Posted on 06/06/2006 11:48:13 AM PDT by Army MP Retired
If Marines did shoot and kill women and children, either in rage or reprisal after the killing of one of their own, and if this alleged atrocity was covered up, those responsible must be punished. That such things happen in every war, even "the Good War," does not excuse them.
But if we are agreed upon that, Haditha, nevertheless -- and again assuming the charges are true -- is going to wound this country deeply and divide us bitterly. For two cultures are heading for a collision.
The first is the culture of the Marine Corps, hierarchical and familial. Marines are an extended family. They believe in loyalty up and loyalty down. Their tradition is not only to retrieve their wounded, but retrieve their dead.
'snip'
The culture of the dominant liberal media, however, is different. It has been so since Watergate. To the big media, the whistle-blower -- the individual who exposes for the press the sins or scandals of church or state, politics or government -- is the real moral hero to be cherished and celebrated.
In 2006, one Pulitzer Prize went to The Washington Post for revealing that NATO allies were secretly allowing the CIA to bring terror suspects into their countries for interrogation. Another went to The New York Times for exposing the super-secret program of the National Security Agency to monitor U.S. overseas calls to and from individuals under suspicion of terrorist connections.
To advance "the people's right to know" of official misconduct, the media claim rights denied to other citizens: the right not to have to testify to grand juries about sources, the right not to have their notes inspected even by prosecutors with warrants. They are the high priests of the secular society.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
The media is all too happy to report the ALLEGED incident ad nauseum, but if it is proved to be false, you'll be lucky to see a retraction below the fold on page 150 of the New York Times, if at all.
These same media clowns know all too well, if for no other reason than what happened with the bogus koran flushing incident, that these reports incite violence against the US both here and abroad.
These Marines are innocent until proven guilty.
A friend who saw combat in WWII and Korea stated when those involved are put on trial that the trial board be composed solely of military that have themselves actually served in combat.
Exactly. See the bottom of my profile page for my view on this.
Ugggggh--Not Pat Buchanan, allthough he makes sense here.
I love it when the media say "this story could hurt support for the war" as if they will not be spending every waking our to see to it that it does.
Unfortunately, your view probably won't be shared by US people. If it did happen, it is a terrible thing, but I agree the tensions of war can play havoc on one's feelings and emotions. I am sure that the civilian dead is still lower than when Sadam Hussein was in power, he used to kill them daily, but I guess that is okay with media.
They view their job as one in which they go to the battlefield after the battle ends and shoot the wounded...
In fact, just the words "If Marines did ..." are enough to cause me move on to the next thread.
Everything about Haditha smells of a manufactured incident. They are accused of executing, not killing during a gunbattle but actually executing little girls. This would never happen, and it didn't happen.
If the worst were true, however, it would change nothing about the war aims. If there were 10 Hadithas, and there could be before its over, nothing changes except that the propaganda war becomes that much more difficult.
We are not like them. On our worst day we are not like them. They have to invent crimes that our guys supposedly committed in a fit of rage during battle, crimes that are for them normal daily methods of governance. Head chopping, mass executions, all of this is found in Haditha on a daily basis, but committed by the insurgents who control th town.
Bullets into the back of a woman's head, this happens, but not by marines, but rather by Iraqi insurgents killing charity workers, and before the war, by Special Republican Guard cutting the heads off of supposed prostitutes, a son of Saddam getting rid of a woman he's done with, Saddamite cops killing someone's family members during an interrogation. How many times have we read now about female secretaries being machine gunned by insurgents on their way home from their Iraqi government jobs? Several times. How many times have we read of IED's going off where kids are playing, where kids are waiting for school buses?
Several times now.
The soldiers over there are our kids. We've sent them over there in our service, in defense of our principles and in defense of our country. They are up against one of the worst death cults in history. The least we can do is give them the benefit of the doubt, and give them the support they need to win this thing.
Speaking of the NYT and buried stories, consider this: with all the attention paid to the My Lai massacre during Vietnam, a story about the murder of 345 citizens of Hue by the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong received a few inches on page A-37. F*cking hypocrites.
"-- is going to wound this country deeply and divide us bitterly. For two cultures are heading for a collision".
I disagree with that sentence!!!
This will never be about the Marines or any other branch of the Military as a whole. (did I say that correctly).
What has wounded this country deeply and divided us bitterly ...
are the Democrats who have not supported this President while we have men and women carrying rifles and ammunition in a very hostile country, fighting terrorist who do not give 2 cents for their lives or anyone's life.
Democrats are dividing this country and so is Pat Buchanan.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1644199/posts
One sees this most sharply in the awarding of Pulitzer prizes to those who have done the most to marginalize, demonize, and humiliate the war effort and the troops who are making it. And one gets what one rewards. Where the journalistic community ignores those who write pro-troop stories and celebrates those who write anti-troop stories the pressure in the field is predictably in the latter direction.
And like a number of professional commnunities this one is insular, self-applauding, and convinced of its own superiority and possession of arcane knowledge denied to ordinary mortals. Meanwhile some of its members who stoop to notice the fact can't help but wonder why they're despised by the public at large. It's no real secret.
Try three thousand civilians, give or take. Noam Chomsky blamed it on the US.
