Propagandists, Murtha, & someone on this site

[BeanCounter]

In the past I've gone at it with a certain individual(s) on this site concerning labeling our military as indiscriminate killers in Iraq. Another thread cited a Russian KGB agent as stating that such misleading statements was part and parcel of an effort to undermine every US President since Truman. I see we have one more example of it and yet some still seem to side with enemy over their own individual countrymen.

" In exonerating Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt of all charges against him arising out of the incident in Haditha in November 2005 including murder, Lt. Gen. James Mattis praised the young Marine who is among the Marines who were accused of cold-blooded murder by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.

As correspondent Nat Helms has written, Murtha publicly labeled the Marines cold-blooded murderers and liars who covered up the crime to protect their skins last year. He repeatedly told reporters interviewing him on CNN and other news outlets that he obtained his evidence from the Time magazine stories, which he failed to explain were based on statements by two known insurgent propagandists.

After agreeing with the Investigating Officer's recommendation that all charges against Sharratt, a veteran of the bloody battle of Fallujah in 2004 and the insurgent ambush in Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005, Mattis assured Sharratt that he could reflect with satisfaction over his service in Iraq. "

And finally I hope Murtha and the others some day have to stand up for the unbelievably callous and yes traiterous way they have portrayed our military.

[imagine2frolic]

Sounds like Mr. Murtha should be facing a slander suit. If what you say is the absolute truth? Mr. Murtha carries a lot of weight around. Not only within his belt, but in Politics too. He should be much more discreet than that! I don't think what he said makes him a traitor, but it does make him irresponsible to the facts.

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by BeanCounter

In the past I've gone at it with a certain individual(s) on this site concerning labeling our military as indiscriminate killers in Iraq. Another thread cited a Russian KGB agent as stating that such misleading statements was part and parcel of an effort to undermine every US President since Truman. I see we have one more example of it and yet some still seem to side with enemy over their own individual countrymen.

" In exonerating Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt of all charges against him arising out of the incident in Haditha in November 2005 including murder, Lt. Gen. James Mattis praised the young Marine who is among the Marines who were accused of cold-blooded murder by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.

As correspondent Nat Helms has written, Murtha publicly labeled the Marines cold-blooded murderers and liars who covered up the crime to protect their skins last year. He repeatedly told reporters interviewing him on CNN and other news outlets that he obtained his evidence from the Time magazine stories, which he failed to explain were based on statements by two known insurgent propagandists.

After agreeing with the Investigating Officer's recommendation that all charges against Sharratt, a veteran of the bloody battle of Fallujah in 2004 and the insurgent ambush in Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005, Mattis assured Sharratt that he could reflect with satisfaction over his service in Iraq. "

And finally I hope Murtha and the others some day have to stand up for the unbelievably callous and yes traiterous way they have portrayed our military.

Bernie,

First, I'm certainly no fan of Murtha. He seems to shoot first and then not even bother with any questions after. But...

Only some of our military are indiscriminate killers in Iraq. Probably about the same percentage as reside in the general populace of any given nation. But I suppose there are some. War and murder must never allowed to be the same. There probably were some "engagement rules" slightly bent by other members of Sharratts squad under some very extenuating circumstances, I might add. Full investigation will usually reveal the final truth.

I think our in-country police forces are a lot more careful than our general military presence in Iraq. As an example consider part of the story as told by the Associated Press ( http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6582889 ) :


***"The women and children died in a different house and Sharratt was not charged in their deaths.

Prosecutors alleged that Sharratt and other members of his squad did not properly identify their targets before opening fire, but Mattis concluded Sharratt acted appropriately and within his rules of engagement.

'Our nation is fighting a shadowy enemy who hides among the innocent people, does not comply with any aspect of the law of war, and routinely draws fire toward civilians," Mattis wrote. "With the dismissal of these charges, you may fairly conclude that you did your best to live up to the standards followed by U.S. fighting men throughout our many wars.'*** "


If collateral police damage such as this occurred in the U.S. involving U.S. citizens, there would be hell to pay. Keeping in mind almost all criminals amongst us are "a shadowy enemy who hides among the innocent people". Another similar outcry would arise if an occupying military force in the U.S. accidently killed our families during routine war. So it seems that we must be above reproach lest the situation ever be reversed.

As far as "certain individual(s) on this site" being critical of US Presidents, it's probably a good thing overall. We wouldn't have caught Clinton with his pants down without occasional effort to undermine the chief.

P.S. Steve's OK. He has some good and provacative posts. I don't think he's Russian KGB.
Wait? Is that chopper blades I hear?


...

[Roscoe]

Not only were the charges dropped but the judge found him 'innocent'.

There is a big difference between just having charges dropped and being claimed innocent.

