Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Stench Prompted U.S. Troops to Burn Corpses
Time online ^ | Time

Posted on 10/21/2005 4:34:10 PM PDT by blogblogginaway

The desecration of Taliban dead prompts outrage in Afghanistan

There simply wasn't enough room on the rocky hilltop above Gonbaz village in southern Afghanistan for the U.S. platoon and the corpses of the two Taliban fighters. The Taliban men had been killed in a firefight 24 hours earlier, and in the 90 degree heat, their bodies had become an unbearable presence, soldiers who were present have told TIME. Nor was the U.S. Army unit about to leave — the hilltop commanded a strategic view of the village below where other Taliban were suspected to be hiding.

Earlier, Lt. Eric Nelson, the leader of B Company, I-508 platoon leader had sent word down to Gonbaz asking the villagers to pick up the bodies and bury them according to Muslim ritual. But the villagers refused — probably because the dead fighters weren't locals but Pakistanis, surmised one U.S. army officer.

It was then that Lt. Nelson took the decision that could jeopardize his service career. "We decided to burn the bodies," one soldier recounts, "because they were bloated and they stank." News of this cremation may have remained on these scorching hills of southern Afghanistan, had the gruesome act not been recorded on film by an Australian photojournalist, Stephen Dupont. Instead, when the footage aired on Australian TV on Wednesday, it unleashed world outrage. A Pentagon spokesman described the incident as "repugnant" and said that the army was launching a criminal investigation into the alleged desecration of the corpses, which is in violation of the Geneva Convention on human rights.

(Excerpt) Read more at time.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan; burnbabyburn; oef; taliban
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: blogblogginaway

Ok, let me see if I have this straight now. Killing terrorists is ok, burning the dead bodies is not. Kind of irrational reasoning IMO. Also, I think the pentagon spokesman who said the idea was repugnant should have his butt kicked for him along with any other American politician or official that speaks against this Lt. for burning the bodies. Don't want to be burned? Don't be a terrorist, AND don't kill civilians and burn their bodies while they are hanging from a bridge.


41 posted on 10/21/2005 6:05:00 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway
How convenient it is for the world to forget 3000 charred bodies in 911.

Oh, I forgot--- it was America's fault.


42 posted on 10/21/2005 6:07:18 PM PDT by melt (Someday, they'll wish their Jihad...Jihadn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rome2000

How does that explain the bacon that was sizzing on Johnny Taliban?


43 posted on 10/21/2005 6:10:43 PM PDT by BurbankKarl (I am the NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

One more thing to add. This is part of the process of getting people's minds off of the good news coming out of Iraq about the elections and so forth. Can't have people feeling good about the Iraqis starting to govern themselves can we?


44 posted on 10/21/2005 6:10:59 PM PDT by calex59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timmy
Am I the only one, or is anyone else tired of these Bush administration people shooting off their mouths before the facts are known?

Just once I'd like to see an official spokesman say, "Yeah, we burned 'em. So what? Yeah, we flushed their filthy Koran down the toilets. Screw 'em! They murdered 3000 innocent Americans!"

A man can dream. . .

45 posted on 10/21/2005 6:12:53 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

Well, this is a good lesson for our soldiers. If you're going to do something like this, shoot the journalist who is embeded with you first.


46 posted on 10/21/2005 6:41:27 PM PDT by McGavin999 (We're a First World Country with a Third World Press (Except for Hume & Garrett ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: McGavin999

LOL! ;)


47 posted on 10/21/2005 6:47:49 PM PDT by Diana in Wisconsin (Save The Earth. It's The Only Planet With Chocolate.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: bdfromlv

Yeah .. I wish our kids would realize there are people all around them taking pictures. That's the way it should be, but I think they get wrapped up in the day to day battles and forget there is some guy lurking with a camera.

But .. where was the leadership who allowed them to do this. That guy needs to get off the battlefield.


48 posted on 10/21/2005 7:04:26 PM PDT by CyberAnt (I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

I'm sorry. I didn't mean to be offensive. I write replies like I would talk to a friend in my kitchen.


49 posted on 10/21/2005 7:05:04 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Ninian Dryhope

And .. here's another one with a snotty remark.

Thanks, but your comment is arrogant!!


50 posted on 10/21/2005 7:05:23 PM PDT by CyberAnt (I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

Well .. I've seen the video of the area - and it looked to me like there were several places where they could have burried the guys, instead of burning them.

Rocky hills or not - I know what I saw.


51 posted on 10/21/2005 7:08:26 PM PDT by CyberAnt (I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

I can imagine being there, from past experiences, and given the conditons I would dump fuel on the bodies and burn them just for simple expediency.


52 posted on 10/21/2005 7:21:32 PM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

"Thanks, but your comment is arrogant!!"

Thanks, but your comment was stupid!!


53 posted on 10/21/2005 7:37:50 PM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Ninian Dryhope

It was not "stupid" - I saw the video of the location where the body burning took place - there were plenty of places where they could have buried the bodies.

Don't call me stupid just because you are trying to make some arrogant point like I don't know anything.


54 posted on 10/21/2005 8:01:23 PM PDT by CyberAnt (I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Rudder

But .. our military has rules against this .. so why would the leader of the group allow them to do that ..??

We have to fight monsters .. but we don't want to turn our precious warriors into monsters too. Just because the terrorists burned our guys on the bridge in Baghdad, that doesn't make it okay for us to burn them. No matter how much we dislike them. We're there to kill and break things - not become butchers and monsters.


55 posted on 10/21/2005 8:05:38 PM PDT by CyberAnt (I BELIEVE CONGRESSMAN WELDON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Citizen Tom Paine
The lawyers have their snoots in this. Who says the dead bodies of terrorists (non uniformed combatants) are due any respect.

Regardless of whether they were scum or desrved a 21 gun salute, who says that cremation is not respectful?

What next?

"U.S. sailors desecrate body by using it for crab food!!!!"


56 posted on 10/21/2005 8:13:20 PM PDT by Polybius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway

I am still at a loss as to why the press thinks that burning terrorist corpses is a bad thing.

Of course, I still am wondering why we are not burning live terrorists...

"I love the smell of napalm in the morning!"


57 posted on 10/21/2005 8:22:53 PM PDT by gogogodzilla (Raaargh! Raaargh! Crush, Stomp!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.


58 posted on 10/22/2005 5:44:56 AM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: blogblogginaway
The MSM's repeated use of the word 'desecrated' is key and I'm sad that the Pentagon's response included the word. The Time article taken alone, as far as I'm concerned, justifies the cremation, but Time still went ahead and used the word 'desecration' in the subtitle. It's by definition a negative word, one which casts a shadow over the entire article. And by using it, Time negates the text of the article by editorially stating from the title that the bodies were violated.

The MSM's repeated use of 'desecration' is not only a case of mindlessly swallowing Al Qaeda talking points; the MSM shaped this story by pushing the assumption from day one that the incident was an act of desecration. The MSM doesn't even qualify it with "alleged" as they would for a rape or murder story.
59 posted on 10/22/2005 6:02:34 AM PDT by manapua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt

I really do think it was done for expediency. Bloated, stinking bodies, high heat, other tactical considerations...all conspire to make it far easier to burn them than bury them. I really don't see what the big deal is, the guys were already dead and if some jerk hadn't photographed it, it never happened.


60 posted on 10/22/2005 7:48:25 AM PDT by Rudder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson