Concerning the Marine and the Insurgent

Your reaction, in my opinion...is way overboard.

We are *not* in the hobby of collecting bottle caps, match books, or balls of tin foil. Our hobby deals

*directly* with history, and current events. In striving to deal with the subjects of our hobby, in detail and accuracy...discussion of the events around them is a *must*. For example, what if a modeler wanted to create a diorama around the current events in Iraq? He would want to take into careful consideration, how such a thing might be perceived, by those who would view it. He would have to engage in a discussion of people's opinions surrounding those current events.

Did it Thursday night. There are nearly 80,000 signatures now but it's kind of disheartening to see how many people are referring to him as a 'soldier' rather than a Marine.

Were the victims using the hospital as a base of combat operations or storing weapons and ammo there? No, right? That means it was an *entirely* different situation and their slaughter was nothing short of murder. I'm pretty sure that's why war crimes trials are being held in The Hague.

nothing happened.

Sure - that's why NATO still has forces in the Balkans...

When the Multinational Forces or Iraqi government forces start beheading innocents, shooting CARE employees in the head, and plowing suicide bombers into crowds of Iraqi civilians, let me know....

Being an active duty military officer, I could not participate in the petition. However, my heart is with it and I've made my personal support for this Marine and his actions quite evident.

Semper fi......Bill Woodier

-- -- -- -- -- "We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." George Orwell

My Home Page:

Amen. A long time ago (about 32 years), I was introduced by my counsin in Germany to a foreman at his factory, a guy I only remember as Herr Hend. He flew Bf.109s during the war, and had the misfortune to be shot down twice. The first time (1944) he was captured by the British and interned in a POW camp. He was so taken with the accomodations that a week later he bugged out and made it back to German lines. The second time, he was forced down by a P-51D and actually crashed on an American landing field. The squadron commander saw that he was just a kid, some sixteen years old, so instead of sending him off with the other detainees, he had him fed (steak - the first one that Hend had ~seen~ in a couple of years) and made Hend his "housemouse". Hend spent the last six months of the war as a willing Prisoner of War, and corresponded with that Army Air Force officer until the man's death in the early 1960s. Herr Hend, if he is still alive, would be about 76 years old now, and he was one German that ~loved~ the United States.

Maybe we should have captured some Frenchmen?

-- John The history of things that didn't happen has never been written. . - - - Henry Kissinger

Who said he was a POW? Even if he was he could legally be killed if he was engaged in perfidy or treachery - look it up in the Geneva Conventions.

The Iraqi terrorists already have two of them. If they're lucky we'll find them before they're murdered.

I rarely sign petitions for anything and I wasn't going to sign this one, but I shall in your place, Bll, if you like.

Tom

If you accept this, then you accept that any US soldier who is wounded can then be shot in cold blood by an opponent as he may still pose a danger.

Remember that.

Don't reply to the btconnect address - and remove nospam!!

BIG difference here. The US soldiers are as a whole following the geneva conventions. The insurgents they are presently fighting are not, and have ALREADY DONE what you describe happen to US troops !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is it that you side with the bad guys ?

And why are you not just as mad, if not moreso about the french soldiers that opened fire on unarmed civillians ?

Al Superczynski wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Maybe France could appeal to the UN for help.

Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!

Dave Fleming wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

What amkes you think it isn't already happening?

I cannot remember the soldier's name, but some time back I heard of a SF sergeant was wounded and accidentally left behind when the evac helicopter took off under fire at night.

His "capture" by the humanitarian savages was recorded on a night vision camera. He was slaughtered and not quickly.

Kill 'em all and let Allah sort 'em out.

"AM" wrote in news:OPednWf9OtmDZDzcRVn- snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

Becuase he is a terrorist sympathizer.

Because he's a dishonest piece of crap.

Sure, like people that behead innocent civilians as a matter of course would give a second thought to shooting a wounded US soldier. Try living in the real world instead of Kumbaya Land...

Not talking just about Iraq Al. Talking about any situation where the US (or other allies - I know people serving with the UK forces out there) is facing an enemy, be they irregular or regular Armed Forces (and it will happen somewhere).

Then, if you accept what happened as being OK, you legitimise anyone else doing the same for the same reasons.

Might surprise you to know I generally agree with the Iraq policy - I may disagree with the tactics used by the US forces (e.g. disbanding the Iraqi army, which in the main was a well trained army, especially inh the Officer corps) and I don't fall for the linking it to 9/11, but I think the aim was a just one.

Don't reply to the btconnect address - and remove nospam!!

I remember it well, Dave.

Here's a news flash for you. What the hell do you think happens when the terrorist/insurgents come across a wounded US Serviceman or if they were to capture one alive. The image of the butchered Marine sniper team of a month or so ago is still very sharp in my mind. The beheading of another who was captured earlier is equally sharp.

-- -- -- -- -- "We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." George Orwell

My Home Page:

FWIW There are people in the Intelligence community who agree, in fact they feel that this may well have been our biggest mistake. The Republican Guard was much more politicized than the Regular Army and it definitely had to go, but the regulars were a different category. If the regulars had been "kept on" and used to secure non essential areas, there may well have been a lot less of the destructive lawlessness that followed Saddam's fall, with it's destruction of critical infra structure. As to the search for Saddam, the regulars who backed off and refused to engage Coalition forces would have had a powerful incentive to help find him, as his well known vengefulness would have made them a prime target should he ever return to power. Yes, we made mistakes. r.e the Marines actions: Considering the insurgents tactics of playing wounded to draw a Marine in and then detonating a bomb, he had little other choice unless he was suicidal in turn. You have to adapt to the battlefield conditions, and in this battlefield the insurgents are setting the conditions. I had an Uncle who was a W.W.II Marine, fought in the Pacific. Our liberal finger pointers would have taken gas at some of the things he spoke of. This isn't something new on the battlefield. The Japanese were just as suicidal and fanatic as the nut cases blowing themselves up in Fallujah!

William Shuey

The US hasn't fought an enemy since WWII that's abided by the Geneva Conventions. Perhaps the UK fought an honorable enemy in the Falklands - I don't know.

US military personnel do not engage in either perfidy or treachery.

Why should I be surprised? You've always seemed reasonable enough to me.

Well, ISTM that the Iraqi army pretty much disbanded itself long before Bremer made it formal. I don't know that the CPA could have reconstituted it even had it wanted to.

The administration never claimed a link between Iraq and the 9-11 attacks. It did, however, link Iraq to terrorism in general terms.

As do I, but not necessarily for the reasons the administration claimed publicly.

Al Superczynski wrote: [SNIP]

I can't let this pass: So, either the Mai Lai massacre was _not_ perfidious, or it was not committed by US military personnel?

Not that the NVA and VC and ARVN could be considered even vaguely decent as combatants.

A big problem is that atrocity breeds atrocity, and when the nominally _good_ side starts behaving as badly as the bad guys... Was it fat Hermann who said, "if we can make America do like us, then we have won"?

Cheers, Gary B-)