Marines killed Iraqis ‘in cold blood’

I can give out orders?

And who can I court marshall if they are not obeyed?

ROTFLMAO....

 

Your orders (in the context of our posts) would be directed towards racists. Once again there you go overstepping your ability. Court Marshalling would have to do with the military. You have to stay on track here. If you wish to do something about the military that would require a massive move in the way the world operates. Neither party has the ability to do that. Court Marshalling the military or its participants that is!

Hmm, are you worried that trying to give orders to an admitted racists might result in your receipt in bodily harm? What is the fear? It can't be that you're worried that your position might not be right.

You have to keep your conversations about solutions limited to reality.

 

An order, with no power to punish if not followed, is meaningless and impotent.

Sort of fits with your argument, i.e. impotent...

Stay on track here? This is about the military.

Doh!

 

Then your impotence is showing. It was your post a few back that contained the phrase:

Uhhh, I don't give orders to racists.

I thought that strange. You have to stop wiggling, there was no underlying military order implication in that post. And you don't have to have power to punish to give an order. If it makes sense, and reasonable folks are around, it would be implemented because of that point. And if there was no agreement, then so be it. Just a lame order. Sorta' fits you, you know?

If your whole case is about the military then your complete post is lame because you, I, congressman, nor senator have any ability to significantly do anything in that regard. Maybe you do write to see yourself ~ write! (To the party who PM'd me of this fact, THANKS!) The subsequent hearings would all be for show. We all know that!

 

"There are only a few racists too! Do you ever take responsibility? Can I blame you for the ills? Of course I can! Can I say you sanction bad behavior? Yes, I can. But that does not make me right."

I am not a member of the army of racists....I can't give them orders that they have to follow or be punished....like the military can punish those who don't follow orders.

Doh!

Senators and congressmen can indeed do something about the military, or have you not checked the powers of the congress....

 

The original statement was can I lump you in with them as they are mostly "white" making the assumption that you might be "white!" If you are not then so be it. The statement of "can I blame" still implies white-folks-to-white-folks.

And the question is not CAN the senators and congressmen do something, it's WILL they! And with the current crop of lame we all know the answer to that.

 

A dozen may face charges.

http://marinetimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-1823925.php

If pics are shown and they are bad - this war is toast.

 

In cold blood

Jack Murtha condemns Marines

May 25, 2006

by W. Thomas Smith, Jr.

Retired Marine Colonel and serving Congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA) has sold his soul: Not to the devil, but to his constituency. And as a former Marine, I urge him now to do the only honorable thing: relinquish his sword and his Eagle, Globe, and Anchor. At the very least, he should apologize to the Marine Corps and the American people for making an utterly outlandish statement in an attempt to keep the fire hot in the cut-and-run camp, of which he is a primary stoker.

At a press conference earlier this month, Murtha stated, “they [a squad of U.S. Marines from Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines operating in Iraq] killed innocent civilians in cold blood. And that's what the report is going to tell.” He was referring of course to the November 2005 action at Haditha, a remote farming community in Iraq’s Al Anbar Province, where Marines allegedly killed a number of innocent Iraqi civilians – including women and children – following an ambush launched against the Americans.

Keep in mind, “in cold blood” means “deliberately or cruelly; ruthlessly, showing no concern or passion, a complete lack of emotion.” In other words, killing without heart or mercy. How Murtha, who was not present with the Marines at the time of the action, purports to know how the men involved felt or what they actually did is beyond me.

Here’s what we know for a fact:

On the morning of November 19, a Marine Humvee was struck by a roadside bomb, killing Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas. Then, insurgents are said to have opened fire on the Marines from several directions. The Marines counterattacked. Several enemy combatants were killed, and apparently innocent civilians were, as well.

Within hours, I received an e-mailed press release from Multi-National Force West at Camp Fallujah, Iraq, stating: “A Marine assigned to Regimental Combat Team 2, 2nd Marine Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), was killed in action when his vehicle was attacked with an improvised explosive device attack while conducting combat operations against the enemy in the vicinity of Haditha.”

The following day, I received a second release from the 2nd Marine Division at Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi, a portion of which reads: “A U.S. Marine and 15 Iraqi civilians were killed yesterday from the blast of a roadside bomb in Haditha. Immediately following the bombing, gunmen attacked the convoy with small arms fire. Iraqi Army soldiers and Marines returned fire killing eight insurgents and wounding another.”

Just how the civilians were actually killed has been the subject of a series of investigations. Some published reports indicate there were more than 15 civilians killed, including a three-year-old girl, and that they were killed as a result of raids on at least three houses believed to be harboring insurgents. A preliminary investigation was completed in March, and three Marine officers have since been relieved of command.

What we do not know are the particulars of what actually happened and why: and we won’t know until a more thorough investigation is completed in the coming weeks, followed by possible courts martial of those involved.

A recent editorial in National Review Online pegged the Murtha condemnation accurately: “The military’s investigation of those claims isn’t finished yet, but Murtha apparently can’t wait for all the facts to emerge before damning the accused.” And an editorial in The Washington Times says the accusation is “not only irresponsible, but an egregious violation of ethical conduct by a sitting congressman.”

Indeed, but how could he? How could a retired Marine officer possibly forget, not only from whence he came, but that all Americans – including his fellow Marines who are performing the most dangerous missions on the ends of the earth – are innocent until proven guilty.

Now, this is not easy for me to write. After all, Murtha spent 37 years in the Corps, starting out as an enlisted rifleman, becoming a drill instructor, later an officer. He served in Vietnam, was highly decorated, and ultimately retired as a Reserve colonel.

Murtha’s service to our country should be respected. But unless he retracts his statement and issues a public apology to the Corps, perhaps his title (Marine) should be stripped, even if the Marines involved are ultimately found guilty.

This has nothing to do with blind obedience to a cause on either side of the political fence, or lemming-like fealty to either party. It has everything to do with being “always faithful” to the Corps, respecting our Marines in the field, and above all acknowledging the fact that the Marines involved are accorded the presumption of innocence until the Uniform Code of Military Justice deems otherwise.

I’m not making excuses for those who may have done something incomprehensibly dark in the heat of battle. I pray they did not. If anyone is found to be guilty of committing war crimes, they should be punished; and if found guilty I am confident they will be.

But that is not the case as of this writing. It was not the case when Murtha accused unconvicted Marines of killing “in cold blood.”

When I was a young Marine-recruit, I was taught there is no such thing as an ex-Marine: Marines are either active, reserve, retired, former, or dead; thus the adage, “Once a Marine, always a Marine.”

The only ex-Marines were those whom did not make it through boot camp; or as we liked to say those not packing the gear to serve in the Corps. The only other way for a Marine to become an ex-Marine would be to shame or denigrate the Corps in such a way that he would essentially be excommunicated, which – it pains me to say – is what Colonel Murtha should be.

 

LOL, the same hypocrits who purported to know that Saddam had WMD even though they were not in Iraq and the inspectors who were there could not find it are now all of a sudden the biggest proponents of the presumption of innocence.

They were wrong about Iraq, there was no WMD, unfortunately Murtha is probably right about the marines, he does know what the report is going to say.

 

"Probably right"??

If he's right, it will come out. Murtha should have waited for the investigation instead of jumping to conclusions.