The Haditha Incident

It's beginning to look like the incident at Haditha isn't a case of young Marines out for revenge and slaughtering civilians in cold blood.

We are now starting to hear from the other side of this and it is passing the smell test of legitimate combat.

Link: Mudville Gazette.

The issue will indeed be settled by a determination of whether the Marines followed rules of engagement for the circumstances. Two questions that are key to that issue are 1) did they correctly assess the situation and 2) did they respond appropriately to that assessment. On-the-scene decision makers have broad latitude to act in response to attack (this is not to imply they can shoot children with reckless abandon), must rely on training and experience to do so (the Marines had both), and obviously can't pull out an instruction manual to determine what to do in any combat situation.

It's worth noting that there are two investigations ongoing into events at Haditha, and that this report addresses both. The first is to determine what happened, the second to evaluate if a "cover up" followed. Obviously, initial reports that civilians were killed by the IED were wrong - but initial reports more often than not are wrong.

The problem with these cowardly pigs is that they hide behind women and children.  They have no regard for their lives.  Shouldn't we be outraged at that.

Whenever something like this happens, the left trots it out like it is DOD policy to shoot innocent civilians.  They are so anxious to find, display and pin another My Lai massacre on American soldiers and Marines, that they go to almost any length to do it. 

They say they support the troops.  When they already have these men tried and ready for the noose before they've even heard their side, I call BS!  That isn't support.   Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty?    To the left, it doesn't apply to soldiers and conservatives

The anti-war left doesn't care one whit that the other side routinely commits atrocities as a matter of course.  If they are asked, they blame it on us being there.  That kind of support, no one needs!

VW

Comments

[Aurelius]

I've read your post several times, and I still don't get what the hell you are talking about.

So, dispite the similarities to My Lai - troops who are worn out and damn tired of seeing their buddies killed in an unwinnable war - we should hold off until some congressional 'investigation' tells us what to think? We should not even mention it?

Not every democrat represents the 'left', but the left has always been the ally of the soldier. When some fantasy world politicians wanted to take on China and fight a land war in Asia, it was the left that finally got those guys out of there - and the half million troops who deserted in Vietnam were all 'on the left' too.

We respect the military that is willing to law down their lives to protect our freedom, that's why we don't want to see those lives thrown around for 'strategic advantages in long term planning.' Those who respect the military only want to see its vast power used when it is necessary to protect America - a whistledick who makes bombs for a living, will want to support every chance to move their 'product.'

I can't believe your website, you're obviously working hard at avoiding any understanding of modern ethics.

Good luck with that.

[Mike Pittman]

Lordy, you are thick! No one said not to investigate, just be fair. Before we start hanging people, give them a chance to tell their side. I know, it's usually a concept that is hard for folks on the left to absorb.

I know that you'd be happier then anything if this turns out to be a crime.

Ya know, I spent 20 years in the service. My job requires that I carry a Geneva Convention card on me. I work for a USAF contractor directly on USAF equipment and airplanes and I am subject to be deployed. We just had a crew come back from Afghanistan a few months ago recovering an aircraft that missed the runway.

I think that gives me a little bit of perspective on who my allies are. It ain't the left.

Avoiding modern ethics? What in the hell are you babbling about, boy? What exactly ARE modern ethics? If they are what I see on your site, I don't want them.

You've probably never worked a 40 hour day, get 3 hours of sleep and get back up and hump a guard line in the cold and rain for another 4 hours, get 2 more houres of sleep and do another 12. You've probably never gotten called at 3am to get out of a nice warm bed and go to work until you are ready to drop. You've probably never worked solid 12 hour shifts for months and no overtime. What in hell do you know about the military?

If you are calling me a "whistledick" because I work for the defense industry, then you better re-think that ethics thing.

The more I read your blog, the more I see an angry little man with an even smaller understanding of life. Good God, you are so full of bile and vitriol!

You seem to think that 80% of the soldiers in Iraq are too stupid to understand their situation because they have no access to the same media. You are clueless! Probably close to 100% of them have access to the internet. Maybe not every day, but they have access. They are sent newspapers from home. They watch CNN, MSNBC and Fox on Armed forces telivision. There are liberal commentators on their radio.

You know nothing about the troops, here or in Iraq. All of them, with rare exception, have at least a high school diploma. Most have some college. Some have two year degress and many enlisted, especially senior enlisted, have bachelor degrees or higher. Again, with very rare exception, all officers have at least a bachelor's degree. Almost all senior officers have at least a Master's degree or higher. As a workforce they are, by and large, better trained and better educated than most.

Take your ethics and shove them up your ignorant ass! Clueless halfwit.

VW

[thirdee]

Aurelius,

It's you who doesn't make any sense whatsoever. And, trust me, I'm being nice.

"We respect the military that is willing to law down their lives to protect our freedom, that's why we don't want to see those lives thrown around for 'strategic advantages in long term planning."

Eh? What "strategic advantages in long term planning" are you talking about? We'd like to hear. This should be interesting.

"Those who respect the military only want to see its vast power used when it is necessary to protect America"

And, just what on earth do you think our military is doing in the war on terror? Was killing Zarqawi necessary to protect America? Or how about Bin Laden? Is our "vast power" to be used on Bin Laden? Or any terrorist for that matter? Is that respectable?

"a whistledick who makes bombs for a living, will want to support every chance to move their 'product."

LOL. I'm sensing some "respect" for the military here.

Maybe, Aurelius, you need to get a good nights sleep and then come back and read this post again.

It is you who lacks understanding and respect for the military.

[Jenn]

I don't care what evidence any one seems to have on this incident. As I've said from the beginning, I'll wait until all cards are on the table before I make any kind of assessment.

That being said, I'm sure there is a logical explaination. Marines just don't do that, not without provocation.