Marine: Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgment
D. Spencer Hines
Sunday, May 28, 2006
The Washington Post
"A year ago I was charged with two counts of premeditated murder and with
other war crimes related to my service in Iraq. My wife and mother sat in a
Camp Lejeune courtroom for five days while prosecutors painted me as a
monster; then autopsy evidence blew their case out of the water, and the
Marine Corps dropped all charges against me ["Marine Officer Cleared in
Killing of Two Iraqis," news story, May 27, 2005].
So I know something about rushing to judgment, which is why I am so
disturbed by the remarks of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) regarding the
Haditha incident ["Death Toll Rises in Haditha Attack, GOP Leader Says,"
news story, May 20]. Mr. Murtha said, "Our troops overreacted because of the
pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
In the United States, we have a civil and military court system that relies
on an investigatory and judicial process to make determinations based on
evidence. The system is not served by such grand pronouncements of horror
and guilt without the accuser even having read the investigative report.
Mr. Murtha's position is particularly suspect when he is quoted by news
services as saying that the strain of deployment "has caused them [the
Marines] to crack in situations like this." Not only is he certain of the
Marines' guilt but he claims to know the cause, which he conveniently
attributes to a policy he opposes.
Members of the U.S. military serving in Iraq need more than Mr. Murtha's
pseudo-sympathy. They need leaders to stand with them even in the hardest of
times. Let the courts decide if these Marines are guilty. They haven't even
been charged with a crime yet, so it is premature to presume their guilt --
unless that presumption is tied to a political motive.
ILARIO PANTANO
Jacksonville, N.C.
-------------------------------
"The writer served as a Marine enlisted man in the Persian Gulf War and most
recently as a platoon commander in Iraq."
-------------------------------
DSH
Lux et Veritas et Libertas
Vires et Honor
Ian MacLure
news:3Xqeg.553$3k3....@eagle.america.net:
> "Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgment"
Mr Murtha is I gather now referred to in Marine circles
as a "former" Marine. Being a "former" Marine is more or
less equivalent to being called a traitor by your peers.
IBM
D. Spencer Hines
Lee Harvey Oswald was also a "former Marine".
Murtha is simply an assassin with greater reach and power than Oswald.
DSH
"Ian MacLure" <i...@svpal.org> wrote in message
news:Xns97D1DC4C88...@216.196.97.131...
CarpATM
news:p41q72l9i3sv63d1v...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 29 May 2006 01:06:58 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
> <pogue...@hotmail.com>
> accused of
> murder during this war. LT Pantano gave up a good job at Goldman Sach in
> order
> to go back in. The anti war movement has been pushing for any, and all,
> charges
> in order to discourage soldiers and Marines. If everyone feels that they
> will
> get screwed then no one will serve. Murtha seems to be assuming guilty,
> not
> listening to all the evidence. It is like he wants the Marines to be a
> parade
> ground military like Canada's and Europe's armies are.
>
>
Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable John P.
Murtha.
Ian MacLure
news:YLudnevBev2Z_OPZ...@comcast.com:
[snip]
> Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
> accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable John P.
> Murtha.
Well except for the fact that Mr Pantano has put his ass on
the line far more recently than has Miiiiister Murtha.
IBM
D. Patterson
CarpATM wrote:
Murtha's accomplishments with self-admitted dubious Purple Hearts,
Bronze Star, etc.; ABSCAM; prejudice against fellow Marines; and
prejudice against fellow veterans with more valorious deeds than
anything Murtha aspires to even claim are hardly accomplishments for
anyone including Murtha to brag about. The fact that Murtha and the DNC
would even attempt to do so speaks volumes about the quality of
judgement of Murtha and the DNC.
Murtha's War Hero Status Called Into Question
http://www.grunt.com/forum/topic.asp?ARCHIVE=true&TOPIC_ID=76263
Jack Linthicum
Very interesting, the rush seems to have been to cover up not to judge.
Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the commander of Multinational Corps Iraq,
anyone remember him? Had a few words to say about Brigadier Nigel
Aylwin-Foster article in U.S. Army magazine Military Review, about
Army rigidity. Some say this incident is an example of over-stressed
units overreacting to events and then covering them up.
http://select.nytimes.com/iht/2006/02/01/international/01globalist.ht...
"I am troubled by the initial news stories," Bush said in his first
public comments about the deaths of about two dozen civilians at
Haditha last November. "I'm mindful that there's a thorough
investigation going on. If, in fact, laws were broken, there will be
punishment." I think I have heard almost that exact phrase used in a
different context.
Associated Press
Report: False Testimony in Haditha Probe
By NEDRA PICKLER , 06.01.2006, 07:47 AM
A U.S. military investigation into actions taken following a deadly
incident in western Iraq will conclude that some officers gave false
testimony to their superiors, The Washington Post reported, while a
commander in Iraq announced new core values training on moral and
ethical standards on the battlefield for U.S. troops.
The order from Lt. Gen. Peter Chiarelli, the commander of Multinational
Corps Iraq, came as the U.S. military investigated whether U.S. Marines
might have intentionally killed unarmed civilians in the Iraqi town of
Haditha on Nov. 19.
The killings, in which victims included women and children, followed a
bomb attack on a military convoy that killed a Marine.
"As military professionals, it is important that we take time to
reflect on the values that separate us from our enemies," Chiarelli
said. "The challenge for us is to make sure the actions of a few do not
tarnish the good work of the many."
The training will be conducted in units over the next 30 days and was
aimed at reinforcing training service members received prior to their
deployment, according to the statement.
"Of the nearly 150,000 Coalition Forces presently in Iraq, 99.9 percent
of them perform their jobs magnificently every day," Chiarelli said.
Of those troops, about 130,000 are from the United States.
The Post reported that Marine commanders failed to scrutinize reports
adequately, according to an article that first appeared on the paper's
Web site Wednesday night.
The probe, which is separate from an investigation into possible
criminal actions by Marines on Nov. 19, 2005, in Haditha, in Anbar
province, also will call for changes in how troops are trained for duty
in Iraq, the Post reported.
On Wednesday, President Bush promised that any Marines involved in the
alleged murders of Iraqi civilians will be punished. A senior officer
said the case could undermine Iraqis' support for the presence of
American troops.
"I am troubled by the initial news stories," Bush said in his first
public comments about the deaths of about two dozen civilians at
Haditha last November. "I'm mindful that there's a thorough
investigation going on. If, in fact, laws were broken, there will be
punishment."
Military investigators have evidence that points toward unprovoked
murders by Marines, a senior defense official said last week.
At first, the American military described what happened as an ambush on
a joint U.S.-Iraqi patrol, with a roadside bombing and subsequent
firefight killing 15 civilians, eight insurgents and a Marine. The
statement said the 15 civilians were killed by the blast, a claim the
residents of Haditha strongly denied.
With some in Congress alleging a cover-up, the Bush administration
offered assurances the facts will be made public.
Bush's spokesman, Tony Snow, urged patience as the Marines conduct what
he called a vigorous investigation. He said a report will come out in
"a matter of weeks, not a matter of months" and include public release
of photographic evidence. "We're going to see everything," Snow said.
Once that investigation is completed, a senior Marine commander in Iraq
will decide whether to press charges of murder or other violations of
the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The probe into the actions of
officers after the Haditha event is expected to conclude by the end of
this week, the Post reported. The criminal investigation is expected to
wrap up sometime this summer.
At the Pentagon, Army Brig. Gen. Carter Ham would not discuss any
aspect of the probe, but he stressed the potential harm caused by
allegations alone.
"Allegations such as this, regardless of how they are borne out by the
facts, can have an effect on the ability of U.S. forces to continue to
operate," said Ham, a deputy operations director for the Joint Staff
and a former commander of U.S. forces in northern Iraq.
"We do rely very heavily - and more importantly, the Iraqi security
forces rely heavily - on the support from the Iraqi people," Ham said.
"And anything that tends to diminish that, obviously, is not helpful to
what we're trying to do."
Until now the most infamous violation of military law in Iraq was the
Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse involving Army soldiers, which came to light
in April 2004. Bush said last week he considered Abu Ghraib to be the
most costly U.S. mistake of the war.
Larry
>
>
> Murtha's accomplishments with self-admitted dubious Purple Hearts,
> Bronze Star, etc.;
Ah jeez, the swifty shuffle starts again.
Quick! Everyone join in, the conga line is forming!
You guys are so predictable with your pack attack horse shit. In the
immortal words of your favorite Vice President (emphasis on the vice)
GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
D. Patterson
Larry wrote:
Spoken like a truly profane Democrat, as usual. Of course, if you had
paid any attention at all to the source, you would have noticed that the
chief accuser is none other than a Democratic Congressman from
Pennsylvania and a decorated Vietnam veteran who served with the 82nd
Airborne and 101st Airborne Divisions. Evidently you seem to think
people like Murtha are supposed to have some kind of special kind of
immunity to denigrate the reputations of fellow veteran Marines like
Pantano with false accusations of murder, incomptence of the Marines and
Army, and engage in schemes like ABSCAM with impunity. You don't seem to
understand or respect the fact that when real combat veterans like
Ritchie Cunningham or wannabee heroes like Murtha screwup, there are
consequences, and rightly so. Murtha cannot badmouth fellow veterans
with impunity, and he certainly cannot badmouth the Marine Corps and the
United States and not expect his own conduct to be reviewed under a
microscope. Being a combat veteran does not exempt anyone from
responsibility for their actions and their statements, especially when
such actions and statements may be seen by some critics as going down
the same road taken by Benedict Arnold, who was a very capable combat
officer and yet a traitor.
