1 posted on
08/27/2008 8:08:16 PM PDT by
xzins
To: RedRover; Girlene; Calvinist_Dark_Lord; brityank; jazusamo
The soldiers who pulled the triggers, according to Sgt. Daniel Evoy, were 1st Sgt. John Hatley, who he called a beloved company first sergeant; Sgt. 1st Class Joseph Mayo, the companys master gunner; and Sgt. Michael Leahy, a medic.
So, if for the sake of argument, we assume the facts as presented (which is not a safe thing to do), what do we do to support these troops if we accept:
1. They were certain the Mahdi army fighters they had captured had just killed 1/18 team members
2. They were told to release the detainees erroneously, because the unit felt they had insufficient support for detaining them.
3. Iraqi Army commanders of Iraqi units are now reporting that they think detainees get released too easily before proof can be found.
4. The unit was certain these Mahdi would kill again.
2 posted on
08/27/2008 8:15:19 PM PDT by
xzins
(Retired Army Chaplain -- Those denying the War was Necessary Do NOT Support the Troops!)
To: xzins
Thanks very much for posting this, xzins. We need to get up to speed.
3 posted on
08/27/2008 8:17:38 PM PDT by
RedRover
(DefendOurMarines.org | DefendOurTroops.org)
To: All
I'm a logical thinker. When I read this article, my brain's anti-logic alarms set up such a clatter as I had not heard since Clinton said "I did not have sex with..."
Here are just a few of the points that set off my alarms:
- All of the accused are senior non-commissioned officers (NCO)
- All accused are said to be loved by the unit
- One of the accused is a medic. As I recall, almost all medics are conscientious objectors and hate handling guns, not to mention killing someone with one
- Senior NCO do NOT disobey orders. It is a bad career move. Maybe in the movies they do such things, but in real life they avoid it like a plague
- A check of the military records of the accusers would probably uncover past offenses committed by accusers with punishments administered by the named NCO
- Assuming these leaders had wanted to execute said bad guys they would not do it with witnesses. They would not even discuss it around witnesses. Another bad career move.
- Assuming these leaders wanted to execute said bad guy(s), one leader would simply go to the motor pool to obtain a vehicle, another would take bad guy(s) to a secret location, then those in vehicle would pick up those with bad guy(s) and disappear for a short while. Requisitioned vehicle would be returned to motor pool shortly thereafter. A report would be written up that bad guys had been released as ordered.
The key point to remember is that senior NCO are very career oriented and do nothing to jeopardize their career(s). Since these bad guys were supposed to be released, they probably were, unless someone can produce dead bodies?
16 posted on
08/28/2008 1:51:53 AM PDT by
egfowler3
(I'm not voting FOR McCain, I'm voting AGAINST Obama!!!)
To: xzins
I read this article in yesterday's
Stripes.
I'm sorry to seem lacking in compassion, but if those detainees were mortar-and-rocket-launching, IED-laying Mahdi Army Sadrist scum, the world is far better off without them.
19 posted on
08/28/2008 6:33:35 AM PDT by
Allegra
(It's above my pay grade.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson