Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Iraq Soldier Discusses His "Kills"
Former marine, John Michael Turner speaks before a group of veterans regarding his participation in the killing of innocent Iraqi's. According to Turner, the men were encouraged to make a 'first kill' and were congratulated by their commander each time one made the list.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelBridgeman
So he is publicly talking about his war crimes?
Seems fishy
From another site...
"Turner was one of more than 200 veterans who came the Winter Soldier hearings organized by Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW). Like the other veterans assembled, Turner spoke openly about what he saw and did during his tours in Iraq. "
"Get ready for the horrible, honest reality of the American occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan like you haven’t heard it before. For four days, from March 13 through March 16, hundreds of U.S. veterans of the two wars will descend on Washington and testify in the “Winter Soldier” hearings about what they really did while they were serving their country in Iraq. And their experiences aren’t pretty.
The event is inspired by the Winter Solider tribunal held in 1971 by Vietnam War vets, including John Kerry. The name comes from a quote from Thomas Paine, the revolutionary who rallied George Washington’s troops at Valley Forge, saying: “These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of his country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman."
So like i said "fishy". So i would imagine that Jon Turner could end up with the same fate if proven...jail for lying about it or jail for being a war criminal.
Really if it is as wide spread as is claimed, its really poor military planning to kill innocent citizens of a country you are occupying, terrible planning, besides the fact that soldier are trained to know what is right and what is wrong..although that doesnt prevent things like this from happening. Sometimes the shallow end of the gene pool ends up in the military.
Last edited by MelBridgeman; 06-02-2008 at 01:11 AM.
So like i said "fishy". So i would imagine that Jon Turner could end up with the same fate if proven...jail for lying about it or jail for being a war criminal.
Really if it is as wide spread as is claimed, its really poor military planning to kill innocent citizens of a country you are occupying, terrible planning, besides the fact that soldier are trained to know what is right and what is wrong..although that doesnt prevent things like this from happening. Sometimes the shallow end of the gene pool ends up in the military.
Yeah, i can now see where it might be fishy.
If it is as widespread as claimed i wouldn't put it past the US govt to try and push this under the rug in hopes it would go away. Just imiagine the huge embarassment if this turned out to be true. Similar to Abu Ghraib but on a much bigger scale.
Yes and soldiers were charged and sent to prison for Abu Ghraib, and in this case since a soldier was dumb enough to talk publicly about his apparent war crimes, the same fate shall be bestowed upon him as well if what he claims is true, which IMO is prob not or at the very least stretched considering the mandate of the organization he represents (which i have no problems with..just the delivery in this case of their message).
Like i said it is poor military planning to be as widespread as it is claimed and or accepted. If things like this are happening, it on the shoulders of a few bad soldiers.
Furthermore this is the first i have heard about this conference which took place over 2 months ago, there is very little evidence of it in mainstream media and seems to be otherwise ignored...which is also strange.
Won't be long until a new administration comes in..lets see if this gets any legs in the coming months.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelBridgeman
Yes and soldiers were charged and sent to prison for Abu Ghraib, and in this case since a soldier was dumb enough to talk publicly about his apparent war crimes, the same fate shall be bestowed upon him as well if what he claims is true, which IMO is prob not or at the very least stretched considering the mandate of the organization he represents (which i have no problems with..just the delivery in this case of their message).
Like i said it is poor military planning to be as widespread as it is claimed and or accepted. If things like this are happening, it on the shoulders of a few bad soldiers.
Furthermore this is the first i have heard about this conference which took place over 2 months ago, there is very little evidence of it in mainstream media and seems to be otherwise ignored...which is also strange.
Won't be long until a new administration comes in..lets see if this gets any legs in the coming months.
These quotes from a previous article might help to explain why it might be happening.
"The problem that we face in Iraq is that policymakers in leadership have set a precedent of lawlessness where we don't abide by the rule of law, we don't respect international treaties, argued former U.S. Army Sergeant Logan Laituri, who served a tour in Iraq from 2004 to 2005 before being discharged as a conscientious objector. “So when that atmosphere exists it lends itself to criminal activity."
Laituri explained that precedent of lawlessness makes itself felt in the rules of engagement handed down by commanders to soldiers on the front lines. When he was stationed in Samarra, for example, he said one of his fellow soldiers shot an unarmed man while he walked down the street.
"The problem is that that soldier was not committing a crime as you might call it because the rules of engagement were very clear that no one was supposed to be walking down the street," Laituri said. "But I have a problem with that. You can't tell a family to leave everything they know so you can bomb the out of their house or their city. So while he definitely has protection under the law, I don't think that legitimates that type of violence."
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Here's one from Newsweek.
Late last week a U.S. Army soldier stood in the rotunda of the Cannon House Office Building and announced during a press conference that he's now refusing orders for deployment to Iraq. Sergeant Matthis Chiroux, who served as a military photojournalist, gave his statement soon after a number of anti-war veterans testified before Congress -- the first time such veterans have done so. AFP gave this account of the hearing:
"As for Sgt. Chiroux, he said his position as a military journalist gave exposed him to countless disturbing stories he was afraid to publish for fear of retribution by the Army. He arrived in Washington, D.C. with Iraq Veterans Against the War (IVAW), which coordinated the testimonies before Congress. Below is a video of Chiroux's speech, where he also said he will remain in the U.S. despite the great number of war resistors who move to Canada."
Again not saying anything he is saying maybe false, but we are dealing with a group with an agenda, and no matter what their message is sometimes things get stretched to get the point across.
Last edited by MelBridgeman; 06-02-2008 at 02:52 AM.
Again not saying anything he is saying may be false, but we are dealing with a group with an agenda, and no matter what their message maybe sometimes things sometimes stretched to get the point across.
For sure they have an agenda. I would also agree that things will get stretched to make a point. Hopefully the truth comes out in time or when the war has ended.
"The problem is that that soldier was not committing a crime as you might call it because the rules of engagement were very clear that no one was supposed to be walking down the street," Laituri said. "But I have a problem with that. You can't tell a family to leave everything they know so you can bomb the out of their house or their city. So while he definitely has protection under the law, I don't think that legitimates that type of violence."
I find this odd, and by no means am i a military expert and maybe someone can set me in my ways,but unless you are walking on the street with a weapon in your hand the US rules of engagment don't ever recommended lethal force to solve the issue. Even if the subject physically attacks the soldier without a weapon, ROE allows for soldiers to use physical means to control the situation. If innocent Iraqis are being killed for not obeying..it is still a war crime and he is not protected. Smoke screen IMO
regardless of the US history of ignoring conventions eta, that still doesnt mean that they are practicing bad military strategy by killling innocent people, therefore i doubt it is widespread, i would never deny it doest take place,as i said always a few in every large group that arent playing with a full deck.
Although there may be threat of a sucide bomber in these situations, but i would imagine that would be a perfect statement to make to "justify" some of these actions, but I haven't seen that used yet.
Last edited by MelBridgeman; 06-02-2008 at 03:08 AM.
If he really wants to back up his convictions and show remorse, he should be tried for his war crimes. Though I'm sure it's a crazy world over there, that no one but a veteran could imagine, what he did is a war crime and he should be tried as such.
Location: A simple man leading a complicated life....
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by MelBridgeman
I find this odd, and by no means am i a military expert and maybe someone can set me in my ways,but unless you are walking on the street with a weapon in your hand the US rules of engagment don't ever recommended lethal force to solve the issue. Even if the subject physically attacks the soldier without a weapon, ROE allows for soldiers to use physical means to control the situation. If innocent Iraqis are being killed for not obeying..it is still a war crime and he is not protected. Smoke screen IMO
regardless of the US history of ignoring conventions eta, that still doesnt mean that they are practicing bad military strategy by killling innocent people, therefore i doubt it is widespread, i would never deny it doest take place,as i said always a few in every large group that arent playing with a full deck.
Although there may be threat of a sucide bomber in these situations, but i would imagine that would be a perfect statement to make to "justify" some of these actions, but I haven't seen that used yet.
The U.S. military officer overseeing the investigation into 24 civilian killings in Haditha, Iraq, has concluded that Marine leadership failed multiple times, including in pre-deployment training, in the tone set by commanders, and in how information was reported up the chain of command, defense officials said.
Army Lt. Gen. Peter W. Chiarelli, the No. 2 officer in Iraq, found that commanders and staff at the regimental and division levels were negligent in how they conveyed orders about how to deal with Iraqi civilians and also in how they responded to conflicting reports they received from units about the Haditha incident, the officials said.
Chiarelli has long been concerned that the U.S. military was inadequately prepared to conduct an effective counterinsurgency campaign in Iraq. He also included thoughts about how better to prepare troops and commanders, the official added.
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Military prosecutors dropped all charges on Friday against a Marine accused of killing unarmed Iraqi women and children at Haditha in 2005, abruptly dismissing the case on the eve of trial with little explanation. Lance Cpl Stephen B. Tatum became the fifth Haditha defendant out of eight to see charges dropped in a case that brought international condemnation on U.S. troops in Iraq. Three Marines, including accused ringleader Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich, still face court-martial later this year.
Zimmermann said he believed the case was abandoned because it was "weak from the start." He described his client and the man's family as "relieved" and tearful at the news.
Former marine, John Michael Turner speaks before a group of veterans regarding his participation in the killing of innocent Iraqi's. According to Turner, the men were encouraged to make a 'first kill' and were congratulated by their commander each time one made the list.
Iraq Soldier Discusses His "Kills"
