Probe Finds Marines Killed Unarmed Iraqi Civilians

Los Angeles Times ^ | May 26, 2006 | Tony Perry

[xzins]

The facts so far gleaned from various sources over the last week are:

1. There was an IED that hit the Marines.
2. There was an ambush.
3. A firefight ensued.
4. The accusers of the Marines are civilians from the area out of which the firing came.
5. The enemy combatants do not wear a uniform, but they violate the Geneva accord in that point. Geneva has this rule about combatants BECAUSE it makes it more likely that civilians will be killed when combatants masquerade as civilians.

A letter from a combat arms commander recently returned from exactly the same area said:

• As you may know, my unit operated in the next AO over to the east from Haditha, (east of them on Phoenix, without giving too much OPSEC info).

• I can assure you this is a problem out toward Syria in the desert (Jazeera) where you have smugglers, black marketeers, terrorists and just plain folk dressed exactly alike...and it's been that way for centuries, as Haditha is right along one of the major trade/smuggling/transit routes from Syria to Tikrit, Bayji, Mosul and eventually Kirkuk. None of the aforementioned groups are particularly thrilled at having us disrupt their "livelihood". None, of course, wear uniforms as combatants. Some pay for this with their lives, and seem perfectly willing to allow innocents to die as a result.

• My experience with JAG's (Army ones) was that they were very in tune with what the commander's and individual riflemen were going through (at least in our BDE). As you know there are mechanisms to sort through this type of incident: 15-6, Article 32, Cdr's Inquiry. If the ROE was understood and enforced by the leadership, the benefit of the doubt always went to that kid on the spearpoint holding the rifle. It HAS to be that way, or we are setting these young men up for failure.

• There is more to this that we know, but the USMC is pretty good at sorting these things out and policing their own ranks. It troubles me though that the media and politicians are so involved in a battalion level incident.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

I'll bet the media WON'T report the final outcome
when these Marines are cleared of the media witch hunt!

[xzins]

I will NOT take that bet, but I will buy you a beer when your prediction comes true.

:>)

[Dialup Llama]

I looked at Google News and the Boston Globe can't wait for the report and is out interviewing the villagers and admitting that they can't verify the stories.

The original report that women and children were killed came to light in a movie that the residents of that neighborhood "made." Looks like AQ knows that if they can't kill us with bombs they'll get the lawyers and media to do it for them.

[68-69TonkinGulfYachtClub]

I don't drink, at all, and never bet!

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for this additional information and insight!

[BnBlFlag]

They can take the "probe" and stick it where the sun don't shine. (Where it belongs)

[BnBlFlag]

They can take the "probe" and stick it where the sun don't shine. (Where it belongs)

[RetiredArmy]

In Nam, Charley tied explosives to 3 year olds and they walked into tents and blew up. I don't trust any of them, Period.

[epow]

From the eyewitnesses, there was no crossfire.

Yeah, and who are the eyewitnesses? Iraqis that's who. They could all be insurgents pretending to be innocent civilians and who would know the difference?

This may turn out to be a real massacre, but they're gonna have to prove it with something more than Iraqi "eyewitnesses" before I believe it.

[sinkspur]

This may turn out to be a real massacre, but they're gonna have to prove it with something more than Iraqi "eyewitnesses" before I believe it.

Why were marine commanders relieved of duty over this incident?

They know something they haven't revealed yet, like there's more than just eyewitness testimony.

[rightwinger49]

Good. One less future terrorist scum