It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

US marine pleads guilty over Haditha killings

page: 4
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I have a question for you, how many civilian deaths in Iraq were caused by the war?




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I have a question for you, how many civilian deaths in Iraq were caused by the war?


None.

Death is caused by people, whether actively or negligently.

Situations don't kill. People do.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:01 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


No civilian causalities? Interesting, please explain. I have another question, were there any civilian casualties during the NATO operation in Libya?

I get your beef. You're upset because I'm blaming all of these deaths solely on the US forces, which would be wrong obviously. The cause of all the deaths could have been cause by either military, coalition, terrorists, etc. So no, not all of these deaths were caused directly by US forces or allied forces, but because of this unjust war led by the US forces people died that didn't have too. History repeating itself and I'm saying it's not okay.

Also, this link will let you download the data file that breaks down the basic events like "Civilian kia", "Iraq forces killed", "Coalition forces wounded", etc, and the numbers.





edit on 25-1-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   
What really confuses me is that AFTER freely admitting that he ordered his squad to "attack nearby homes", and specifically to "shoot first, ask questions later", the result of which was 24 unarmed civilians dead (including women, children, the elderly and the wheelchair-bound), and everyone ELSE got off scott free, the MAXIMUM penalty he could face was 3 months jail, a dock in pay (which isn't going to happen) and a demotion from Lt. Col. to Private. How does that work?

And now even that sentence is being reconsidered?
US marine in Haditha case 'should serve no time'
And even more weirdly, if he so desires, the entire sentence could be reversed or ignored by the Commander of the Marine Corps Forces Central Command.

The American Justice system is seriously broken.
This basically means that soldiers can literally do whatever the hell they like, hide behind semantics and a face-saving non-apology, and then their buddies will protect them?
edit on 25-1-2012 by babloyi because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Well there's the thing Slayer.

In 1945 the US actually had a moral code and stood by it.

Today the US is morally bankrupt and behaves as if people of other nations are of a lesser value than Americans.

Are you actually defending these slimebags ?

I would add that the reference to Nazi's and Germany is because those trials set the precedent for military conduct, don't start whining as if i'm calling you all nazi's all of a sudden.


Cosmic..
edit on 24-1-2012 by Cosmic4life because: (no reason given)


heh. funny story. Although the allies certainly had the moral high-ground, it is no secret that many times throughout the war we gave no quarter and shot the captured. As one famous officer said (was it Bradley? I can't recall) said - 'if it had been the other way around, we would be the ones on trial right now', or something in that vein.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by nenothtu
 


No civilian causalities? Interesting, please explain.


Don't be obtuse. I was clear enough. No civilians have been killed BY THE WAR. Neither have any soldiers. People kill people. That's like asking "how many people have been killed by driving?". The answer is NONE, even though plenty have been killed by DRIVERS. They were not killed by driving per se.



I have another question, were there any civilian casualties during the NATO operation in Libya?


I would imagine so, based upon reports. Since this is your thread, are you SURE you want to go this route? I'm game if you are. There is a difference between being killed DURING something and being killed BY it.



Also, this link will let you download the data file that breaks down the basic events like "Civilian kia", "Iraq forces killed", "Coalition forces wounded", etc, and the numbers.

edit on 25-1-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)


The link is nice, and I've downloaded the file. I'm currently looking for a program that will open it, so that I can look and see if it differentiates between civilians killed by coalition forces and civilians killed by insurgents. Without that differentiation, the numbers are meaningless as far as your contention that the US killed all those civilians goes.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:33 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


This is where you and I differ. I get the "guns don't kill people, people kill people argument" but I find it odd you apply to a war. That data file breaks down fairly well what happened (and an excel program will open it. Google has their own version of it), who, what, when, where, and how, just brief descriptions but enough to get an idea. So my final thoughts are if there was no war in Iraq these people would not have died the way did. This war never should have began in my opinion. Perhaps one day people may be brought up on war crimes, like someone from the Bush administration, you never now, but most likely not.
edit on 25-1-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by babloyi
What really confuses me is that AFTER freely admitting that he ordered his squad to "attack nearby homes", and specifically to "shoot first, ask questions later", the result of which was 24 unarmed civilians dead (including women, children, the elderly and the wheelchair-bound), and everyone ELSE got off scott free, the MAXIMUM penalty he could face was 3 months jail, a dock in pay (which isn't going to happen) and a demotion from Lt. Col. to Private. How does that work?


They would have to promote him from Sergeant to Lt. Colonel first, before they could demote him to Private. Chessani was the Lt. Col, and he's already been exonerated.