CarpATM
news:447E8BF0...@fidalgo.net...
are in agreement with Congressman Murtha rather than your pathetic ilk?
La N
Without prejudice. Help me understand this, Patterson. Is Murtha loathed
all of a sudden (and, I say, all of a sudden because prior to this incident
I heard glowing reports from Republican and Democrat talking heads about his
bipartisan leadership skills and service) ... is he loathed for telling a
lie? Or is he dissed for being a Democrat? Or is he hated for breaking a
"code", known among military people and other cultures - you don't narc on a
brother?
Well?
- nilita
D. Patterson
CarpATM wrote:
It will be very entertaining to watch you post the links where "CJCS
General Peter Pace and USMC Commandant Hagee are in agreement with
Congressman Murtha" as Murtha falsely accused Pantano of being a
murderer, embroiled himself and members of his family in the
self-dealing of ABSCAM, and unsuccessfully for a time lobbied
Congressmen to award him Purple Hearts for the events that took place
long ago in Vietnam.
D. Patterson
La N wrote:
I don't know that he is or is not loathed by anyone, excpet to the
extent he has made blanket accusations against fellow veterans and the
Marine Corps. In other words, there are many people who regret or
otherwise disapprove of the way Murtha seems to be using his real and/or
imagined status as a combat veteran to promote a political cause that is
believed by his critics to be harmful at best, cowardly at worst, and
falsely disparaging of the armed services and nation in any case. To
make matters worse, Murtha and the DNC seem to be willing to use
Murtha's real and/or imagined status as a combat veteran as an excuse to
make criticism of his politics beyond reproach and beyond criticism.
This rankles many veterans of all political parties, because any such
deflection of criticism of Murtha's statements appears to imply that the
conflicting opinions of other combat veterans disputing Murtha are
somehow less valid and less worthy despite their superior service
records and deeds of valor. One of the men who criticized Murtha and his
military service record was a Congressman from Pennsylvania in Murtha's
own Democratic Party. There is a long history of puffery of military
service records in politics which long predates the history of the
United States all the way to Ancient civilizations. Tippacanoe and Tyler
Too was used with effect, as were many other slogans such as Roosevelt's
politically legendary Charge Up San juan Hill. President Lyndon Baines
Johnson succumbed to the temptation of accepting an award he said he had
not really earned. So, the issue of puffery in elections is real, and a
close examination of Kerry's activities with the Winter Soldier Hearings
can be very instructive of how such puffery can be used disloyally. In
politics, every person is responsible for his/her actions and
statements, regardless of whether or not they are a combat veteran. If a
politician represents himself or herself to be something he or she is is
not and never was, the electorate has very good cause to be suspicious
of that politician's motives and and goals as they seek to influence
public policy for everyone.
I could care less about Murtha, but I do care about the policies Murtha
seeks to influence. So long as he tells the truth, the whole truth, and
does not deceive with half truths, he deserves to be heard; but he and
his political party also must also respect the right of others to
likewise seek the truth and be heard as they too seek to influence
public policy for the benefit of the nation. This cannot happen when an
individual and their political party seek to put their personal
performance, actions, comments, and statements regarding public policy
beyond public review and criticism.
CarpATM
character -
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2029993
Face it, Mr. Patterson - "You can't handle the truth!"
La N
Okay, I certainly understand that when people put their credentials and
medals OUT THERE thinking it gives them carte blanche to opine on whatever
politically heated topic ... that same puffery will be used against them by
those who oppose their opinions.
Would Murtha's stand have been more "acceptable" if he had cushioned it with
a proclamation such as, "I don't want these heinous acts by a handful of
Marines to reflect badly on our servicemen and women, 99.99 percent of whom
perform brilliantly and with integrity" ?
I think I recall Bush saying something similar in a news soundbite this
morning.
- nilita
Colin Campbell
wrote:
>Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
>accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable John P.
>Murtha.
What are Mr. Murtha's 'achievements?' A Purple Heart granted under
suspicious conditions?
Face it _ Murtha was doing nothing but media grandstanding. He will
throw any servicemember under a bus in order to further his political
career.
>
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
D. Patterson
CarpATM wrote:
No, the topic was your comment, "Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before
he will have half the accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of
the Honorable John P. Murtha." As I have shown, your claim that Murtha's
accomplishments are something superior to be proud of to the exclusion
of other veterans such as Pantano is impeached by fellow veterans and
fellow members of Congress in the Democratic Party.
Any "petty ravings" in this discussion are your own as everyone can see
by your use of profanity and demeaning language.
It remains to be seen if and when Murtha apoligizes to Pantano for
rushing to judgement before a trial was even held and wrongfully
accusing Pantano of committing murder. No matter how the Haditha
investigation and any trials resulting from that investigation turn out,
the fact will remain that Murtha used his position as a U.S. Congressmen
to prejudicially presume the U.S. Marines to be guilty of murder
before an investigation had been concluded or the U.S. Marines had been
charged with any crime whatsoever. It really makes you wonder what kind
of U.S. Marine officer Murtha was when he uses his privileged position
as a former officer and a U.S. Congressman, sworn to protect and defend
the Constitution of the United States, and proceeds to publicly presume
and pronounce U.S. Marines to be guilty until proven innocent of
accusations that are not even being prosecuted yet.
La N
>
>
> It remains to be seen if and when Murtha apoligizes to Pantano for
> rushing to judgement before a trial was even held and wrongfully accusing
> Pantano of committing murder. No matter how the Haditha investigation and
> any trials resulting from that investigation turn out, the fact will
> remain that Murtha used his position as a U.S. Congressmen to
> prejudicially presume the U.S. Marines to be guilty of murder before an
> investigation had been concluded or the U.S. Marines had been charged with
> any crime whatsoever. It really makes you wonder what kind of U.S. Marine
> officer Murtha was when he uses his privileged position as a former
> officer and a U.S. Congressman, sworn to protect and defend the
> Constitution of the United States, and proceeds to publicly presume and
> pronounce U.S. Marines to be guilty until proven innocent of accusations
> that are not even being prosecuted yet.
>
>
Now, this is true. He was challenged by Paula Zahn of CNN on this issue - I
believe, yesterday - to which he replied that what he says is true, has been
known for some time, and that he will be redeemed in his statements.
Having said that, yes, it is rather tacky to proclaim someone guilty before
prosecution.
- nilita
D. Patterson
La N wrote:
The phrase, "I don't want these heinous acts by a handful of Marines to
reflect badly on our servicemen and women....", presumes guilt until
innocence is proven; so such a phrasing is unacceptable. These men,
innocent or guilty, are serving in combat to defend a Constitution which
guarantees the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Consequently, these Marines have a right to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty by a competent tribunal. Murtha has abused his privileged
position as a U.S. Congressman by publicly presuming the Marines to be
guilty of the crime of murder without a full investigation, without
prosecution, and without trial by a competent court martial to which the
accused are entitled. Congressman Murtha has engaged in conduct
prejudicial to the rights of the men he has sworn to protect and defend
by means of the U.S. Constitution and his oath as a former officer of
the U.S. Marine Corps.
> I think I recall Bush saying something similar in a news soundbite this
> morning.
>
> - nilita
I just heard the NPR broadcast of President Bush's comments about the
Haditha investigation. I noticed how President Bush was careful enough
in his phrasing to distinguish the difference between accusations versus
any guilty parties a subsequent court martial may identify. Promising
punishment for those persons a court martial finds guilty of a criminal
act is reasonable and non-prejudicial. Presuming the presence of guilt
in advance of a court martial is prejudicial.
La N
Very good points, Patterson. I don't disagree with you.
If the Marines are found guilty and there is discovered to be systemic
cover-up, do you think the (alleged) guilty should be prosecuted to the
furthest extent of the law? And, even the DoD is saying ... it don't look
good at all.
What I'm getting at is .... This sure doesn't look good and already
prejudices the world against the U.S.A. I would recommend, if it turns out
that these Iraqis were the innocent victims of rampant slaughter on the part
of Marines, that the U.S. make the strongest condemnation possible against
the perps and this act.
But, then ... *nobody* ever listens to *moi* .....
- nilita
La N
"Colin Campbell" <activa...@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote in
message news:k4ev72dq5f1qoeo3r...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 31 May 2006 23:37:07 -0400, "CarpATM" <mr.bi...@comcast.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
>>accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable John P.
>>Murtha.
>
> What are Mr. Murtha's 'achievements?' A Purple Heart granted under
> suspicious conditions?
>
> Face it _ Murtha was doing nothing but media grandstanding. He will
> throw any servicemember under a bus in order to further his political
> career.
>
>
tsk tsk tsk. Very bad form, Colin. "throw .... under a bus ..."????
For a person who wishes to further his career in either the military *or*
politics, here is a recommended statement: "I admit that the situation
doesn't look very good. However, Congressman Murtha went well beyond the
bounds of what we uphold to be dear in the Constitution of the U.S. - the
accused are innocent until proven guilty."
This is in recognition that a significant number of servicemen seem to agree
with Murtha, and you can't even *pretend* to represent *all* servicemen,
never mind the citizens or government of the U.S.
I mean ... I'm just sayin' ...
- nilita
D. Patterson
La N wrote:
Much of the world is prejudiced against the "U.S.A." no matter what the
U.S.A. does or fails to do. If the United States Government prosecutes
and punishes any guilty parties to the fullest extent of the law,
government and military officials and famililes in many other nations
will assume the United States may also proceed against their citizens
with no less harsh treatment and punishment in similar circumstances, so
those goverments may harbor more distrust in the future when joint
military operations are proposed. If the United States does not
prosecute the accused, there will be no shortage of critics to castigate
the United States for a failure to find the accused guilty of some major
crimes no matter whether or not anyone was guilty of a crime. If the
United States does prosecute and does not find all of the accused to be
guilty and/or does not find cause to punish all of the accused to the
fullest extent of the law, there will be no shortage critics accusing
the United States Government of being too soft on the accused. If the
United States never reported or accepted a report of such alleged
crimes, as most nations do in such circumstances, the United States
would be criticized for covering up real crimes and non-existant crimes.
In other words, the world will criticize the United States no matter
what the United States Government does or does not do. In such a
circumstance, the United States Government will disregard the prejudiced
world opinion and act to satisfy its own standards for the trial and
punishment of such alleged criminal acts.
If the worlds' critics had any good sense whatsoever, they would
impartially note both sides of the problem and note how the trial and
punishment of the guuilty parties, if any, is actually a good thing for
the United States and not something to be a cauase for prejudice against
the United States. As anyone who has been around combat operations
around most places in the world should know quite well, nearly any and
all combat operations result in misdeeds by some troops no matter how
well led and disciplined they may be overall. It is not a question of if
members of an armed force can sooner or later commit crimes. It is only
a question of when, where, how often, and what is done about the
criminal acts when they finally do occur. The fact that the United
States Government takes such accusations seriously as often as it does
should be remarkable all by itself. Given the numbers of troops the
United States has had engaged in combat operations, it must be asked
what other nation/s have ever taken the responsibility to investigate,
prosecute, and punish such crimes among its armed forces as freely and
often as the United States Government?
La N
I don't disagree with you, Patterson.
However, the U.S. - or, rather, GWB - purports to hold the nation to at
least a higher standard than most of us peons in the rest of the world. "We
are a nation of laws," says GWB.
It appears that this alleged crime would have / could have continued
inconsequential until some reporters brought it to the forefront. Unless
those with a conscience hadn't done so, the U.S. would have acted no
differently from any 3rd world country except for compensating each famiy
something like $2,500 per victim.
The trouble with this is ... as more time goes by, the more the Iraqis
(never mind the world) resent the presence of the Coalition forces in their
country, and they are going to start to challenge more the deaths of
*other* innocent civilians on the part of - especially - the U.S. military.
IOW the U.S. military is going to have to mind its P's and Q's more than
ever from hereonin.
YOu see, you are in a position where this war is extremely unpopular with
your own citizenry, never mind the rest of the world! Unfortunately, thus
the onus is on *you* to put on a better performance than the insurgents.
I could write a whole other essay about re-deploying troops 2, 3, and 4
times over and the obvious (psychological) consequences of that.
Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
horrific slaughter of innocents.
I try to tell some of you Conservatives how you can un-do and/or neutralize
some of the damage ... but ... ehem ..... nobody EVER listens to *moi* ....
- nilita
Vince
It is also important not to confuse the "facts" of what we think
happened with with the "verdicts" of tribunals in individual criminal
cases. Tribunals make "operative" decisions about individuals, not
factual determinations. Such verdicts are strongly affected by both
procedure and evidence.
Similarly even "official" investigations may or may not be focused on
the facts that the public wants to hear as opposed to the facts that
those setting up the investigation want to hear. .
In general the role of political and public pressure is to make sure
that the facts are revealed, in so far as they can be. Normally those
with a vested interest in the facts being concealed will scream
about politician's "premature" statements. this is the routine behavior
of those who would not want the facts out in the first place.
These factors are the same whether we are talking about Haditha, Bill
Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, Pearl harbor, the Titanic, The Lusitania,
Hurricane Katrina or any other controversial event.
Vince
CarpATM
news:k2Pfg.7832$S61.5826@edtnps90...
involved have already made confessions.
Vince
As always you have to distinguish between individual guilt, for which
presumptions of innocence always apply, and statements of the probable
existence of a set of facts, for which totally different evidence and
rules of proof apply.
Vince
Jack Linthicum
The kind of Marine Mr. Murtha appears to be is to function as the
"outside" voice for those officers and men trapped in the service and
unable to tell what happened without incurring penalties. He has done
this in the past, even General Pace called him when he made the speech
about pulling back.
As an aside the number of people in Hadith who were killed by an IED
inside their homes without any damage to the house itself would suggest
the bad guys had a neutron bomb or something.
The U.S.forces (and given recent problems in Basra Coalition forces)
have been stretched so thin that when they see and feel an event like
the killing of one of their best, while the locals knew the bomb was
there, they react in a manner that imitate poilice officers faced with
the same situation. Witnesses that won't talk are considered hostile
and must be taught a lesson and made to talk. Only after the lesson has
been meted out do the troops realize they have done something wrong.
dan
That ain't no conga line, it's a daisy chain.
Hope you know the difference...
Dan
La N
"Jack Linthicum" <jackli...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1149249730....@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
I find this discussion quite interesting on so many levels - mostly, on the
human level. One can only imagine *why* people act as they do - whether it
be the Marines in question, whether it be Murtha, whether it be those who
allegedly tried to cover it up. Why some support Murtha. Why others hate
him.
I've said it so many times - albeit half-jokingly - there should be some way
to fashion robots to take on the job of fighting wars. Most, if not all,
sentient human beings have their breaking point. That people are
re-deployed to a war 2, 3, 4 times where the enemy is not obvious and where
carnage is the norm, it doesn't surprise me at all that these things happen.
One of the soldiers who had to go into the house after the incident to
retrieve the bodies and take them to the morgue is suffering from horrible
PTSD, according to his mother. The family of the soldier who died and whose
death ignited the alleged rampage is living their grief all over again daily
as new reports come out.
- nilita
Soren Larsen
> "Colin Campbell" <activa...@earthlink.net (remove underscore)>
> wrote in message news:k4ev72dq5f1qoeo3r...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 31 May 2006 23:37:07 -0400, "CarpATM"
>> <mr.bi...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
>>> accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable
>>> John P. Murtha.
>>
>> What are Mr. Murtha's 'achievements?' A Purple Heart granted under
>> suspicious conditions?
>>
>> Face it _ Murtha was doing nothing but media grandstanding. He will
>> throw any servicemember under a bus in order to further his political
>> career.
>>
>>
>
> tsk tsk tsk. Very bad form, Colin. "throw .... under a bus ..."????
>
> For a person who wishes to further his career in either the military
> *or* politics, here is a recommended statement: "I admit that the
> situation doesn't look very good. However, Congressman Murtha went
> well beyond the bounds of what we uphold to be dear in the
> Constitution of the U.S. - the accused are innocent until proven
> guilty."
There is a difference between stating that a massacre was comitted by
US marines as seems to be the case, and assuming guilt on behalf of
individual marines.
I wouldn't expect Patterson and Cambel to understand the difference,
but I expected better from you.
Soren Larsen
--
History is not what it used to be.
Jack Linthicum
Another person caught in the middle is the guy who was wounded by the
IED, did not take part in events ensuing, has an obligation to his unit
and yet doesn't want to be one of those standing in front of a My Lai
court.
In answer to a question from my wife: Lieutenant later Captain William
Calley is the manager of a jewelry store in Columbus, GA.
La N
"Soren Larsen" <soh...@tiscali.dk> wrote in message
news:4480580e$0$47035$edfa...@dread15.news.tele.dk...
Ummm .... wha????? You expected *better* of *moi*? What should I have said
to get in your good books, then? ...%)
- nilita, not that I care or anything ... this is just a mental exercise for
me ....
Glenn Dowdy
>
>
> In answer to a question from my wife: Lieutenant later Captain William
> Calley is the manager of a jewelry store in Columbus, GA.
>
Family business, IIRC.
Glenn D.
La N
The rippling effect from the damaged lives of each of these individuals has
huge implications, a subject on which I could discourse on and on ad
infinitum ad nauseum, but then we would be skirting the realm of esoterica,
and I don't want to bore the gentle audience.
Yeah, I kinda heard that Calley was a working stiff who has blended into
anonymous society.
- nilita
Soren Larsen
Use the same standard for both sides.
Would Murtha have gone in your bad book for claiming that
the insurgents were responsible for a massacre, even though no
individual had been convicted for said massacre?
La N
Murtha's *not* in my bad book. I feel incredibly neutral about him. I was
just trying to examine the issue from all sides, trying to put myself in the
"boots", if you will, of all the participants in this drama - whether they
be in Iraq, Washington, DC, or Usenet.
Chill. It's what I do for fun to de-stress from a work week.
- nil
Soren Larsen
Neither are you in mine.
I was just surpriced that you apparently didn't see
this angle of the argument, since you usually do see more
angles.
> I was just trying to examine the issue from all sides, trying to put
> myself in the "boots", if you will, of all the participants in this
> drama - whether they be in Iraq, Washington, DC, or Usenet.
>
> Chill. It's what I do for fun to de-stress from a work week.
I just got home from work and started this to de-stress.
Assuming you are across the pond, you must have had one
hellish week.
Cheers
La N
I see lots of angles, alright. Sometimes, though, when I'm tired I tend to
suffer from dysangleitis, a deficiency of angles.
>
>
>> I was just trying to examine the issue from all sides, trying to put
>> myself in the "boots", if you will, of all the participants in this
>> drama - whether they be in Iraq, Washington, DC, or Usenet.
