct me if I'm wrong Armalite.

[Armalite]

Except for the word "enjoy" you're pretty close.


And Stone, i agree about Bush and friends.

[ComfortablyNumb]

Then Bush & Co should be arrested for the illegal and unjust war on Iraq.

mmm, maybe. Unjust war, certainly, but illegal? How so? I'm not disagreeing with you, just asking for clarification and justification for the word "illegal."- which would be the only way to justify their arrest.

[piewalker]

It's illigeal because they went to war despite the U.N ruling against it.

[Armalite]

According to the UN Charter, no member nation may attack any other nation, except when defending a direct attack, without explicit UN approval. The United States is a member of the UN. Iraq did not attack the United States or any of its property or citizens. The United States invaded the nation of Iraq. Therefore, the United States is in direct violation of the UN Charter. That's a pretty big fuckin breach.

[Stone]

And the reason they used going in? WMD? All that was found was evidence cooked by the US and UK intelligence agencies.

To be honest, as much as I tirade about the US and the US military It's really only the leadership I despise. A leadership driven by a greed for power and money. To control everything and to crush anybody in the way. Reminds me of a well known Iraqi who was hanged recently. Roll on election time and please let the democrats win. Another Clinton would be a relief to the whole world.

[Armalite]

Clinton is also a war criminal. Remember that missile strike? Republican or Democrat, it's still the choice between a giant douche or a turd sandwich.

[ComfortablyNumb]

Republican or Democrat, it's still the choice between a giant douche or a turd sandwich.

EXACTLY, i love South Park. As to the illegality of the iraq war... it certainly seems as though you guys are right, however I would like to look at the specific wording of the UN charter, but I'll take your word for it at the moment. Plus, but this is just on a personal sidenote, and is not intended to support Bush in any way, my allegiance is to the United States Constitution, I really dont care what the UN says I can or cant do, and Bush's actions are legal under that document, however, on that same note, Bush and his administration, by trying to work with the UN and using it to punish our enemies, have legitimized the UN's authority over their actions and should, regardless of the UN's complete bureaucratic ineptitude, be subject to any and all puynishments set forth by their charter.

To be honest, as much as I tirade about the US and the US military It's really only the leadership I despise. A leadership driven by a greed for power and money. To control everything and to crush anybody in the way. Reminds me of a well known Iraqi who was hanged recently. Roll on election time and please let the democrats win. Another Clinton would be a relief to the whole world.

Though this statement is true, I think you are unfairly singling us out. All governments, not just the US, are driven by greed for power and money. Simply because the US has the most power and the most money (which means the ability to obtain more power and money), doesn'[t mean we're the only ones. I suspect the reason you despise the US government (don't get me wrong though, I can guarantee I hate the US government much more than you do) and only the US government is because most media sources single us out because we're the most powerful (sure, we encourage these tirades with things like Abu Ghraib, and other shit). I mean, what about Iran's ridiculous theocracy? or North Korea's wackjob? there's some pretty awful guys down in Africa too. And theres that Hugo Chavez fella down in Venezuela who is now threatening innocent shop owners with nationalization for trying to make a profit. Now, certainly the US is much, much more powerful and active than any and all of these other countries, but you cited the motives of the US as your reason to hate our government, not our actions. I can guarantee you that if any of these other nations had the ability to do what we do to get our way, they would. Thats all for that though, and once again, I'm not in any way saying you're wrong to despise the Bush administration, just that you shouldnt single us out.
As for the democrats winning the next election...I agree with Armalite- it really doesnt matter what party any candidate is from, they all should be taken out back and shot. As for Hillary Clinton being a relief to the world... maybe she'd be a relief to the rest of the world, but I am not confident in her ability to run the country, and I simply dont trust her (I dont trust any politicians, but especially not Hillary Clinton, that woman is a natural at what she does, and is much to good at lying and faking sincerity and "changing" her views along with public opinion to get my vote-however her competition leaves much to be desired, except maybe for that Barack Obama feller, but I still don't know about him-he seems good, but he's got them shifty eyes...).

[Armalite]

http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/chapter7.htm

Article 39
The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

Don't remember this ever happening.

Article 41
The Security Council may decide what measures not involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the United Nations to apply such measures. These may include complete or partial interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air, postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication, and the severance of diplomatic relations.

Did this happen? I don't think so.

Article 42
Should the Security Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security. Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air, sea, or land forces of Members of the United Nations.

So did the Security Council do this, or did Bush and Co. decide they had this authority themselves?

Article 51
Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.

This would be the only legal circumstances for an invasion. Iraq did not perform any actions that fit this mold.

[Stone]

CNumb, I agree that many governments in the world are driven by greed and corruption. Even here in Ireland the government are corrupt bastards, and I hate them too. I hate the UK government for being lying fucking hypocrites, I hate the governments in Africa and Asia who terrorise their people. I hate the Zionist government of Isreal and I hate fundamentalist governments like the Taliban were. I hate communism, I hate corruption, I hate greedy, power hungry, abusive fuckers. Most of the governments of the world are like this. To be honest, I can't think of a government who I do like. Maybe the Japanese...

[Armalite]

I'm in Japan and let me tell you, those fuckers are pretty right bastards.

[Stone]

Please elaborate? Maybe in a new thread? I'd be interested to hear why.