And now even that sentence is being reconsidered?
US marine in Haditha case 'should serve no time'


The sentence you speak of is a maximum. I don't believe he has actually been sentenced yet, so the sentence can be anything UP TO that maximum, but it's not automatically the maximum.



And even more weirdly, if he so desires, the entire sentence could be reversed or ignored by the Commander of the Marine Corps Forces Central Command.

The American Justice system is seriously broken.


This is under the UCMJ, the military justice system, which is different and separate from the American Justice System, but I agree, the American Justice System is broken, and has been for a very long time.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:41 AM
link   
When I hear things like this, it reminds me of how barbaric and uncivilized the human race really is. It's sad we cannot evolve past the point of being killing machines obsessed with death. There is absolutely no excuse for the actions of these soldiers. I wonder how they would feel if a stranger came in and put a bullet in their wife and children's head.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by nenothtu
 


This is where you and I differ. I get the "guns don't kill people, people kill people argument" but I find it odd you apply to a war.


Well, it's the chicken-or-the-egg argument. By claiming it was "the war" that killed them, individuals are absolved - after all, it was only a situation that killed them, not a trigger-puller. The route you propose leads to an endless round of "just who started it?", which ultimately leads nowhere. By claiming that "the war did it", you are merely trying to lay every death at the doorstep of "America", and absolve the actual guilty parties of their wrongdoings.



That data file breaks down fairly well what happened (and an excel program will open it. Google has their own version of it), who, what, when, where, and how, just brief descriptions but enough to get an idea.


I think Open Office will handle it. I'm not real fond of Google products since they started building tracking modules into everything they produce.



So my final thoughts are if there was no war in Iraq these people would not have died the way did. This war never should have began in my opinion. Perhaps one day people may be brought up on war crimes, like someone from the Bush administration, you never now, but most likely not.


I've always been against the Iraq war, from way back when they started agitating for it, although probably for reasons different than you are. The fact remains that if people continue to try to pin the deaths on something as nebulous as a war, the individuals responsible for various atrocities will NEVER get to trial for war crimes or anything else.

The Obama administration is just as guilty as the Bush administration, so the rules applied to the one ought properly to be applied to the other as well.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 01:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cosmic4life

This case and all cases of atrocity should be held in International courts.



No individual should ever be tried in an International Court. Only nations should be tried in International Courts.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 01:09 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I understand where you're coming & I agree generations are usally a bad idea but sometimes its good to get a point across. Im sure we all can agree that these civilian deaths aren't caused solely by the USA, or othe forces, but each case is like a snowflake, they're all unique.

You and I absolutely agree on which administration could be brought to justice, & if we had our way I fear most of DC will be arrested, past & present

edit on 25-1-2012 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by nenothtu
 


I understand where you're coming & I agree generations are usally a bad idea but sometimes its good to get a point across. Im sure we all can agree that these civilian deaths aren't caused solely by the USA, or othe forces, but each case is like a snowflake, they're all unique.


I tend to get too deeply into technicalities. Some civilians were killed by insurgents, some collaterally by US/Coalition forces, and some few of those were absolutely egregious, uncalled for, unnecessary, wanton, and illegal under anyone's laws. Those should absolutely be answered for by someone, preferably the guilty party. That's what I'm getting at when I say that individuals caused the deaths, and those individuals should be held to account.

Who is more responsible, the man who gives an order, or the man who actually pulls the trigger, whether pursuant to a potentially illegal order, or in defiance of orders? My contention is that it's the trigger puller who is responsible. Of those responsible parties, what were the factors in play at the time of the death? What factored into the decision to pull the trigger? Intent is what will make an action illegal or justifiable under some circumstances. There's just a lot we don't know, and may never know.

Note that justification doesn't mean that the action was always the correct one, only that it can be justified given the state of knowledge and intent at the time of the action. We all have 20/20 hindsight.



You and I absolutely agree on which administration could be brought to justice, & if we had our way I fear most of DC will be arrested, past & present



All of DC SHOULD be arrested and tried. I'm all for firing the lot of them and putting them behind bars pending trial under their own laws, which they seem to have trouble recalling. I think a few trials would improve their memory capacities tremendously. When they pass one law in direct contravention to an already existing law without first eliminating the pre-existent one, well, there seems to be a problem there...



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by nenothtu
 

My mistake. I'm not a very military person, and I have no desire to be
. I confused the rank of the judge with his rank. You are right, he is/was(?) indeed a Sergeant.