>>
>> Chill. It's what I do for fun to de-stress from a work week.
>
> I just got home from work and started this to de-stress.
>
> Assuming you are across the pond, you must have had one
> hellish week.
Rather intense. But I rose to the occasion(s).
- nil
dapra
Mental exercise? OK. Let's try it, removed it from the present
situation. Just take some basic facts.
A far superior power attacks an inferior one. As usual far superior
powers are always threatened by inferior ones. The superior ones have no
choice but to attack. The more superior the power is, the more insecure
they are, the more necessity to attack others to preserve peace. The
justification for the attack may turn out to be untrue, but that usually
is an insignificant little matter.
After the inferior power is destroyed, it needs to be occupied, to make
them enlightened to the ways the superior power works.
There are always some elements of the inferior nation that resist the
superior nation's way. Is there any way for the superior benefactors,
but eliminate them? For the sake of humanity, world peace of course.
Are you ready to puke, I am.
La N
"dapra" <dap...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:zoKdndehA5n...@comcast.com...
This is off topic to the thread, you're going off in several tangents and
presenting at least a couple faulty premises.
Or.
This is your opinion, emotionally laden as it is; and I will take it as just
that.
- nilita
dapra
I might have made a long build up, but it was to prove, that the
'superior power' has no choice, but brutally suppress the resistance, if
they want to rule. Terrorizing the population is part of the deal.
An occupation is 'nice' if the occupied cooperate. It's brutal and
bloody, if the don't. Putting the face of democracy on it, is
hypocritical. It's only for domestic consumption of the occupiers.
I tried to put Haditha in a larger context, if it happened or not. I
think it did, and a lot more. It's the necessary consequence of the
situation.
hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com
Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:
> On Mon, 29 May 2006 01:06:58 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines" <pogue...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> |"Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgment"
> |
> |Sunday, May 28, 2006
> |
> |The Washington Post
> |
> |"A year ago I was charged with two counts of premeditated murder and with
> |other war crimes related to my service in Iraq. My wife and mother sat in a
> |Camp Lejeune courtroom for five days while prosecutors painted me as a
> |monster; then autopsy evidence blew their case out of the water, and the
> |Marine Corps dropped all charges against me ["Marine Officer Cleared in
> |Killing of Two Iraqis," news story, May 27, 2005].
> |
> |So I know something about rushing to judgment, which is why I am so
> |disturbed by the remarks of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) regarding the
> |Haditha incident ["Death Toll Rises in Haditha Attack, GOP Leader Says,"
> |news story, May 20]. Mr. Murtha said, "Our troops overreacted because of the
> |pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-06-02-ishaqi_x.htm?csp=24
CarpATM
news:1149288398.8...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
killing of civilians.
Colin Campbell
wrote:
And you . . . completely missed my point. (Which was a criticism of a
politician who is using this incident for political purposes.)
And FYI - Mr. Murtha has a lost a lot of trust from members of the
military over the past year or so.
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Colin Campbell
wrote:
>Would Murtha have gone in your bad book for claiming that
>the insurgents were responsible for a massacre, even though no
>individual had been convicted for said massacre?
He would have in mine - for jumping to conclusions prior to the
completion of the investigation.
Gunner
wrote:
>D. Patterson wrote:
>>
>>
>> Murtha's accomplishments with self-admitted dubious Purple Hearts,
>> Bronze Star, etc.;
>
>Ah jeez, the swifty shuffle starts again.
>
>Quick! Everyone join in, the conga line is forming!
>
>You guys are so predictable with your pack attack horse shit. In the
>immortal words of your favorite Vice President (emphasis on the vice)
>GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
But your mantra of Bush was AWOL and the Swift Vets are full of shit,
are ok.
Is that your claim?
Hypocrit.
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
Gunner
wrote:
>
>Spoken like a truly profane Democrat, as usual. Of course, if you had
>paid any attention at all to the source, you would have noticed that the
>chief accuser is none other than a Democratic Congressman from
>Pennsylvania and a decorated Vietnam veteran who served with the 82nd
>Airborne and 101st Airborne Divisions. Evidently you seem to think
>people like Murtha are supposed to have some kind of special kind of
>immunity to denigrate the reputations of fellow veteran Marines like
>Pantano with false accusations of murder, incomptence of the Marines and
>Army, and engage in schemes like ABSCAM with impunity. You don't seem to
>understand or respect the fact that when real combat veterans like
>Ritchie Cunningham or wannabee heroes like Murtha screwup, there are
>consequences, and rightly so. Murtha cannot badmouth fellow veterans
>with impunity, and he certainly cannot badmouth the Marine Corps and the
>United States and not expect his own conduct to be reviewed under a
>microscope. Being a combat veteran does not exempt anyone from
>responsibility for their actions and their statements, especially when
>such actions and statements may be seen by some critics as going down
>the same road taken by Benedict Arnold, who was a very capable combat
>officer and yet a traitor.
On the other hand..the Leftoids well and truely defamed the 50 or so
Swift Vets and painted them the most hidious as can be..even though
even a small fraction of the group earned enough gongs and awards to
sink a small battle ship.
The Leftoids are hypocrits first, last and foremost.
Gunner
wrote:
>I don't know that he is or is not loathed by anyone, excpet to the
>extent he has made blanket accusations against fellow veterans and the
>Marine Corps. In other words, there are many people who regret or
>otherwise disapprove of the way Murtha seems to be using his real and/or
>imagined status as a combat veteran to promote a political cause that is
>believed by his critics to be harmful at best, cowardly at worst, and
>falsely disparaging of the armed services and nation in any case.
John Kerry did the same..and the Left ate it up like it was truth
incarnate.
WHen Kerry was proven to have lied like a rug..the Leftoids conviently
forgot all about that portion of his life.
Being a decorated combat vet does not make one able to walk on water.
If it did...Id never need swim fins.
Gunner
wrote:
>
>Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
>Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
>horrific slaughter of innocents.
And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
Yours?
Gunner
wrote:
>
>"Colin Campbell" <activa...@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote in
>message news:k4ev72dq5f1qoeo3r...@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 31 May 2006 23:37:07 -0400, "CarpATM" <mr.bi...@comcast.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
>>>accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable John P.
>>>Murtha.
>>
>> What are Mr. Murtha's 'achievements?' A Purple Heart granted under
>> suspicious conditions?
>>
>> Face it _ Murtha was doing nothing but media grandstanding. He will
>> throw any servicemember under a bus in order to further his political
>> career.
>>
>>
>
>tsk tsk tsk. Very bad form, Colin. "throw .... under a bus ..."????
>
>For a person who wishes to further his career in either the military *or*
>politics, here is a recommended statement: "I admit that the situation
>doesn't look very good. However, Congressman Murtha went well beyond the
>bounds of what we uphold to be dear in the Constitution of the U.S. - the
>accused are innocent until proven guilty."
>
>This is in recognition that a significant number of servicemen seem to agree
>with Murtha, and you can't even *pretend* to represent *all* servicemen,
>never mind the citizens or government of the U.S.
>
>I mean ... I'm just sayin' ...
>
>- nilita
>
Other similar politicians did the same in the past...I suggest you
review " Winter Soldier" as a google search term.
La N
"Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
news:bvd282pbnh5ihlihm...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 06:40:57 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
>>Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
>>horrific slaughter of innocents.
>
>
> And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
> bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
>
> Yours?
>
The rest of the world, including my part, predicted this would happen before
the U.S. even went in. You want to force your way on another people, you
are going to deal with the counterforces. Cause and effect. Duh!
Every day the news from Iraq horrifies people in the world. It's hard not
to blame Bush for this.
Jack Linthicum
Please name two members of the military, serving in Iraq or at the
Pentagon, who have "lost a lot of trust" in John Murtha.
Murtha is their mouthpiece, he is repeating what he has been told by
the very people you claim have "lost their trust".
John P. Mullen
Another echo of 'Nam,
:-/
John Mullen
Jack Linthicum
D. Patterson wrote:
> I don't know that he is or is not loathed by anyone, excpet to the
> extent he has made blanket accusations against fellow veterans and the
> Marine Corps. In other words, there are many people who regret or
> otherwise disapprove of the way Murtha seems to be using his real and/or
> imagined status as a combat veteran to promote a political cause that is
> believed by his critics to be harmful at best, cowardly at worst, and
> falsely disparaging of the armed services and nation in any case.
> I could care less about Murtha, but I do care about the policies Murtha
> seeks to influence. So long as he tells the truth, the whole truth, and
> does not deceive with half truths, he deserves to be heard; but he and
> his political party also must also respect the right of others to
> likewise seek the truth and be heard as they too seek to influence
> public policy for the benefit of the nation. This cannot happen when an
> individual and their political party seek to put their personal
> performance, actions, comments, and statements regarding public policy
> beyond public review and criticism.
Does this sound like Murtha jumped the gun, after the Time article in
March, on Fox News on May 18, he said that U.S. officials learned of
the alleged massacre in Haditha "a few days" after it happened and
organized a cover-up:
" This is what the Marine Corps told me at the highest level. The
Commandant of the Marine Corps was in my office just last week, so you
know. I know there was a cover-up someplace. They knew about this a few
days afterwards and there's no question the chain of command tried to
stifle the story. I can understand why, but that doesn't excuse it.
Something like this has to be brought out to the public, and the people
have to be punished."
Sounds like he is speaking for someone else other than himself doesn't
it?
June 3, 2006
Killings
Initial Response to Marine Raid Draws Scrutiny
By DAVID S. CLOUD and ERIC SCHMITT
WASHINGTON, June 2 - Marine commanders in Iraq learned within two
days of the killings in Haditha last November that Iraqi civilians had
died from gunfire, not a roadside bomb as initially reported, but the
officers involved saw no reason to investigate further, according to a
senior Marine officer.
But the handling of the matter by the senior Marine commanders in
Haditha, and whether officers and enlisted personnel tried to cover up
what happened or missed signs suggesting that the civilian killings
were not accidental, has become a major element of the investigation by
an Army general into the entire episode.
Officials have said that the investigation, while not yet complete, is
likely to conclude that a small group of marines carried out the
unprovoked killings of two dozen civilians in the hours after a
makeshift bomb killed a marine.
A senior Marine general familiar with the investigation, which is being
led by Maj. Gen. Eldon A. Bargewell of the Army, said in an interview
that it had not yet established how high up the chain of command
culpability for the killings extended. But he said there were strong
suspicions that some officers knew that the Marine squad's version of
events had enough holes and discrepancies that it should have been
looked into more deeply.
"It's impossible to believe they didn't know," the Marine general said,
referring to midlevel and senior officers. "You'd have to know this
thing stunk." He was granted anonymity, along with others who described
the investigation, because he was not authorized to speak publicly
about it.
In recent weeks, investigators have interviewed the Marine commanders
who were serving in Iraq at the time of the killings, including Maj.
Gen. Stephen T. Johnson, commander of the Second Marine Expeditionary
Force in Iraq, and Maj. Gen. Richard A. Huck, commander of the Second
Marine Division, a senior Pentagon adviser said.
But even before the investigation is completed, the Marine Corps
commandant, Gen. Michael Hagee, is considering relieving some senior
Marine commanders who served in Iraq at the time of the killings, the
Pentagon adviser said, citing what the adviser called a "loss of
confidence" in those officers.
Yet debriefings on Nov. 20 gave rise to another version of events.
Marines at the site said that the civilians had been killed by
cross-fire during a firefight with suspected insurgents, the officials
said.
Investigators have since come to the view that 24 civilians died,
apparently from shots fired at them by Americans, and not as random
victims of stray bullets in a gunfight.
In retrospect, he said, it might have been advisable to correct the
inaccurate press release, but the Marines did not consider doing that
then. Investigators have been examining whether there were signs of a
cover-up by marines that senior officers missed or ignored, including
the circumstances of the shooting of five Iraqi men in a taxi shortly
after the roadside bomb exploded.
But he added that the process of matching weapons with bullets in
bodies had been delayed because families of the Iraqi victims were
refusing to exhume the bodies.
vidi
"John P. Mullen" <jomu...@zianet.com> wrote in message
news:44817d51$1...@nntp.zianet.com...
No, another echo of a politician lying for personal gain.
Colin Campbell
wrote:
>On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 06:40:57 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
>>Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
>>horrific slaughter of innocents.
>
>
>And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
>bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
I have noticed this - they simply do not care about the Iraqi people,
they just want to criticize the US and our troops.
La N
> On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 07:19:36 GMT, Gunner <gun...@lightspeed.net>
> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 06:40:57 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
>>>Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
>>>horrific slaughter of innocents.
>>
>>
>>And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
>>bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
>
> I have noticed this - they simply do not care about the Iraqi people,
> they just want to criticize the US and our troops.
>
In case you missed my point - and, of course, anything I say is
inconsequential to you, Colin .... every day bad news comes out of Iraq. It
is very hard *not* to criticize Bush for this mess. And to say that I'm
just critical of the U.S. and the troops is very dishonest of you. Duh.
Colin dishonest? News at 11.
- nilita
John P. Mullen
I didn't know Gunner was a politician.
John Mullen
Gunner
wrote:
>
>"Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
>news:bvd282pbnh5ihlihm...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 06:40:57 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
>>>Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
>>>horrific slaughter of innocents.
>>
>>
>> And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
>> bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
>>
>> Yours?
>>
>
>The rest of the world, including my part, predicted this would happen before
>the U.S. even went in. You want to force your way on another people, you
>are going to deal with the counterforces. Cause and effect. Duh!
>
>Every day the news from Iraq horrifies people in the world. It's hard not
>to blame Bush for this.
>
>
Chuckle...and you were horrified before the Coallition went into Iraq,
about the rape rooms, wood chippers, acid baths, mass graves
containing 300,000 innocents...and did what again?
Nothing
The Balkans? You did what again?
Im sure if you think hard..you would also bitch about the Invasion of
France by coallition forces on June 6th 1944.
Gunner
Yes and? More importantly..its another echo of unscrupulous people
lying to make political brownie points and in the process..defaming
people unjustly. Odd how the Left is noted for that....
Fred J. McCall
:Being a decorated combat vet does not make one able to walk on water.
:If it did...Id never need swim fins.
If it did, 'Duke' Cunningham wouldn't be in jail....
--
"But if this ever changing world in which we live in
Makes you give in and cry...
Say live and let die."
-- Paul McCartney & Wings
Fred J. McCall
:
:"Gunner" <gun...@lightspeed.net> wrote in message
:news:bvd282pbnh5ihlihm...@4ax.com...
:> On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 06:40:57 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
:> wrote:
:>
:>>
:>>Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
:>>Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
:>>horrific slaughter of innocents.
:>
:> And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
:> bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
:>
:> Yours?
:
:The rest of the world, including my part, predicted this would happen before
:the U.S. even went in. You want to force your way on another people, you
:are going to deal with the counterforces. Cause and effect. Duh!
In other words, THEIR atrocities are "merely understandable" while our
lesser and infrequent ones (prosecuted by US when discovered) are a
cause for outrage at "horrific slaughter of innocents".
And on top of that you lie about OUR view (which you obviously have no
clue about) of these events which WE try, convict, and imprison our
own people for when we find them.
Meanwhile, bombing mosques and killing thousands is merely "cause and
effect".
:Every day the news from Iraq horrifies people in the world. It's hard not
:to blame Bush for this.
Yeah. Also global warming and the Holocaust.
Feh!
--
"Most people don't realize it, but ninety percent of morality is based
on comfort. Incinerate hundreds of people from thirty thousand feet
up and you'll sleep like a baby afterward. Kill one person with a
bayonet and your dreams will never be sweet again."
-- John Rain, "Rain Storm"
Mark Bradford
Gunner, we are held to a much higher standard, essentially because we have
set one for ourselves.
And yes, I am outraged at the stupidity and blasphemy of the so called "holy
warriors".
While I did not agree with the initial invasion, we cannot just walk away
from the mess we have made. We need to try to salvage something to prevent
what happened in Somalia.
Speaking of Somalia - it looks like there is going to be another Islamic
republic to rise out of the ashes of the anarchy there. We should be very
concerned.
Mark
John P. Mullen
Right conclusion, but wrong azimuth.
The reason we are seeing echoes of 'Nam is that some of the same
scumbags that dragged the war out eight years after the Brass knew it
was lost are now in the White House.
There are definitely lying, unscrupulous people who are doing their best
to spin events so they can make millions more and avoid blame for the
consequences of their selfish actions. You can find the ring leaders in
the White House. That fact that, after all the evidence has come out,
you haven't admitted this obvious fact makes me suspect you are either
1) in on the scam, or 2) just a big fool.
Oh, and a Faux News watcher.
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_060511_poll_3a_2004_election_.htm
If your perception is any indication of your prowess in artillery, I'd
say the safest place to stand might be right in front of the target.
:-)
John Mullen
Paul J. Adam
<gun...@lightspeed.net> writes
>>the U.S. even went in. You want to force your way on another people, you
>>are going to deal with the counterforces. Cause and effect. Duh!
>>
>>Every day the news from Iraq horrifies people in the world. It's hard not
>>to blame Bush for this.
>>
>>
>Chuckle...and you were horrified before the Coallition went into Iraq,
>about the rape rooms, wood chippers, acid baths, mass graves
>containing 300,000 innocents...and did what again?
Was it 300,000 per year? Or was it 300,000 total? Nobody seems sure,
they just like the number. And torture, violence, murder et cetera were
a tightly state-controlled monopoly in Hussein's Iraq, while they're
popular sports now.
I'm not convinced our intervention has made the average Iraqi any safer
from an untimely death: it's just now they have less certainty over who
may come and kill them. Back then they only had to cosy up to the Ba'ath
Party: now, they need to avoid the ire of various religious militias,
foreign jihadis, bent cops and common criminals.
(And nobody ever did find the fabled wood chipper, though it made for
some good propaganda.)
>The Balkans? You did what again?
Put troops on the ground and tried to keep the combatants apart.
>Im sure if you think hard..you would also bitch about the Invasion of
>France by coallition forces on June 6th 1944.
Nope: Hitler had been trying to kill us for years, we'd declared war on
him five years previously, we had a clear obvious war on.
But if saving lives and overturning tyranny was as important as you
suggest, why didn't we follow Patton's idea of going straight from
fighting Hitler to fighting Stalin?
Trouble is, we're in Iraq now and have to deal with the situation as it
stands. Neither cashing in the "told you so" card nor preening over
"getting Hussein" are worth a damn, it's where we go from here that
counts.
--
Paul J. Adam
John P. Mullen
As soon as the Marines involved made major revisions to their story to
fit the facts better, one big red flag should have gone up.
