...im 2/8 1st cav bienhoa
LMAO yeah right. All 50+ year olds talk like that.
Posted on 11/15/2004 10:34:22 PM PST by LouAvul
The fox reporter also said it is very hard to second guess soldiers on the battlefield.
This is also why the USA needed to stay out of the world criminal court. This is the propaganda BS that will be used to have show trials.
The report also included that TWO US marines were killed inspecting a boobytraped dead corpse.
Either way, this is one dead enemy who will not recover to fight another day.
May I politely suggest you read the rules of engagement for posting on this board.
You won't last long here if you don't.
Perhaps it's time for some serious "pantie" retraining so we can win this war.
98.6
Do you think that a reporter in 1943 ever would have shown this piece of tape. NO. He would have cared about the ramifications to his country's war effort. He would have been on the Marine's side. The media should be severely punished for their aiding the enemy in this case. Who is it that did this?
> Beheading kidnapped civilians is also
> against the rules of war.
What a thought, some perspective. The media always distorts things: Abu Gharib, for example... they will *never* juxtapose our "overstepping the bounds" with the Islamofascists' "overstepping the bounds" or they'd have to show people jumping off the World Trade Center.
He had not surrendered, therefore he had to be considered a threat.
The Marine then apparently fired a single shot into the wounded man's head — which was heard and caught on videotape but blacked out when the tape was aired. A voice can be heard saying, "He's dead now."
IOW, he became a good terrorist.
Shooting an unarmed, wounded combatant is considered a violation of the rules of war.
How could he have known the terrorist was not armed or rigged? Should a marine in active combat have to prove that a wounded enemy is armed before shooting at him?
There's some bad spin being put out by the media on this incident, IMO.
I'm confused -- they say that like it's a *bad* thing...
Marines investigate shooting of wounded insurgent
and here:
Military investigates shooting of wounded insurgent
Let's see, the situation was:
- other terrorists had retaken the Mosque and had to be cleaned out again
- many terrorists are suicide bombers
- terrorists hide and disguise Improvised Explosive Devices
- terrorists set up booby traps everywhere they can
- terrorists booby trap their dead and wounded
- terrorists fake surrendering then attack when our troops are drawn out to take the prisoners into custody
- terrorists fake surrendering then blow themselves up when our troops are attempt to take the prisoners into custody
- other terrorists had retaken the Mosque and had to be cleaned out again
- no intel provided that enemy wounded had already been subdued
- other terrorists had retaken the Mosque and had to be cleaned out again
- after our troops successfully storm the Mosque, they go room to room to secure each, and discover some wounded and dead enemy in the room. They start to secure the wounded to render them harmless and an assumed dead terrorist makes a sudden move
WHAT WOULD YOU DO?
- ask him if he wants a cigarette?
- apologize for thinking he was dead?
- call up the chain of command for orders?
- ask the reporter for his recommendations?
- blow the #(*&^%@* terrorist's head off.
If you answered A, B, C or D:
YOU'RE DEAD!!!
MOST OF YOUR TEAM IS DEAD!!!
because if you believe in any other possible outcome, then YOU WILL FAIL TO ACT IN TIME when it really counts. This is the way our troops are trained AND SHOULD BE trained.
JMHO
How do we KNOW he was faking? If the soldier was mistaken and the enemy was already dead, there is nothing wrong with shooting a dead body of an un-uniformed enemy.
You are forgetting the terrorists are waiving white flags in order to trick compassionate troops into ambushes.
(in islam you are allowed to lie to a non believer)
The only way to fix faluja is to eliminate the whole city and start from scratch.
"Terrorists by their very nature, eliminate their ability to claim Geneva Convention protections."
Worth repeating as many times as necessary to drown out the whining military-hating anti-American Obsolete Media.
Illegal combatants are specifically excluded from the protections of the Geneva Convention. Out of uniform, in the wrong uniform, using mosques or churches or schools or hospitals as a firing platform or staging area, using civilians as shields, using ambulances to transport munitions, using a flag of truce or surrender falsely are all violations that can subject you to summary execution on the field of battle or behind enemy lines. Furthermore, a nonsignatory is not protected by the GC if they themselves violate it. None of the various terrorist groups have signed the GC and none adhere to them, so members of those groups are not protected.
There are documented instances of each and every one of the above listed war crimes perpetrated on numerous occasions by the terrorists. Not one of our soldiers should be put at risk obeying rules that don't apply, especially when the other side is using those rules against our guys.
If an enemy appears to be playing possum then they are most likely up to no good. A bullet to make sure is a worthwhile investment when it may possibly be saving the life of one of our soldiers. And if the bad guy was already dead it doesn't matter.
It's about some semblance of the English language. That is the house language at FR. Not some truncated hip tech speak. We don't speak PC. Go find a games site........
Kerry would have shot him and applied for a bronze star, a purple hart (for the hangnail pulling the trigger) and then written a book on how there was a fierce fire fight at the time. again.
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.