And yes, what I said was the maximum penalty he could face (and I thought I clearly described it as such). In that particular instance, that IS what I was talking about- in reference to my point that for something as heinous as what occurred, that is the maximum punishment he could face...speaks volumes for the deterrent such a punishment would be IF other soldiers who wished to behave like that were caught.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 05:42 AM
link   
As expected they got off lightly compared to what they should have recieved and even though some claim their was high level accountability, there really wasn't. Same old story.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu
War is as it always has been, and always will be. It's never BEEN pretty, nor will it ever be.


What's the point of posting truisms?


Killing civilians won't help anyone's war effort - nether theirs nor ours. Hiding among civilians and thus making targets of them won't either, but it is what it is, and will remain so.


How does "hiding" apply to the topic of this thread? I'm just baffled here. First you say that sparing civilians is a luxury, then imply that one way to get the bad guys is to exterminate the civilian population. Who exactly was "hiding" among the 24 unfortunate dead?





posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1



First you said..........


Originally posted by Cosmic4life
The Nazi's were convicted in an International court, not by themselves in their own court.


EVERYONE here knows that is FALSE.

I showed you clearly that wasn't the case.............

Then you decided that "fact" has no merit,because he didn't actually "kill" anyone.

But,he was in Power,and knew of the atrocity's......................Acquitted,by Nuremberg, and then TRIED AGAIN!

Franz von Papen was a war criminal,and with it,LIABLE in the atrocitys of the Nazi Regime.

Unless your brush ONLY has "red white and blue" atrocity colors running through it........

And BTW,Inferring I am "smoking something" doesn't take away the fact that you are WRONG.

PERIOD.

And "NOW" this.........


Originally posted by Cosmic4life
And for the record i have endured more danger and unpleasantness than you've had hot dinners, it didn't make me succumb to those forces and become the very thing i was fighting against.


So enduring dangers, that you "say" you have been through,makes you into this grandiose "someone" that "knows" right or wrong ? Better then,say me,or anyone else?

Really?

People do really bad things,regardless if they are wearing a Uniform or not. You dont have to see UNPLEASANTNESS to know that. You also dont have brag to me,about it.



Originally posted by Cosmic4life
Because i would refuse to commit a war crime you would label me a coward ?? says more about you than me i think.



NO ONE said you refused to commit one,please show me where I said "COSMIC refuses to commit a war crime,and hes a coward."

It was a general statement to the sentence you provided.

Actually ANYONE that clearly lets atrocity's take place,has a chance to stop them,has the power to stop them, is and will ALWAYS be a coward,in my eyes.


Originally posted by Cosmic4life
I defend humanity..ALL of humanity...i wonder if you would be so lenient if it was 24 Americans murdered by Iraqis..i for one would not.


I defend all humanity also. The difference is I am not gung ho on one particular country's atrocity's.

As YOU have clearly shown.










Well for the last time..

The Nuremberg trails was an International court, attended by US, UK, France, USSR.

How can that be false ?? hmmm ?

And lastly stop crying like i'm some American hater...I'm Gung-ho on ALL atrocities...this one happens to have been committed by Americans.

I don't see any other atrocities on the boards right now..so how can you accuse me of only selecting America.

Seems like deflection to me, you cannot defend the actions or the verdict so you infer that the outrage is Anti-Americanism.


The murder of 24 un-armed civilians is murder.
The verdict of dereliction of duty is an outrage.

But you and your buddies just close your eyes and close ranks...hmmm well ok.

Cosmic..
edit on 25-1-2012 by Cosmic4life because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by nenothtu
War is as it always has been, and always will be. It's never BEEN pretty, nor will it ever be.


What's the point of posting truisms?


Because so many people live in la-la land. Sometimes, they have to be slapped with a dose of reality.




Killing civilians won't help anyone's war effort - nether theirs nor ours. Hiding among civilians and thus making targets of them won't either, but it is what it is, and will remain so.


How does "hiding" apply to the topic of this thread? I'm just baffled here. First you say that sparing civilians is a luxury, then imply that one way to get the bad guys is to exterminate the civilian population. Who exactly was "hiding" among the 24 unfortunate dead?




I don't know. I wasn't there. If you were, perhaps you can enlighten us.

The reports are that there was an attack. A soldier was killed. The attackers went somewhere, and apparently the soldiers had some reason to suspect that the attackers went to where they assaulted. It was not a case of soldiers driving down a road, and one saying to another "what do you want to do this evening, Joe? How about we just pick some civilians at random and massacre them. What else is there to do? The jello at in the chow hall sucks."

I didn't say "sparing civilians is a luxury". I said that peace affords luxuries that war does not. Nor did I imply that one way to get the bad guys is to exterminate the civilian population - I implied that if the bad guys hide among the civilians, that's where you go to find the bad guys. I'm not sure what sort of monster it is you think I am, but the odds are that I'm a lot worse than that.



