It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iraqi Vets Testify to War Atrocities, Vow to Fight and Resist Bush Policy (Update)

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on May, 22 2008 @ 06:00 PM

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
Orders are orders. They need to be followed blindly from a soldier.

So, you sympathise with the Nazis then? Who were only following orders. Legal orders at the time I might add.

Would you rather have an anarchic system within the military where each soldier gets to decide whether or not the action he is planning on taking is legal?

Yes. Soldiers need to make a judgement. What happens if the order comes down the line to kill anyone who's Nick is 44soulslayer? Would you want them to just follow blindly?

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
George Orwell.

This quote can be taken another way too. As most of Orwell's work.

My definition:

People sleep peacably in their beds at night because there are those of us who will fight the tyrrany of government till our deaths.


No truer words have ever been spoken. Then AND now.

[edit on 5/22/2008 by Griff]

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 06:01 PM
reply to post by jerico65

No they're not mate - but I digress.

If you read the article and the update, you'll see the guy who was quoted was a sergeant - just to add some info to your chain of command post.

I have no idea why they waited 2 years (?)

It's possible that they were trying to round up as many vets as possible to testify, I suppose - or even trying to get someone to take them seriously.

Whatever the reason, I've posted a link on this page where you can watch or read their testimony.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 06:27 PM
reply to post by budski

A Sergeant still has someone above him. He was a squad leader, so he could have gone to the platoon sgt or leader for guidance.

posted on May, 22 2008 @ 10:20 PM
It is difficult to be put into situations such as our troops find themselves today. My respect and heart goes out to them for the largely thankless task they are living.

Choices on the battlefield are sometimes difficult. Mistakes can be made. A split second decision can mean life or death. Spit second decisions compounded by a relentless succession of tours create fatigue, low morale, and many troops wounded both physically and mentally. These PTSD injuries are often unrecognized and are taking a huge toll on the ability of our troops to make sound judgements in incredibly stressful situations.

One thing that is often overlooked is that the military is made up of human beings and these human beings can be stressed to a breaking point. The military culture does not promote or encourage an open dialog with the public. So the public is largely unaware of any problems within the military and may be surprised by these types of communications.

But don't for a moment think that anyone is above or beyond the law.

There are rules and laws that govern our civilization. The rule of law applies to soldiers, commanders, and yes, even Presidents. It is that simple. As simple and difficult as the law is, ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Difficult circumstance is not an excuse to break the law.

Killing, taking someone's life, taking from them all they will ever be or hope to be. is not something that should ever be taken lightly, or given a pass due to circumstance. Anyone with a conscience who has fought and killed suffers a consequence from the experience, legal or illegal.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 04:08 AM
Most serial killers are veterans.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 04:24 AM
reply to post by jerico65

Be that as it may, read the whole transcript and see the part about a report being falsified.

In a situation where that occurs, how could you approach superiors in good faith?

It appears to me as though the culture of covering up led to these guys staying silent at the time.

In that kind of culture it's easy to lose faith in the system.

I'm not trying to second guess these people - just offering some explanation of what may or may not have been the motivating factors.

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 04:29 AM
reply to post by Leo Strauss

With respect, your president has shown that he thinks nothing of breaking the law or circumventing the constitution he swore to uphold and protect.

In that situation would it be any surprise (and I'm not saying this is the case, just a hypothetical) if that were to drip down through the ranks...

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 04:35 AM
reply to post by jerico65

When the order is given out, and you have a question about it being lawful, you bring it up to your squad leader.

*Marine calmly walks up to CO during a firefight*

"Excuse me Staff Sargent, sorry to bring this up now, but you know when you said I need to take out those civilians holed up in that house over there... umm why did you want me to do that?"

Get a grip mate! Pull some sh*t like that in the Marines and your discharged.

The troops need to follow orders, but you don't want robots or someone that will follow blindly.

Yeah you want a guy who's gonna question and evaluate your every move on the battlefield and play the role of a self-appointed PC watchdog, that's what every officer needs on the field, their own personal guardian angel.

