To: RedRover; jazusamo; xzins; Girlene; freema; darrylsharratt; Shelayne; Lancey Howard; lilycicero; ...
Thanks, Red and Nate, for this; what a fiasco!
The first prosecution witness was a retired Marine named Courtney Johnson. Johnson fought his war as a corporal during Desert Storm when Iraqi soldiers were surrendering en masse to journalists that had sneaked over the border ahead of the Marines slipping into Kuwait.
In Gulf War I, the DoD reports that U.S. forces suffered 148 battle-related deaths, plus one pilot listed as MIA (further 145 Americans died in out-of-combat accidents). (per Wikipedia).
IIRC, most enemy troops were in some sort of uniform, and the Al Qaida/foreign fighter group was very small.
The next witness was a sharp young infantry major named Daniel E. Schmitt. He told the jury that the Marine Corps called the environment of combat chaos.
Schmitt passionately explained that one of the problems in preparing young Marines to enter combat in Iraq was getting their heads around shooting women holding babies. At first, the actors the Marines employed to add reality to the exercise simulated holding babies When the Marines didnt buy it the trainers went to Wal-Mart and bought doll babies to simulate the real thing.
After that, the Marines had a lot harder time shooting the moms, he said with a straight face. That was a good thing, he added. The baby toting mamas represented an important component of the training program dealing with identifying and reacting appropriately to perceived threats.
An obvious look of consternation passed over the face of one of the women jurors while Schmitt was explaining how the Marines decided whether the mothers holding the babies were also hiding bombs behind their children.
I wondered whether it was even possible for the jurors to ever imagine women holding bombs and their babies in the same embrace.
I hope that they provide some additional proof of this to the Jury for them to consider in deliberation, as it is a telling point on the methods used against our troops and the civilians. It's called terrorism.
The jury was kind of confused by all the military lingo because this kind of case is supposed to be in a military court, Nazario later observed.
Maybe it's just me, Jose, but sometimes the new military lingo trips some of us older Vets too.
Because it doesnt have any bodies, names, identities, nationalities, physical evidence, or grieving widows and orphans to prove the existence of the phantom decedents, it is falling back on policy and procedures to prove a crime occurred.
I drew a little picture of what I imagine the Iraq/Afghanistan Battlespace looks like from my view -- little kids included.
Besides women and kids, our enemy isn't confined, they can and do play off the board from all directions -- but we have to 'play by the rules'.
I know there's been some talk about Congress revising the laws they are using against Nazario and others like him; has anyone seen anything concrete, or are they doing their normal thing of blowing smoke?
posted on 08/22/2008 11:11:37 AM PDT
(The more I learn about the Constitution, the more I realise this Government is UNconstitutional !!)
To: brityank; usafrjag; RedRover; jude24
Congress could deal with crimes committed while in uniform by putting a clause in the enlistment/commissioning contract that permits departure from service, ineligible to be recalled for service, with the sole exception of recall for crimes committed while in uniform, all with an 10-20 year statute of limitations (whatever is a reasonable statute of limitations.)
posted on 08/22/2008 11:29:16 AM PDT
(Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
The defense needs to put on witness after witness to describe in cold gruesome detail every kind of devious atrocity the enemy is capable of. Lots of big shiny hi-def pictures would help immensely. I guarantee you that most of the silly-vilian jurors do not have the slightest clue what it means to be in a firefight or at war. If I was a defense attorney I would do whatever was necessary to get these jurors throwing up all over the idiot judge.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson