Haditha.... - Page 3 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Azure · 05-31-2006, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubecube

Just like they never intended to torture people at Abu Gharib?

Innocent civilians, perhaps? Or don't you think there is a difference?

rubecube · 05-31-2006, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Innocent civilians, perhaps? Or don't you think there is a difference?

Weren't most of the people from Abu Gharib released? Doesn't that make them innocent? I'm just saying the U.S. doesn't exactly have the cleanest record when it comes to civil rights, attrocities, etc, so nothing is completely out of the question.

Azure · 05-31-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubecube

Weren't most of the people from Abu Gharib released? Doesn't that make them innocent? I'm just saying the U.S. doesn't exactly have the cleanest record when it comes to civil rights, attrocities, etc, so nothing is completely out of the question.

Most people from Abu Gharib were caught in combat, or somehow related to the "insurgants." I wouldn't necessarily put them into the same group as innocent "civilians."

But I know what you mean, and can't disagree. But God knows those Marines were told from day one, "to not fire unless fired upon." Regardless of what the media says, if you have friends and family in a war-zone, its very hard to believe that Marines would do this on purpose, without any sort of mis-communication occuring.

rubecube · 05-31-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Most people from Abu Gharib were caught in combat, or somehow related to the "insurgants." I wouldn't necessarily put them into the same group as innocent "civilians."

But I know what you mean, and can't disagree. But God knows those Marines were told from day one, "to not fire unless fired upon." Regardless of what the media says, if you have friends and family in a war-zone, its very hard to believe that Marines would do this on purpose, without any sort of mis-communication occuring.

Yes, but this was being talked about as revenge for one of their own getting killed. Similar things happened in Vietnam so this isn't out of the question.

Azure · 05-31-2006, 03:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubecube

Yes, but this was being talked about as revenge for one of their own getting killed. Similar things happened in Vietnam so this isn't out of the question.

Indeed. But you just explained that those Marines weren't in a normal state of mind. They did not "freely" kill innocent civilians.

rubecube · 05-31-2006, 04:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Indeed. But you just explained that those Marines weren't in a normal state of mind. They did not "freely" kill innocent civilians.

Well I'm sure you could say the same thing about Charles Manson and his followers but that doesn't take away from what they did.

RougeUnderoos · 05-31-2006, 04:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Not really it doesn't. The situation was an accident, and I'm positive those Marines never "intended" to kill innocent civilians.

The situation was an accident? What does that mean? It was certainly a terrible situation, but I don't know how it's an accident. Nor do I know how long they intended to kill those people but if they were shooting them in their beds, they intended to kill them. If they didn't intend to kill them, they wouldn't have shot them. It's pretty straightforward.

Azure · 05-31-2006, 04:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

The situation was an accident? What does that mean? It was certainly a terrible situation, but I don't know how it's an accident. Nor do I know how long they intended to kill those people but if they were shooting them in their beds, they intended to kill them. If they didn't intend to kill them, they wouldn't have shot them. It's pretty straightforward.

Nice way to look at it. You ever been in combat before?

Azure · 05-31-2006, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well I'm sure you could say the same thing about Charles Manson and his followers but that doesn't take away from what they did.

Can't argue with that.

RougeUnderoos · 05-31-2006, 05:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Nice way to look at it. You ever been in combat before?

Nice way to dodge the obvious. I'm sure I could say the same thing about you but here you are commenting on the situation. I guess we're both equally unqualified.

Azure · 05-31-2006, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Nice way to dodge the obvious. I'm sure I could say the same thing about you but here you are commenting on the situation. I guess we're both equally unqualified.

Which is why I always give the military the benefit of the doubt.

Azure · 05-31-2006, 09:28 PM

Another update on the situation.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/...s/14697475.htm

FlamesAddiction · 05-31-2006, 10:02 PM

I'm not as quick to forgive these marines as some people here. The excuse that they are put in situations that are not normal is not really valid to me. In fact, the whole notion that these situations are not normal to these men, should give them a greater insight to what is and isn't an appropriate reaction.

We have no trouble putting others on trial for war crimes, many of whom are from countries where violence, war, and reprisal are the norm, and that is all they know. Why don't we feel sorry for them like so many do for the marines at Haditha? It makes no sense.

I do give credit to the U.S. military for at least following up on these allegations. Most countries don't bother. I remember when I first heard about this massacre last year... I didn't think it would be seriously followed up. It was, so that is good.

RougeUnderoos · 05-31-2006, 10:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azure

Which is why I always give the military the benefit of the doubt.

It's the military investigating this whole thing and it will be the military that puts them on trial if it comes to it. Who exactly are you giving the benefit of the doubt?

Iowa_Flames_Fan · 05-31-2006, 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubecube

Well I'm sure you could say the same thing about Charles Manson and his followers but that doesn't take away from what they did.

Not to leap to Azure's defense or anything, but that's a pretty odious comparison to me. Manson was a sociopath and a serial killer. I doubt the same can be said for these kids, who will probably be traumatized for life because of what they did--which one might say is the price that you pay, but I think they've been placed in an impossible situation.

The comparison has been made to suicide bombers--but I suspect that Blaster's reference to groupthink is more apt. Groups actually tend to make poorer decisions than individuals. Add to that the collective emotional immaturity of the people involved, throw in guns and you have a recipe for disaster.

As to FlamesAddiction's point that

Quote:

the whole notion that these situations are not normal to these men, should give them a greater insight to what is and isn't an appropriate reaction.

I can see your point. There are, however, two mitigating factors in my view. One of them is stress, which has been mentioned before, and the other is youth. These kids are not prepared to have the insight that you're talking about--which is a failure of education.

I guess maybe I believe this because I'm an optimist. The alternative is "they're evil" and I'm not willing to go there.

Lanny_MacDonald · 06-01-2006, 08:29 AM

The latest, and likely most realistic take on the situation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060601/...NlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Frankly, it doesn't matter what a military tribunal finds, the court of public opinion has already come in with a verdict in the middle east. When the Brookings Institute's best spin on the situation is "My Lai on a smaller scale" you know you're screwed. The military could very easily bury this and find 1000 excuses for the incident, but the bottom line is that the jury of Iraqi opinion has already handed down its verdict. This incident will resonate throughout the middle east, for all the wrong reasons.

rubecube · 06-01-2006, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Not to leap to Azure's defense or anything, but that's a pretty odious comparison to me. Manson was a sociopath and a serial killer. I doubt the same can be said for these kids, who will probably be traumatized for life because of what they did--which one might say is the price that you pay, but I think they've been placed in an impossible situation.

The comparison was more to the followers of Manson than Manson himself.

rubecube · 06-01-2006, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

The latest, and likely most realistic take on the situation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060601/...NlYwMlJVRPUCUl

Frankly, it doesn't matter what a military tribunal finds, the court of public opinion has already come in with a verdict in the middle east. When the Brookings Institute's best spin on the situation is "My Lai on a smaller scale" you know you're screwed. The military could very easily bury this and find 1000 excuses for the incident, but the bottom line is that the jury of Iraqi opinion has already handed down its verdict. This incident will resonate throughout the middle east, for all the wrong reasons.

This kind of goes back to what Azure was saying about whether this could've been done in cold blood. I think My Lai shows exactly what soldiers are capable of doing cold blood. Psychological distress or not, there's not excuse for this kind of behaviour.

Bobblehead · 06-01-2006, 03:32 PM

And more information - the most detailed I have read yet.

Survivors say Marines went house to house in a rage

RougeUnderoos · 06-01-2006, 04:41 PM

Now there is another one.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5039420.stm

The BBC has uncovered new video evidence that US forces may have been responsible for the deliberate killing of 11 innocent Iraqi civilians.