Posted on 11/17/2004 3:54:24 AM PST by notkerry
A WOUNDED US soldier seen on TV shooting dead an Iraqi prisoner was defended last night by SAS hero Andy McNab.
The US marine — shot in the cheek earlier — machine-gunned the man in the head as he lay bleeding in a mosque in Fallujah.
The soldier feared the Iraqi was pretending to be dead to draw him into a trap.
Just before the killing, a fellow GI yells: “He’s f***ing faking he’s dead!”
Walking away ... victim is obscured by fellow captive after burst of gunfire
The marine faces a murder probe.
But McNab — who has stared death in the face — said: “It’s easy for people sitting comfortably in their armchairs in front of the TV to take the moral high ground.
“They are not there in Fallujah, in that killing environment.
“We don’t know what is going through that marine’s head. The Iraqi could have been hiding a weapon or explosives.
Grisly ... the shot prisoner - on the left - lies dead in Fallujah mosque
“Troops are fighting an enemy that doesn’t stick to any rules.
“The insurgents use mosques to launch attacks. They come out under cover of a white flag, then attack the Americans. They plant booby-trap bombs on dead bodies.
“Every soldier has a right to defend himself, and if that is a grey area — then so be it.”
If you like those, definitely check out the book I mentioned in a previous post, Requiem: By the Photographers Who Died in Vietnam and Indochina
You might also be interested in Larry Burrows: Vietnam, _Don_McCullin_ by Don Mccullin (out of print?), and Inferno by James Nachtwey.
These books are large, expensive, coffee table type books. You can probably find them at your local library or get them through an interlibrary loan.
That said, I must warn you that many of the pictures are incredibly graphic and are not for a weak stomach. The pictures on DOD websites have been censored. These have not and show war in its full horror.
Liberal or not, anyone who carries a camera into a war zone has my respect.
Ah, so, you are embarrassed by the broadcast of this event. Why is that?
Do you happen to know what the Geneva Conventions say about the situation when one side does not stick to it whether the other side is obligated to still continue doin it?
Do they still have your respect if they use the photos for unseemly puposes?
"This marine is only one of the thousands WE sent over there to take the war to the enemy....To take him out of the picture and hang him for performing his duties under extreme stress is an outrage!!!...After all the beheading videos of many people of many nations, I am a little sick and unsympathetic......"
DAMN STRAIGHT!!! I could give a squirted piss about what our LibeRAT, Anti-American, Islamo-Fascist Sympathizing "brethren" have to say about this being "murder". Like someone else had posted, they should be happy I was not that particular marine as I would have laid waste to EVERY prisoner in the room...they all deserve to rot in Hell and I would expedite that process...Funny how U.S. Marines are vilified for killing ONE threatening prisoner but these scumbag terrorists are just "responding" to the atrocities we commit.(sarcasm)
Embarrased, schmambarrased. In wartime there are rules and procedures to follow to prevent harm to the troops.
"Are things slow at DU?"
Pardon my ignorance, but what does the acronym "DU" stand for? I am surmising that the "D" stands for DemonRat, but what, pray tell, does the "U" stand for?
It depends on the definition of 'unseemly'. There is no denying that combat photographers put themselves in the same risk as the soldiers fighting and in many times more risk because they have to expose themselves in order to take pictures. I have infinite respect for someone who will go into a war zone voluntarily to document what is happening. What is done after the fact with the images depends on the situation. A photograph is simply a photograph. How it is used is up to an editor. That is a different story.
Dear Mr . Troll I am not in the least embarrassed by this Marine or any other. But aiding our enemy with crap like this is irresponsible at its least. This craphead depends on the soldiers he is embedded with for his protection and he turned on them like a rabid dog for a news story that isnt news, This type of thing has happened in every war. No I AM embarrassed for you, It isnt easy to explain why any American would want to see this marine harrassed for doing his job.
No kidding. I got whacked in the lip by a richochet recently - about as minimal a hit as could be, but still hurt, bled, swelled, and left a chunk of lead inside. Now I understand the receiving end a lot better ... getting it full force must be unreal ...
DU stands for Democratic Underground and is the website where the party of sedition meets and discusses the various ways and means to take this country into the abyss with them.
I've discovered a interest in snipers and the weapons they use and in doing so, stumbled on to Carlos Hathcock. *sheepishly* I was up until 3am reading about him. What an incredible person.
http://www.marinescoutsniper.com/sniper%20pages/Carlos.html
Couldn't agree more!
Whether this was a normal wartime event or a murder - and yes, Virginia, it is possible to commit murder on the battlefield - is up to the Judge Advocate General. Suppressing this film would be evidence of consciousness of guilt, which can imply that the actor had criminal intent.
Not to mention, that suppressing this film would quite likely require using force against civilians, another big no-no.
I see the United Nations has launched into it. On National People's Radio they had some U.N. spokesman say it was against the laws of war to shoot an "unarmed civilian."
Hello, these were terrorists shooting from a mosque.
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.