John Mullen
Jack Linthicum
That seems to be what Murtha is saying and from his statements he got
his information from either the Commandant of the Marine Corps or the
mouse in the General's pocket.
Fred J. McCall
:In message <pag382d6g7fg54i8j...@4ax.com>, Gunner
:<gun...@lightspeed.net> writes
:>On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 08:10:54 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
:>wrote:
:>>The rest of the world, including my part, predicted this would happen before
:>>the U.S. even went in. You want to force your way on another people, you
:>>are going to deal with the counterforces. Cause and effect. Duh!
:>>
:>>Every day the news from Iraq horrifies people in the world. It's hard not
:>>to blame Bush for this.
:>>
:>>
:>Chuckle...and you were horrified before the Coallition went into Iraq,
:>about the rape rooms, wood chippers, acid baths, mass graves
:>containing 300,000 innocents...and did what again?
:
:Was it 300,000 per year? Or was it 300,000 total? Nobody seems sure,
:they just like the number. And torture, violence, murder et cetera were
:a tightly state-controlled monopoly in Hussein's Iraq, while they're
:popular sports now.
Usual misdirection and handwaving while trying to toss gorilla dust in
the air to obscure things.
:I'm not convinced our intervention has made the average Iraqi any safer
:from an untimely death: it's just now they have less certainty over who
:may come and kill them. Back then they only had to cosy up to the Ba'ath
:Party: now, they need to avoid the ire of various religious militias,
:foreign jihadis, bent cops and common criminals.
:
:(And nobody ever did find the fabled wood chipper, though it made for
:some good propaganda.)
Gee, not a single wood chipper in the entire country of Iraq? THAT
would sure look suspicious if it were true.
:>The Balkans? You did what again?
:
:Put troops on the ground and tried to keep the combatants apart.
After we promised to come in with you. Until then, it was lots of
rhetoric and no action.
:>Im sure if you think hard..you would also bitch about the Invasion of
:>France by coallition forces on June 6th 1944.
:
:Nope: Hitler had been trying to kill us for years, we'd declared war on
:him five years previously, we had a clear obvious war on.
Typical English. It makes a difference when it's THEIR war....
:But if saving lives and overturning tyranny was as important as you
:suggest, why didn't we follow Patton's idea of going straight from
:fighting Hitler to fighting Stalin?
Exhaustion, mostly. It was a pity. A lot of misery could have been
avoided if we had.
:Trouble is, we're in Iraq now and have to deal with the situation as it
:stands. Neither cashing in the "told you so" card nor preening over
:"getting Hussein" are worth a damn, it's where we go from here that
:counts.
About the only correct thing you've had to say.
--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn
Fred J. McCall
:The reason we are seeing echoes of 'Nam is that some of the same
:scumbags that dragged the war out eight years after the Brass knew it
:was lost are now in the White House.
You have GOT to be kidding!
:There are definitely lying, unscrupulous people who are doing their best
:to spin events so they can make millions more and avoid blame for the
:consequences of their selfish actions. You can find the ring leaders in
:the White House. That fact that, after all the evidence has come out,
:you haven't admitted this obvious fact makes me suspect you are either
:1) in on the scam, or 2) just a big fool.
And the fact that you adopt the 'war for profit' screech just puts you
in the same camp of loons as Cindy Sheehan.
:If your perception is any indication of your prowess in artillery, I'd
:say the safest place to stand might be right in front of the target.
Do us all a favour....
--
"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the
soul with evil."
-- Socrates
Paul J. Adam
<fmc...@earthlink.net> writes
>"Paul J. Adam" <ne...@jrwlynch.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>:(And nobody ever did find the fabled wood chipper, though it made for
>:some good propaganda.)
>
>Gee, not a single wood chipper in the entire country of Iraq? THAT
>would sure look suspicious if it were true.
Nobody could find the one choked up with shredded human flesh...
>
>:>The Balkans? You did what again?
>:
>:Put troops on the ground and tried to keep the combatants apart.
>
>After we promised to come in with you. Until then, it was lots of
>rhetoric and no action.
You promised to come in with us in 1991?
>:Nope: Hitler had been trying to kill us for years, we'd declared war on
>:him five years previously, we had a clear obvious war on.
>
>Typical English. It makes a difference when it's THEIR war....
Maybe we should have sat on the sidelines and left it to the French.
--
Paul J. Adam
John P. Mullen
> <snip>
>
> Trouble is, we're in Iraq now and have to deal with the situation as it
> stands. Neither cashing in the "told you so" card nor preening over
> "getting Hussein" are worth a damn, it's where we go from here that counts.
>
Well, that is a mature, adult way to view it. It clearly indicates what
we must do.
However, if someone is a politician and wants to continue in politics,
it is necessary convince enough people that a stupid blunder was
actually a brilliant stroke.
As Mr. Lincoln once said,
"You can fool some of the people all the time ..."
The problem I see is that instead of trying to deal with situation on
the ground in Iraq, the Administration is focusing mainly on looking
good and, as a result, the mission suffers greatly.
Another echo of 'Nam, I'm afraid.
John Mullen
Sue
<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>"John P. Mullen" <jomu...@zianet.com> wrote:
>
>:The reason we are seeing echoes of 'Nam is that some of the same
>:scumbags that dragged the war out eight years after the Brass knew it
>:was lost are now in the White House.
>
>You have GOT to be kidding!
>
>:There are definitely lying, unscrupulous people who are doing their best
>:to spin events so they can make millions more and avoid blame for the
>:consequences of their selfish actions. You can find the ring leaders in
>:the White House. That fact that, after all the evidence has come out,
>:you haven't admitted this obvious fact makes me suspect you are either
>:1) in on the scam, or 2) just a big fool.
>
>And the fact that you adopt the 'war for profit' screech just puts you
>in the same camp of loons as Cindy Sheehan.
What's happened to her anyway? I've not heard anything for months.
Did someone get through to her that cozying up to Hugo Chavez maybe
wasn't such a good idea?
Sue
Jack Linthicum
This seems to be fairly recent. No testimony as to the veracity.
Sue
Fred J. McCall
:In message <i5l3829p6li9jb3nf...@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:<fmc...@earthlink.net> writes
:>"Paul J. Adam" <ne...@jrwlynch.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>:(And nobody ever did find the fabled wood chipper, though it made for
:>:some good propaganda.)
:>
:>Gee, not a single wood chipper in the entire country of Iraq? THAT
:>would sure look suspicious if it were true.
:
:Nobody could find the one choked up with shredded human flesh...
Yes, and you no doubt think the poor bloody wogs never clean anything,
so you would expect that.
:>:>The Balkans? You did what again?
:>:
:>:Put troops on the ground and tried to keep the combatants apart.
:>
:>After we promised to come in with you. Until then, it was lots of
:>rhetoric and no action.
:
:You promised to come in with us in 1991?
We had to. Otherwise you lot did nothing but whine about how you need
airlift and resupply and on and on....
:>:Nope: Hitler had been trying to kill us for years, we'd declared war on
:>:him five years previously, we had a clear obvious war on.
:>
:>Typical English. It makes a difference when it's THEIR war....
:
:Maybe we should have sat on the sidelines and left it to the French.
Maybe you should have selected one of:
1) Deal with your local problem while it's small, or
2) Don't put the other guy in a position where you KNOW he's going to
force you to declare war on him when you're unable to handle it after
having toadied to him in the past.
Fred J. McCall
:Paul J. Adam wrote:
:
:> <snip>
:>
:> Trouble is, we're in Iraq now and have to deal with the situation as it
:> stands. Neither cashing in the "told you so" card nor preening over
:> "getting Hussein" are worth a damn, it's where we go from here that counts.
:
:Well, that is a mature, adult way to view it. It clearly indicates what
:we must do.
Oh? And what is that?
:The problem I see is that instead of trying to deal with situation on
:the ground in Iraq, the Administration is focusing mainly on looking
:good and, as a result, the mission suffers greatly.
:
:Another echo of 'Nam, I'm afraid.
Yes, well those who are stuck in the past will see it everywhere, to
the point where they don't even see what is really happening.
Fred J. McCall
:On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 18:34:36 GMT, Fred J. McCall
:<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
:
:>"John P. Mullen" <jomu...@zianet.com> wrote:
:>
:>:The reason we are seeing echoes of 'Nam is that some of the same
:>:scumbags that dragged the war out eight years after the Brass knew it
:>:was lost are now in the White House.
:>
:>You have GOT to be kidding!
:>
:>:There are definitely lying, unscrupulous people who are doing their best
:>:to spin events so they can make millions more and avoid blame for the
:>:consequences of their selfish actions. You can find the ring leaders in
:>:the White House. That fact that, after all the evidence has come out,
:>:you haven't admitted this obvious fact makes me suspect you are either
:>:1) in on the scam, or 2) just a big fool.
:>
:>And the fact that you adopt the 'war for profit' screech just puts you
:>in the same camp of loons as Cindy Sheehan.
:
:What's happened to her anyway? I've not heard anything for months.
:Did someone get through to her that cozying up to Hugo Chavez maybe
:wasn't such a good idea?
She showed herself up as such a nutcake that even the liberal
Democrats wanted nothing to do with her, at which point she promptly
dropped off the Press' radar screen.
Funny how that works, isn't it?
--
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed
and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks
that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has
nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more
important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature,
and has no chance of being free unless made or kept so by the
exertions of better men than himself."