Sheesh, I suppose you think Soldiers can just opt out of missions if they find it morally or ethically reprehensible?
It's war... when your surrounded by death on all sides and unspeakable acts of violence being committed; morals, ethics and values usually fly right out the window along with the soldier's conscience.
On afterwards do they realise the true implications of their actions when they see it from a civilian perspective.

Troops that don't follow orders put their entire unit at risk, their as good as dead in the long run.
You know that whole "Sir yes sir!", blind obedience soldiers are taught in boot camp? What do you think that's for?
So they'll impress ma & pa when they go back home with their manners?

It's so when the sh*t hits the fan, and the platoon's lives depend on the actions of one guy in the field, he's not gonna stop, pause and think out whether what he's doing is morally ambiguous...

[edit on 23/5/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 05:21 AM
reply to post by Rockpuck

LOL.. why do you call George Bush "the decider" .. it's very.. cliche ya know?

If no one put it up yet...

"I'm the decider, and I decide what's best."
-- George W. Bush

From my thread The Top 50 Most Stupid Bush Quotes

The source is linked there.

And regarding this story... for 'we the people' to get our country back from "the decider," it's certainly best we have OUR military forces on OUR side.

[edit on 5/23/2008 by RabbitChaser]

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 07:56 AM
reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira

Excuse me, but just how long have you been in the US Marine Corps? Since you're only 19, and in Australia, I have a hunch that you have:

1) No clue what goes on in the Marines or the US Military in general.

2) Zero combat experience.

Which adds up to someone that's talking out of their fourth point of contact.

Go back to the airsoft boards with your opinions and views of combat.

School's over.

Now, back to the regularly schedule thread, already in progress.

Sorry for the interruption.

[edit on 23-5-2008 by jerico65]

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 11:19 AM
I've heard worse stories from Iraq. A good friend of mine, a medic in the U.S. Army reserves, was in Falujah after the incident where a Blackwater guard was killed by the Iraqis. After that the city was basically levelled as example. Women and children were allowed to leave after a time after hundreds had been killed, but men of fighting age (16 - 60) were not allowed to leave. These men were then labelled enemy combatants and were slaughtered. Here is one link that I could find on what happened in Fallujah:
Fallujah disaster

It corresponds to what one British journalist reported, that he and others had been shot at by U.S. vehicles while travelling in clearly marked ambulances.

My friend has been trying to resign from the reserves for 3 years now with no luck as he wants no further part in this "war". While there he was reprimanded for treating the injured enemy with the same care as injured American soldiers. He and other U.S. soldiers would on their own initiative, sneek into town to retrieve injured civilians and bring them back into camp for treatment. He brought back many photos from Iraq which he showed me of injured civilians. The photos were quite horrifying.

With 1 million Iraqis dead, 4 million now refugees, one wonders what hope there is for a peaceful Iraq. How many terrorists have we created there? And now Bush wants to go after Iran??


posted on May, 23 2008 @ 01:06 PM
reply to post by ghofer

The problem is, that by denying these atrocities happen, people are condoning them by default.

The coalition is SUPPOSED to be the good guys.

Guess not...

posted on May, 23 2008 @ 01:33 PM
reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira

Sheesh, I suppose you think Soldiers can just opt out of missions if they find it morally or ethically reprehensible?

According to your own post, esentially, you answer "yes."

Get a grip mate! Pull some sh*t like that in the Marines and your discharged.

There's your option out.

And if all you brain-washed military men and women would "opt out" -- especially when you KNOW the whole thing is a scam and you are all being used as simply a disposable resource, for TPTB, in this "War on [Fake] Terror" -- if you all opt out, then you don't commit these criminal acts.

Sadly, with all your blind-faith actions, you've all most likely created REAL terror threats against the U.S.

It scares me greatly to think you all are so brainwashed that it seems, as you describe it, that you wouldn't question killing your own people, if that is what you were ordered to do. VERY SCARY.

I "support the troops" -- I don't support morons who lost the ability to think for themselves. These soldiers coming forward are thinking for themselves. Maybe not at the time... but they eventually knew it was wrong and are coming forward. These are the kind of "troops" I support. Not the completely brainwashed ones, like you apparently are.

[edit on 5/23/2008 by RabbitChaser]

posted on May, 24 2008 @ 07:13 AM
reply to post by jerico65

Way to dodge my point with the whole "your not a soldier" thus you don't know what your talking about trick.

As I recall neither are you? So where's your high ground?
You've given nothing to refute me apart from some lame military slang and insults.

Well bravo, Mission Accomplished Private Stooge!
When you wanna come back and talk like an adult let me know...

reply to post by RabbitChaser

There's your option out.

Right so every soldier who disagrees morally with what their ordered to do is going to forfeit all their hard-earned dough and entitlements and livelihood essentially and face possible jail time; and just choose to say to "no" to their CO's?

Come off it, put yourself in their shoes. Most of the men over in Iraq didn't even have jobs prior to deployment, it doesn't work that way. They may well realise what their doing is wrong, but they don't have the motivation or freedom to stand up to it.

Of course every self-appointed PC watchdog on these forums comes up and says "I wouldn't do that! I would say No!", yeah from our perspective that seems real easy and likely.

6,000 miles away in a foreign country with no rights and your life on the line, it becomes a whole lot harder to put things in the right perspective.

Like the SS Regiments in WW2, their commanders would have a put a bullet in their head if they didn't follow orders to the minute, and while it is selfish and disrespectful, whose life are they going to value more, theirs or the Jews they're being ordered to kill?

Just think it through for a second.
You keep talking about blind faith. THAT IS A NECESSARY PART OF THE MILITARY. That's what enables victories on the battlefield. That is what the military is founded upon.


Would Hannibal have been such a renowned tactician if every man under his command kept questioning why he told them to burn this Roman village or burn that one, or execute these prisoners?

The grunt is never given a choice essentially because if he was, every man and woman in the armed forces would want one and then it would cease to be an "armed force" so to speak, but rather a bunch of individuals who want everyone to cater to their beliefs.

That's not what the army's about. It's about oneness, working together and cohesion.
I never said I agree with the how the Chain of Command works and how soldiers rights are trampled upon, but sadly is is the truth.

It's necessary for armies to be this way.

Sadly, with all your blind-faith actions, you've all most likely created REAL terror threats against the U.S.

Did I ever say I support the war, I support the Bush Admin, the erosion of civil liberties?

I'm pretty sure you've seen my posts before so I don't know where or why your pulling this from but seriously, you've gotten the wrong impression mate.

It scares me greatly to think you all are so brainwashed that it seems, as you describe it, that you wouldn't question killing your own people, if that is what you were ordered to do. VERY SCARY.

Again... get to know a bit about people before playing the assumptions wild card.

I wouldn't kill a civilian if God told me to, let alone some bozo with stripes on his shoulders would you?

I "support the troops" -- I don't support morons who lost the ability to think for themselves. These soldiers coming forward are thinking for themselves.

Me too, I have no respect for a man who willingly signs up to serve a corrupt government with the knowledge that he is going to be used as a vehicle for them to further their own interests.

But you have to understand we're their coming from.
Like I said above, these men may committing reprehensible acts and KNOWING their doing this, BUT... why are they blindly oblivious to it?

That is the question you have to ask.

Imagine your an ordinary private in the army, you have no job back home, you barely made it through high school, you got no credentials, you signed because otherwise you'd be fighting for scraps on the street and your pregnant girlfriend wouldn't have a place to stay.

Your on deployment in Iraq, your sweeping a neighbourhood or a village or whatever, looking for insurgents.
Some guy starts firing at your Platoon from a second story window. You look at the house, you see women and kids holed up inside, your CO tells you to put a few grenades in their until that threat is gone, otherwise your squad is pinned down and liable to die.