(steely)
But if we are agreed upon that, Haditha, nevertheless -- and again assuming the charges are true -- is going to wound this country deeply and divide us bitterly. For two cultures are heading for a collision.
Pat Buchanan talking sense? I guess I should mark the calendar.
But he's right. Bad things happen in war, and people are foolish to think that no bad things happen in Iraq. If you don't want to put up with the occasional overreaction by a military unit, and the messy consequences that follow, then don't sent troops into combat.
That said, if you believed in the war in the first place, then what, if anything, happened at Haditha shouldn't change anything. If you thought the war was a mistake, this will merely confirm your feelings.
I'd like to see this all exposed as a plot by the MSM to smear our troops, but the truth is probably a lot more mundane. The phenomenon of men overreacting under pressure and doing harsh things in the heat of battle is as old as warfare, and no amount of sensitivity training or discipline will ever eradicate it.
Clean, surgical warfare is a myth. It's bloody and personal, and it always will be. The irrational focusing on it, when 99.9 percent of the troops are downright Spartan in their adherence to regulations, shows a severe lack of perspective.
Sorry I don't!!
Just who is the msm - they really are not important! And they are making themselves even less important!
Just like Dan Rather - he is gone, who cares, another has take his place.
Pat is an isolationist - does Pat believe in the war on Terror? Does Pat support President Bush, even 70% of the time?
"For two cultures are heading for a collision to mean that the clash and division are between those who support / believe MSM and those who support our warriors."
I will think about those words - but even as I read them now --- I'm thinking --- they have always been in collision with each other.
Thanks for fixing my link. You might find this one on intrest. Post 222 of the Sunday Thread if you haven't seen it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1643125/posts?q=1&&page=201
Why have so many people forgotten that this is a war for our survival?
I seem to recall that yesterday numerous terrorists disguised as Iraqi police kidnapped 50 people.
Maybe this is what happened in Haditha (terrorists disguised as U.S. Marines).
Don't laugh: Go watch Invasion USA and study the tactics implemented by the terrorists.
A few things to think about:
The only tactical principle which is not subject to
change; it is, To use the means at hand to inflict
the maximum amount of wounds, death, and destruction
on the enemy in the minimum amount of time. General George S. Patton
Always cheat, always win. The only unfair fight is the one you lose. Jim Pruett
"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast." William Tecumseh Sherman
I wish our troops were allowed to do what's needed to end this.
Executions? No friggen way. Not by an American warrior - not against a non combatant. I will never believe it.
I will think about those words - but even as I read them now --- I'm thinking --- they have always been in collision with each other.
Perhaps I have some how implied that I am a Buchananist??? Nope - but I did read the whole story and IMHO he's right on the money here. I was merely pointing out that I thought you misunderstood the context of the article. I positively agree that these two cultures (media - military) have always been in conflict. FReep On!
...is that sometimes nations are built upon the unimaginably bloody carnage of a civil war, which BTW, is the destiny which awaits Iraq after the LMMedia achieve the goals of their callous insurgency.
...is that sometimes nations are built upon the unimaginably bloody carnage of a civil war, which BTW, is the destiny which awaits Iraq after the LMMedia achieve the goals of their callous insurgency.
This is not true about the media. They like those who expose the sins of THEIR opponents, whether church/state/politics/gov't.
Free Republic did not get a media award for exposing the criminal plot cooked up by Dan Rather and Mary Mapes. None of the pajama clad were nominated for Pulitzers.
And if they are not, and media, as we expect, barely covers it, or calls their exoneration a "Whitewash" or "Cover UP". We'll have further demoralized our fighting forces by the application of the "America is Always Wrong" assumption, and by the left wing loathing of all things military.
I don't think they do, although they can be challenged for true cause, no peremptory challenges as in civilian court. The members of the Court are selected by the Convening Authority in most cases.
But it's not as if that were a difficult thing to do. Something is always more than nothing.
That's a very nice sentiment, but how realistic is it? When I was in the Philippines, the locals there were very familiar with a battle that took place nearby between the Moro pirates / Islamic rebels and the U.S. forces under General Pershing 100 years back. Around 2500 rebels, some with their families, fell back to a large hill called Bud Bagsak, and refused to surrender. They were arrogant, and over the years had managed to kill a number of Americans through hit and run attacks. They didn't think much of us as fighters, and they thought we'd never dare storm the hill.
We stormed the hill, and killed every last man, woman and child on it. There are a few pictures that survive to this day, showing the victorious Army unit, camped and grinning, atop a large, open mass grave. It was, by all accounts, a massacre.
That battle crushed the violent Islamic movement in the southern Philippines, and it took several decades for them to recover. The American forces got tired of playing around, and they put a brutal end to the game.
Times may have changed, but human beings haven't. I'm not comparing what may have happened in Haditha to what did at Bud Bagsak, as the scenarios are completely different, but history shows one thing clearly. Men can and will act without mercy when they feel justified in doing so. That's simply human nature, and always will be.
You know as well as I do, clearing a room with grenade followed by small arms spray upon entry - by design, kills everything in the room (hopefully anyway). I would believe that happened in Haditha - and be perfectly at peace with it. But, to believe a squad of Marines, acting unilaterally, deliberately and with malice, executed a house full of women and children - I just won't...
De Oppresso Liber
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.