--John Stuart Mill
Sue
<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Sue <seb...@thegrid.net> wrote:
>
>:On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 18:34:36 GMT, Fred J. McCall
>:<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>:
>:>"John P. Mullen" <jomu...@zianet.com> wrote:
>:>
>:>:The reason we are seeing echoes of 'Nam is that some of the same
>:>:scumbags that dragged the war out eight years after the Brass knew it
>:>:was lost are now in the White House.
>:>
>:>You have GOT to be kidding!
>:>
>:>:There are definitely lying, unscrupulous people who are doing their best
>:>:to spin events so they can make millions more and avoid blame for the
>:>:consequences of their selfish actions. You can find the ring leaders in
>:>:the White House. That fact that, after all the evidence has come out,
>:>:you haven't admitted this obvious fact makes me suspect you are either
>:>:1) in on the scam, or 2) just a big fool.
>:>
>:>And the fact that you adopt the 'war for profit' screech just puts you
>:>in the same camp of loons as Cindy Sheehan.
>:
>:What's happened to her anyway? I've not heard anything for months.
>:Did someone get through to her that cozying up to Hugo Chavez maybe
>:wasn't such a good idea?
>
>She showed herself up as such a nutcake that even the liberal
>Democrats wanted nothing to do with her, at which point she promptly
>dropped off the Press' radar screen.
>
>Funny how that works, isn't it?
The footage I've seen of her getting arrested always shows her with a
big smile on her face. She seems to be getting way too much pleasure
from her son's death.
Sue
TOliver
"Fred J. McCall" <fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote ...
outlets, urging his Sunni brotheres to kill every Shiite possible "to cut
off the head of the Shia snake", and Mullen's still blaming the internecine
bloodletting in Iraq on Bush and the US. One could make the statistical
point that since the US invasion, the rate at which Iraqis were being killed
by other Iraqis hasa ctually declined, Saddam's cumulative totals and the
rate during the last years he was in power actually exceeding current
civilian casulaltie toals and rate of occurence.
My only question concerning the investigation by the USMC of allegations
that civilians were murdered as a reaction to IED casualty in the unit
involved involve making sure that should blame be apportonioned for criminal
actions that it also fall on the shoulders of field grade officers who had
failed to provide proper leadership for the enlisted personnel and junior
officers on the scene. Command has failed when troops participate in
excesses such as those which have been alleged.
TMO
Fred J. McCall
:On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 19:55:48 GMT, Fred J. McCall
I have to agree. Whatever her original problems, Cindy Sheehan has
fallen prey to Rock Star Syndrome. It's not about the issues anymore.
It's all about Saint Cindy. She got so much attention from mainstream
press for her looniness that she's now come to think she's important.
What she does now plays to that self-importance.
Meanwhile, mainstream Democrats having recognized this, are avoiding
her in droves.
If, as the Nation claims, Cindy Sheehan is the 'face of the anti-war
movement', then the anti-war movement is going nowhere in a hurry.
--
You have never lived until you have almost died.
Life has a special meaning that the protected
will never know.
jackli...@earthlink.net
Any way of extending that blame to the person who thought up this war
on the cheap that has required multiple tours? About a year ago the
pundits from the military were saying the Army and, implied, Marines
were worn down. They got from June to November before that was proven.
Murtha said it was so but who listens to the guy who everyone in the
military talks to?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-12-01-murtha-iraq_x.htm
La N
<jackli...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1149369906.5...@h76g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Troops were / are wearing down from multiple deployments. Fighting an enemy
that doesn't wear a uniform, where every minute of every day you didn't know
if you would encounter an IED or sniper. Something like this was bound to
happen and is likely to happen again. Soldiers are people, they aren't
robots. Everybody has his breaking point.
And, here's a hint Mr. President and DoD: sending the soldiers (back) to
sensitivity training sessions where they get to watch videos, etc, saying
that you shouldn't shoot civilians,. is NOT effective.
The mind is a complicated structure but is not infinite in its ability to
handle trauma and can only take so much stress before it "cracks".
Yeah, whoever thought of doing this war on the "cheap", cutting corners,
redeploying people and units beyond their mental health threshhold over and
over and over again .... *they* are ultimately responsible.
Mebbe, just mebbe, on second thought as long as y'all were going to do Iraq
anyway, perhaps in retrospect the Powell doctrine would have been more
effective.
btw, this war has gone on 3 plus years already; isn't that longer than the
U.S. troops spent in WWII?
- nilita
Paul J. Adam
>"Paul J. Adam" <ne...@jrwlynch.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>:Nobody could find the one choked up with shredded human flesh...
>
>Yes, and you no doubt think the poor bloody wogs never clean anything,
>so you would expect that.
Fred, dear Fred, what were you so shrilly whining about? Oh, yes, "lying
about me".
I fear there is indeed doubt in what you think, but do you really
believe that Iraqi torturers cleaned their equipment to forensic levels
between executions?
This fabled shredding machine was meant to be personally watched by
Uday, Qusay or Saddam himself (depending who you believe) and apparently
some victims' death agonies as they were forced through feet-first were
videotaped... yet nobody's found the shredder, the tapes, the place it
was meant to be based, or any pits of chipped human remains thus
produced.
Not the first time propaganda has run ahead of reality (recall those
tales of Belgian babies being roasted on bayonets and eaten scorched but
still wriggling by the beastly Huns, back in 1914?) and probably not the
last.
>:You promised to come in with us in 1991?
>
>We had to. Otherwise you lot did nothing but whine about how you need
>airlift and resupply and on and on....
And when did you actually make good on that promise, out of interest,
and with what forces?
--
Paul J. Adam
Jack Linthicum
Yes, but as we can all see from the movies WWII was "fun", lots of
freelance chasing after Nazi gold, Four/Five star generals slapping men
in hospital beds, John Wayne on am ammo cart, just fun, fun, fun, til
her Daddy took her T-bird away.
The units in the field get hit by an IED, they look around and there's
a whole group of people watching the results, a good guy is killed in
the explosion, the units sees that the town or neighborhood knew the
IED was there and was waiting for it to go off. the unit reacts like
police when they see a bunch of witnesses they know won't turn the perp
in. (I know cops don't say "perp" but what the hell). They are
stretched out, enough that their commanding officers start lobbying to
the voice in congress that that is so. All the brave people in DC and
the posters on this ng know that it's just time to suck up and go back.
Perhaps the next guy won't frag the platoon leader he'll launch a TOW
into HQ or use up some of that ammo on the mess tent.
La N
"Jack Linthicum" <jackli...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:1149371493....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
It p*sses me off to no end when some one says that I don't support the
troops. I care more about them in *that* regard than they're own robotic
asses and civilian leaders do.
And you know? Combat stress (PTSD) is something *I* know more than a little
bit about. So, naysayers, don't even argue with me on that one.
- nilita
Jack Linthicum
When, and if, you do that book on Iraq remember this date in November
2005 when the wheels came off and nobody said boo.
Colin Campbell
<ne...@jrwlynch.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>Chuckle...and you were horrified before the Coallition went into Iraq,
>>about the rape rooms, wood chippers, acid baths, mass graves
>>containing 300,000 innocents...and did what again?
>
>Was it 300,000 per year? Or was it 300,000 total? Nobody seems sure,
>they just like the number. And torture, violence, murder et cetera were
>a tightly state-controlled monopoly in Hussein's Iraq, while they're
>popular sports now.
It is really hard to determine just how many people Saddam killed
directly. They are still finding mass graves.
Just as it is impossible to say how many people died as a result of
the diversion of money intended to buy food and medicine from the 'oil
for food program.' (Notice how no nation but the US has conducted
criminal investigations on the people who participated in this
scandal?)
--
There can be no triumph without loss.
No victory without suffering.
No freedom without sacrifice.
Kerryn Offord
> On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 07:19:36 GMT, Gunner <gun...@lightspeed.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 06:40:57 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Patterson? To you and many of the conservative USAian's, it's just a few
>>> Iraqi civilians (collateral damage). To the rest of the world, it is
>>> horrific slaughter of innocents.
>>
>> And the outrage from the "rest of the world over the daily car
>> bombings of innocent Iraqis manifests itself where exactly?
>
> they just want to criticize the US and our troops.
Well, Colin..
The thing is.. Before Iraq was invaded.. Were there these daily bombings
of innocent Iraqis?
And of course, I'm sure I remember being assured in the newsgroups (by
you) that the Americans had procedures for investigating every Civilian
death and things like this (Murder of innocents by US forces) weren't
happening...
Doesn't appear as if those procedures are working.. Which make one
wonder, how many other cases of murder have been swept under the carpet...
La N
I have a *very* good memory for some things. And a low threshhold for
macho hoo-rah bullsh*t.
- nilita
hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com
CarpATM wrote:
> <hot-ham-a...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1149288398.8...@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Shmaryahu b. Chanoch wrote:
> >> On Mon, 29 May 2006 01:06:58 +0100, "D. Spencer Hines"
> >> <pogue...@hotmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> |"Mr. Murtha's Rush to Judgment"
> >> |
> >> |Sunday, May 28, 2006
> >> |
> >> |The Washington Post
> >> |
> >> |"A year ago I was charged with two counts of premeditated murder and
> >> with
> >> |other war crimes related to my service in Iraq. My wife and mother sat
> >> in a
> >> |Camp Lejeune courtroom for five days while prosecutors painted me as a
> >> |monster; then autopsy evidence blew their case out of the water, and the
> >> |Marine Corps dropped all charges against me ["Marine Officer Cleared in
> >> |Killing of Two Iraqis," news story, May 27, 2005].
> >> |
> >> |So I know something about rushing to judgment, which is why I am so
> >> |disturbed by the remarks of Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.) regarding the
> >> |Haditha incident ["Death Toll Rises in Haditha Attack, GOP Leader Says,"
> >> |news story, May 20]. Mr. Murtha said, "Our troops overreacted because of
> >> the
> >> |pressure on them, and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood."
> >
> > http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-06-02-ishaqi_x.htm?csp=24
> >
> Would that, as in Ishaqi, there were no more confirmed cases of intentional
> killing of civilians.
Give it a rest.
Gunner
<jomu...@zianet.com> wrote:
>Gunner wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 03 Jun 2006 06:15:30 -0600, "John P. Mullen"
>> <jomu...@zianet.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Gunner wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 02 Jun 2006 05:10:06 GMT, "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>"Colin Campbell" <activa...@earthlink.net (remove underscore)> wrote in
>>>>>message news:k4ev72dq5f1qoeo3r...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>On Wed, 31 May 2006 23:37:07 -0400, "CarpATM" <mr.bi...@comcast.net>
>>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Mr. Pantano has a long way to go before he will have half the
>>>>>>>accomplishments or a quarter of the sensibility of the Honorable John P.
>>>>>>>Murtha.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What are Mr. Murtha's 'achievements?' A Purple Heart granted under
>>>>>>suspicious conditions?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Face it _ Murtha was doing nothing but media grandstanding. He will
>>>>>>throw any servicemember under a bus in order to further his political
>>>>>>career.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>tsk tsk tsk. Very bad form, Colin. "throw .... under a bus ..."????
>>>>>
>>>>>For a person who wishes to further his career in either the military *or*
>>>>>politics, here is a recommended statement: "I admit that the situation
>>>>>doesn't look very good. However, Congressman Murtha went well beyond the
>>>>>bounds of what we uphold to be dear in the Constitution of the U.S. - the
>>>>>accused are innocent until proven guilty."
>>>>>
>>>>>This is in recognition that a significant number of servicemen seem to agree
>>>>>with Murtha, and you can't even *pretend* to represent *all* servicemen,
>>>>>never mind the citizens or government of the U.S.
>>>>>
>>>>>I mean ... I'm just sayin' ...
>>>>>
>>>>>- nilita
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Other similar politicians did the same in the past...I suggest you
>>>>review " Winter Soldier" as a google search term.
>>>>
>>>>Gunner
>>>>
>>>
>>>Another echo of 'Nam,
>>>
>>>:-/
>>>
>>>John Mullen
>>
>>
>> Yes and? More importantly..its another echo of unscrupulous people
>> lying to make political brownie points and in the process..defaming
>> people unjustly. Odd how the Left is noted for that....
>>
>> Gunner
>>
>
>Right conclusion, but wrong azimuth.
>
>The reason we are seeing echoes of 'Nam is that some of the same
>scumbags that dragged the war out eight years after the Brass knew it
>was lost are now in the White House.
>
>There are definitely lying, unscrupulous people who are doing their best
>to spin events so they can make millions more and avoid blame for the
>consequences of their selfish actions. You can find the ring leaders in
>the White House. That fact that, after all the evidence has come out,
>you haven't admitted this obvious fact makes me suspect you are either
>1) in on the scam, or 2) just a big fool.
>
>Oh, and a Faux News watcher.
>
>http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_060511_poll_3a_2004_election_.htm
>
>If your perception is any indication of your prowess in artillery, I'd
>say the safest place to stand might be right in front of the target.
>
>:-)
>
>John Mullen
Odd..you are firing on a negative bearing.
In the Whitehouse? Kerry lost. Get over it.
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the shit out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
Gunner
<fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote:
Oddly enough..she was just (again) divorced..and (again) gave up a
son.
I sense a trend.
Gunner
I donno..lets see who those folks were first shall we?
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to
develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them.
That is our bottom line."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program."
--President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a
great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will
use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies
is the greatest security threat we face."
--Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten
times since 1983."
--Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with
the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including,
if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to
respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its
weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and
others, Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass
destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region
and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
-Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass
destruction and palaces for his cronies."
-- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his
weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and
nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War
status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and
is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop
longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our
allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass
destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical
weapons throughout his country."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible
to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as
Saddam is in power."
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and
developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course
to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities.
Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
-- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the
authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein
because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction
in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working
aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear
weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have
always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of
weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years,
every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and
destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity.
This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports
show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and
biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to
terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that
if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his
capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying
to develop nuclear weapons."
-- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that
Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing
capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction."
-- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to
miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to
his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass
destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass
destruction is real..."
-- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Fred J. McCall
:Troops were / are wearing down from multiple deployments. Fighting an enemy
:that doesn't wear a uniform, where every minute of every day you didn't know
:if you would encounter an IED or sniper. Something like this was bound to
:happen and is likely to happen again. Soldiers are people, they aren't
:robots. Everybody has his breaking point.
Gee, then the CF must be composed of an absolute horde of homicidal
maniacs, if you seriously believe the preceding.
:Yeah, whoever thought of doing this war on the "cheap", cutting corners,
:redeploying people and units beyond their mental health threshhold over and
:over and over again .... *they* are ultimately responsible.
Horse manure.
:btw, this war has gone on 3 plus years already; isn't that longer than the
:U.S. troops spent in WWII?
No, it isn't. Surely you can count past 3!
It's also not the same intensity of combat, doesn't involve the same
number of troops, is orders of magnitude lower in casualties....
La N
"Fred J. McCall" <fmc...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:hci48218g1bbj1fhp...@4ax.com...
> "La N" <nilita20...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> :Troops were / are wearing down from multiple deployments. Fighting an
> enemy
> :that doesn't wear a uniform, where every minute of every day you didn't
> know
> :if you would encounter an IED or sniper. Something like this was bound
> to
> :happen and is likely to happen again. Soldiers are people, they aren't
> :robots. Everybody has his breaking point.
>
> Gee, then the CF must be composed of an absolute horde of homicidal
> maniacs, if you seriously believe the preceding.
>
Everybody has his breaking point, including in the CF. People have varying
threshholds of pain, mental and physical. And absolutely not everybody ends
up homicidal. A lot of CF people come back with severe PTSD, including
so-called "peacekeepers" who had to deal with terrible situations.
Fred, by your own admission you have been shot at all of one time and that
was in the 1st Gulf War, and you just about peed your pants and were glad to
be out of the military.
So don't be playing that macho b.s. with me.
Fred J. McCall
:In message <top382lo7n4m70g2a...@4ax.com>, Fred J. McCall
:<fmc...@earthlink.net> writes
:>"Paul J. Adam" <ne...@jrwlynch.demon.co.uk> wrote:
:>:Nobody could find the one choked up with shredded human flesh...
:>
:>Yes, and you no doubt think the poor bloody wogs never clean anything,
:>so you would expect that.
:
:Fred, dear Fred, what were you so shrilly whining about? Oh, yes, "lying
:about me".
:
:I fear there is indeed doubt in what you think, but do you really
:believe that Iraqi torturers cleaned their equipment to forensic levels
:between executions?
And there is presumably nothing between "choked up with shredded human
flesh" and "cleaned ... to forensic levels"?
Right, Paul.
:This fabled shredding machine was meant to be personally watched by
:Uday, Qusay or Saddam himself (depending who you believe) and apparently
:some victims' death agonies as they were forced through feet-first were
:videotaped... yet nobody's found the shredder, the tapes, the place it
:was meant to be based, or any pits of chipped human remains thus
:produced.
Oh? And people have been looking for this, have they?
Gee, by your reasoning I guess that Osama bin Ladin doesn't exist,
either.
:Not the first time propaganda has run ahead of reality (recall those
:tales of Belgian babies being roasted on bayonets and eaten scorched but
:still wriggling by the beastly Huns, back in 1914?) and probably not the
:last.
Yes, precisely the sort of thing expected from Perfidious Albion.
Pleased to see that you personally are keeping up that fine tradition.
:>:You promised to come in with us in 1991?
:>
:>We had to. Otherwise you lot did nothing but whine about how you need
:>airlift and resupply and on and on....
:
:And when did you actually make good on that promise, out of interest,
:and with what forces?
We had well over a combat brigade in the region for quite some time,
in addition to providing a lot of the logistics support for other NATO
countries. Afraid I don't have the actual dates and units on tap
after a dozen years. I do, however, remember all the political
wrangling about it at the time. Even then we weren't particularly
eager to get bogged down in what was often viewed from here as a local
European problem that Europe refused to deal with.
The bulk of our ground troops went into Macedonia (that would have
been early 1992, I suppose). Interestingly enough, that region didn't
disintegrate and you certainly didn't see US forces surrendering en
mass to terrorists as those of some other nations did.
Fred J. McCall
:It p*sses me off to no end when some one says that I don't support the
:troops. I care more about them in *that* regard than they're own robotic
:asses and civilian leaders do.
Yeah, now above is a great demonstration of how well you 'understand'
what's going on. NOT.
:And you know? Combat stress (PTSD) is something *I* know more than a little
:bit about.
Oh? Got a lot of combat time, do you?
:So, naysayers, don't even argue with me on that one.
Yeah, how dare we have an opinion! They're only OUR troops, after
all.
Feh!
--
You are
What you do
When it counts.
John P. Mullen
No, the USA lost.
John Mullen
John P. Mullen
I also noticed the investigations stopped.
John Mullen