Now... here's the decisive part. You know if you chuck a grenade in there, there's a good chance you could be killing innocent civilians.
You know this is wrong, even though you may be uneducated, your certainly not without a conscience.

But, on the other hand, you know if you refuse to; your buddies who you've served with for all these years could die. You could jeopardise the whole mission.
You could be charged with dereliction of duty, refusal to obey orders, maybe desertion. You could be court-martialled, imprisoned, get a permanent record and essentially ruin any chance you have to lead a normal life once you return home.
Your kid would go to foster care, you'd never see him, your girl leave you, etc...

You think to yourself... "What means more to me?". My life, the lives of my friends, the well-being of my family and my own future well-being, or the well-being and lives of a ordinary, innocent Iraqi family?

Yes it's SELFISH, and it's insensitive and brutal, but hey your in a WAR ZONE, and a man is trying to kill you.
What do you do?

Are you trying to tell me you would seriously hold somebody else's life higher than yours if yours was in grave danger?
Not blood likely...

Self-preservation comes before all else, let's just face it.
Even though that soldier knows he's gonna kill people who don't deserve to be killed, he kills them anyway, because in reality he doesn't have a choice or reason to do otherwise, his life would suffer greatly from refusing to do that and while he maybe applauded for his courage and moral standard, he would have little of a life to lead in the future.

There's really no choice left to many of them. In then end it boils down to kill or be killed (maybe not literally but close enough to it)

[edit on 24/5/08 by The Godfather of Conspira]

posted on May, 25 2008 @ 02:24 AM
few comments here. First of all, yes every soldier is responsible for the legality of their own individual actions....isnt that what the recent court cases showed us? If you are a soldier and given an illegal command, that doesnt protect you in court when the fat needs to fry. Second of all, we are all individuals FIRST, and we are our own supreme judge. In a battlefield, is it right for me to question orders when im told to kill women and children? i suppose that depends on if i value MY life more than innocent women and children. Personally i would die first, and be more than happy to sacrifice all i have and hold dear before i kill one innocent. but thats just me.
As to this fool saying this isnt a war because only 4k americans have died....tell that to the 1,300,000 iraqi casualties...and ask THEM if this is a war.
If i came upon my officer or superior raping or murduring or torturing someone, then i would most likely have killed them first, and worried about court marshall after. I am an individual, and i accept my responsibility for caring for ANY innocent i see around me NOW....the future will sort its self out.

posted on May, 25 2008 @ 02:36 AM
finally, you guys supporting the actions as "part of war" keep writing up all these specific scenarios where "bullets are flying and chaos is rampant" and decisions are being made on the fly in particular instances....
This does not seem to be the case though. It seems that these are general policies being passed down all across the board, from torturing prisoners, to killing innocents.
To the person said all males 16 and up were kept in fallujah and killed...i think you are mistaken...i had read it was 12 and up. And as above posters have pointed out, it is not people complaining about doing their duty. It is people complaining about a government of lies and corruption, about killing they dont believe in, and about occupying an innocent country. Im sure these soldiers would not be complaining if this was WWII and they truly knew they were fighting for freedom and right, but this is not the case. They were lied to and handed a raw deal (as are all young stupid infantry), and they are trying to right a wrong.
THis is what happens when people are raised on movies like Rambo, and such, thinking battle is romantic, and our country is a force for freedom. Then when they find out the truth...that the history books lie, and the news tells crap, and our government is rotten...well, the natural evolution of action is the budding of protest and outcry. Just as your natural reaction of being raised in an oppressed masculinized indoctrinated society is your inability to understand people having emotions, and your need to be "manly" and "tough" and ridicule people who dont live up to your image of what they are supposed to be. Hopefully we can all learn and grow from this.

posted on May, 25 2008 @ 06:06 PM

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira

Way to dodge my point with the whole "your not a soldier" thus you don't know what your talking about trick.

As I recall neither are you? So where's your high ground?
You've given nothing to refute me apart from some lame military slang and insults.

