This Is My Rifle...

War of Wits ^ | 1/31/2007 | Jayme Evans

[verbosevet]

The Marine Corps spokesman, Col. Stewart Navarre stated: "We are absolutely committed to holding fair and impartial proceedings in full compliance with the Uniform Code of Military Justice."

Anyone familiar with the UCMJ knows that it comprises less text than an issue of Time Magazine, so it is hardly a compelling case for ensuring a fair trial for the enemy, much less our finest combat soldiers. It makes no provisions for gag or contempt orders to prohibit any prosecutorial monkey business, and is not subject to civilian oversight.

Until proven otherwise these men are innocent until proven guilty. The leaks must be located, and punished severely in the interest of justice. The worst dregs in our society are constantly afforded inalieable rights against prosecutorial prejudice every day, and yet John Murtha and his good 'ol boys down at Camp Pendleton can't seem to extend them to the accused, who actually fight to secure them.

The Marine Corps exists because it draws it's strength from the honor, courage, and commitment of it's riflemen to dispatch their enemy more efficiently than all others. But some in the Corps who leak to the press betray those values.

[verbosevet]

Lest we forget the long-term effects of convictions in this case. Wuterich was assaulted on TV last night, so to bring balance, here is the other side.

The leaks have supposedly stopped, but no one's been punished for that.

[oyez]

BFL

[LiteKeeper]

First, the UCMJ is larger than the average Time Magazine
Second, the detainees are not subject to the UCMJ...that is for members of the Armed Forces of the United States of America.

[verbosevet]

Hi there. Have you read the UCMJ? It is not any bigger than time magazine.

Here are 2 links. google the rest of the hundred thousand entries out there for UCMJ, then come back and tell me that again.

http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/ucmj.htm

http://www.military-network.com/main_ucmj/main_ucmj.htm

The article in question refers to US Marines being subject to the UCMJ, not detainees. As a matter of fact, the word "detainee was nowhere to be found. Nor did I mention anything about detainees. No disrespect, but what have you been smoking?? You're incoherent.

[LiteKeeper]

After 29 years in the Army, beginning with Viet Nam, I have read the UCMJ several times. I misspoke about the detainees...my bad.

[verbosevet]

Then if you've read it, in it's entirety several times, how can you say that??

I've read it myself. I know it's an uncomfortable subject for veterans to get their arns around, but it's true. The UCMJ is too vague and simplistic to deal with modern threats, and it DOES in fact compreise less text that an issue if time.

If you're prepared to offer some sort of counter argument,t hen by all menas show me a link, website or point me somewhere to prove your point, but don't just make empty statements.