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by buddhasystem

Originally posted by nenothtu
War is as it always has been, and always will be. It's never BEEN pretty, nor will it ever be.


What's the point of posting truisms?


Because so many people live in la-la land. Sometimes, they have to be slapped with a dose of reality.


Wait, you were replying to my post. Do you mean to say that I reside in "la-la land"? Do you really feel you educated anyone on this board by saying "war is nasty" with a great deal of pomp? Do you feel like you explained anything? Hello?


I don't know. I wasn't there. If you were, perhaps you can enlighten us.


If you weren't there, how come you go off in a tangent of pure speculation?



and apparently the soldiers had some reason to suspect that the attackers went to where they assaulted. It was not a case of soldiers driving down a road, and one saying to another "what do you want to do this evening, Joe? How about we just pick some civilians at random and massacre them. What else is there to do? The jello at in the chow hall sucks."


Well,

en.wikipedia.org...


cellphone photos reportedly taken by one of the Marines the day after the killings have been put forth as evidence that the killings were methodical and without resistance.In particular, the video shot by Thabet shows the bodies of the children and women with gunshot wounds, bullet holes in the interior walls of the house, and bloodstains on the floor


Please read "without resistance" and "methodical". According to other accounts, the shots were "well aimed". So there is a lady in the house, a Marine lines up a perfect shot and she's dead. Then he proceeds to do same to a kid. You know, that does look like a random killing to me.

edit on 25-1-2012 by buddhasystem because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   
Ok, so there was a lot of people that commented negatively on my post, and I'd like to maybe clear up a few things.




The war is over.


Maybe officially, but as long as bullets are flying and people are dying, and/or military operations are still taking place, then I consider it war. Iraq might be over, or on it's last legs, but Afghanistan is still ongoing, and I'm still hearing reports of helicopters being shot down, and people dying all the time. On top of that, I believe this took place in 2005.

Also, contrary to what I said earlier, this isn't exactly one of those wars that can technically be won unless every terrorist on the planet has been killed, along with any of his or her offspring that might one day grow up to plot terrorist attacks. It is an ongoing effort to thwart terror on the US and it's allies. I know this is a conspiracy site, but lets just pretend that's the real reason for now.




I won't succumb to that school of thought. I won't brush aside human life because it was lost in war, even if I think it's a terrible thing. These deaths could have been avoided if America was never mislead and invaded Iraq. You're right though, America has killed many innocent civilians in wars they participateed in, like Vietnam, and the death toll increases.


I don't think they should be brushed off. I couldn't imagine how pissed off, or saddened I'd be if my Dad or child (if I had one) was one of the people killed in this incident, but although it might be really hard, seemingly impossible sometimes, it's just one of those things in life that you eventually have to deal with. That's why we're officially in this war to begin with.




I think you have it wrong, it was an illegal war fought for profit and not meant to be won fast or easily. It was meant to sustain the industry of death and destruction and those soldiers represent their leaders values I guess. No civillians should have been killed because there should never have been a war in Iraq or Afghanistan in the first place imo.


Again, I realize this is a conspiracy site, I'm just going off of the official story. Either way, that would now be the governments fault these people were killed, not the marines just doing their job.




Were not talking collateral damage here. These soldiers were eye to eye with most of the people they killed. And when did it become a strategy to blindly fire into a building without knowing that fire is coming from it?


What is the difference between what happened here, and some fighter pilot missing his target with a bomb and hitting a hospital filled with a bunch of children? Should the fighter pilot be charged with murder? No, and he isn't even under that much duress. On top of that, how do you even prove it was unintentional? Maybe he has mental problems and was really aiming for the hospital? Who knows.

The point is, we don't know exactly what happened here, or what was going through their minds, and how much stress they were under. According to the article, they had just watched one of their friends get killed, so I can assume they were taking fire from some place. Maybe they were really wound up and honestly thought the people were posing a danger to them. Maybe they just got really scared and started shooting.

Either way, like I said, bad things happen in war. It doesn't always work out like in the movies. Sometimes the good guys die, and sometimes innocent people bite the bullet. You don't like the heat, then get out of the kitchen.

I don't suppose you've ever read "Lone Survivor" by Marcus Luttrell? Well, when you've read that a couple times, I'd say come back here and tell me the Rules of Engagement shouldn't be bent under certain circumstances. Another good example is "Kill Bin Laden" by Dalton Fury. A Delta Force team had Bin Laden cornered just months after September 11th in Tora Bora, and had to let him slip away into Pakistan. It took 10 more years and countless American lives later to catch him.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join