Well bravo, Mission Accomplished Private Stooge!
When you wanna come back and talk like an adult let me know...

Opps, did I get too close to home when I schooled your non-combat ass? You're 19 and haven't been in a combat zone; you really don't have much to add describing life under fire, etc.

And just a tip, it's "you're" not "your". Spell check is our friend!

Back to playing Call to Duty in Mom's basement. The adults are now having a serious discussion.

(And for your info, yes, I've been in combat and flown over 100+ combat missions. And I really don't give a crap if this doesn't impress you. I'm not losing any sleep, Gus.)

Back on topic. I wrote a friend of mine over there and asked him this question:

"If you were given the order to fire up civilians that are "making you feel uncomfortable" would you question that? Wouldn't that be close to an unlawful order???"

His answer:

I’ll take a swing at this: In a word "Yes".

The guy on the ground needs to be switched on to all the ROE’s that are in effect in the AO, as well as any special orders or policies that the chain of command have put out. He also has to understand the mission plan and how things are actually happening.

War crimes obviously fall into the “unlawful order” category, so something like an order to "fire up the civilians” would seem to be something you’d want to think twice about. However, context is everything. I’ll give you a couple of examples.

Scenario #1) Imagine that you’re on a dismounted patrol that’s running a movement to contact within a certain area. You’re not expecting to run into any particular enemy force, but you have been told to patrol through the area to make sure there aren’t any bad guys around. You move to within a 100m or so of a little village. From your vantage point you can see that the people aren’t obviously armed or wearing uniforms. They’re hanging out doing the things that people in 3rd world villages do. Your PL puts all of you on line, and orders you to “fire up the civilians”. What do you do? Because although it seems clear that the order is unlawful, if you don’t follow it, you’re PL might just shoot you for disobeying an order in combat. The old catch-22 is that you must not carry out an unlawful order, yet you are not generally allowed or even qualified to decide what is “unlawful” and what isn’t.

Scenario #2) You’re riding along in a convoy. You’re element is moving through a contested area, but you aren’t expecting any trouble. LBMF’s are around in vehicles and walking along on the side of the road. Boom. The duce and a half you’re riding in is hit with something, you don’t know what. All you know is that you just got dumped out the back of the duce, and it’s on fire. You hear small arms fire all around you. A group of LBMF’s is running away from the area, they are 50m away and opening the gap. An American NCO that you don’t know appears and starts yelling at you to “fire up the civilians” indicating at the group that’s running away. What do you do? You’re convoy might have been ambushed by an IED or RPG followed up by small arms fire. The LBMF’s running away might have fired the RPG. Or your truck might have hit a mine and the small arms fire is coming from you’re buddies who’ve had the # scared out of them, and everyone is running away because they’re afraid the crazy Americans are going to shoot them by accident.

This is a VERY complex subject. And lawyers can argue about it until the cows come home and still not make much sense of the whole thing. But the fact is that it’s up to Joe on the ground with little more than a high school education to make the decision, while the JAG lawyers and the cover-their-ass senior officers generate increasingly complex and impractical ROE’s that are designed to manage their risk, while leaving the Soldier who’s actually on the mission responsible for everything that might go wrong. In scenario #1 it's pretty straight forward. In scenario #2 it's rather less so. The point is that you don't get to decide. 99 times out of 100 you do what the # you're told to do and you do it right now.

Having said all that, I’d be skeptical of any story that has American Soldiers or Marines playing out some sort of SS style mass execution. That nonsense strikes me as some sort of wet dream and I don’t believe a word of it.

This is just my opinion; take it for what it’s worth.


Looks like everyone, even you Godfather of Conspira, have hit on his points at one time or another.

[edit on 25-5-2008 by jerico65]

posted on Jun, 6 2008 @ 03:22 PM
here's a video with interviews from Soldiers who did tours in Iraq and they're talking about soldiers using Drop-Weapons on innocent Iraqis who were killed.
Killing the Innocent

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in