Roscoe

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by Roscoe

Not only were the charges dropped but the judge found him 'innocent'.

There is a big difference between just having charges dropped and being claimed innocent.

Roscoe

Absolutely. Charges may dropped because of insufficient evidence. But a declaration of innocence (as in this case) is an acknowledgement of evidence of no wrong doing. I imagine Sharratt was a bit nervous until the outcome. Being innocent is no guarantee of getting off.

But some individuals in his squad may yet be charged and even found guilty.

A few years ago my Conductor and a Utility Man that was helping him, almost backed me and my 80 car train into an Amtrak, by radio direction. Had they done so, and people became injured, I probably would have gone down with them as an "example". We were all initially charged as is normal regarding procedure involving the whole train crew. As it was, I was absolved of any responsibilty after a couple of weeks because I had strictly followed the radio rules.

It was a long wait though. The top corporate CEO personally called the local administration the next day to see WTF. Several engineers that heard the radio conversation reassured me that none of them would ever willingly back a train by radio again if I took the burn. But still, it causes that knot in the stomach until a man knows for sure. So I feel for Sharratt. And any others that maybe slipped up in the heat of the moment. S happens.


...

[dblbarrel]

Originally Posted by Wes Tausend

Bernie,

First, I'm certainly no fan of Murtha. He seems to shoot first and then not even bother with any questions after. But...

Only some of our military are indiscriminate killers in Iraq.


...

And exactly how do you know the above?
Sorry after that statement, I didn't read the of the rest of your post
Thank heavens there were no civilians killed in Dresden or Tokyo.

[BeanCounter]

Wes,

Local police do not have to deal on a regular basis with fully automatic weapons, RPG's, IED's, and squads of gangsta's attacking them. The police are totally ill equipped to deal with anything like this. This is a war, where only the military is capable of dealing with the situation. Anyone thinking it's the job of the police has his head.......in the wrong place.

In the military I've seen men whimper and cry, unable to mount a reasonable defense let alone an offense when the rounds come flying their way. Things happen so very fast in an ambush that lasts 30 seconds at best before they disengage and run away. Things happen in that 30 seconds that most don't even know happen. To me it's a little cheeky for someone who was not engaged in it to try to make assumptions that they're totally unfit to make. I get pissed that the poor guys not only have to worry about the bullets that come from the front but also the knife that's coming from the back. To me unless you can prove that they simply took civilians out and knowingly knelt them down and shot them in the back of the head (think My Lai) then anything done during a search mission you give the guy the benefit of the doubt, you don't try to send him to Leavenworth for life.

My beef with Steve is that he goes out of his way to constantly portray everything in a negative light that deals with our side while pointing out the nobility of the other side. He is in my opinion anti-American. He will go on ad nauseam about stacking naked prisoners in a pyramid (god didn't they used to do that at frat hazings?) while not saying a word about hanging civilian contractors upside down from a bridge and setting them on fire. WTF gives on the relativity of the situation??? I can only take it as a hatred of America.

[Ron61]

Bernie,

I agree with most of what you posted. The people who have only came close to these situations by sitting in their chairs and watching the biased TV reports don't have any idea of what it is like to walk down a road and wonder if the kid or woman you just passed is going to pick up a gun and start shooting you in the back once you are past. This stuff really started in Korea, and then escalated in Vietnam and there will never be another nice clean war with drawn battle lines and enemy in uniforms. All militaries of all countries carry out things that should not be done. Personally in light of what I saw and what is going on in this world today, I favor the shoot first and then sort it out later policy. You are just as dead if some 10 year old girl blows you up with a grenade as you are if a 30 year old soldier in uniform does so. This is a war, though not one that i care much for and innocent people are going to be killed. Tell me, how many innocents have been killed in Iraq and how do that number compare to the people killed here every day in traffic accidents.

Ron

[VRM]

Bernie,
If someone is found innocent they should be freed with the apologies and the thanks of the court. If they are found guilty they should face whatever penalty is required. They are innocent until proven guilty.

Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt was exonerated.
Marine Sgt. Lawrence Hutchins III was found guilty and sentenced to 15 years.
Cpl. Marshall Magincalda was convicted of conspiracy to commit murder and sentenced to time already served.

There are a few others who have been charged with a crime and convicted. The overall percentage is thankfully small, but because of the nature of this situation one single bad action can overcome hundreds of good ones.

Any instance where any Marine (or any other service member) acts dishonourably is not acting in the best interests of our country. Our enemies are looking for ANY instance of our corruption so that they can point to us and tell everyone how bad we are, and that we deserve to die. Because people like you are perfectly happy treating our own transgressions as unimportant you are actually aiding Al Quaida in the battle for hearts and minds. Of course, people that share your attitude of Iraqis are not helping either.

Bernie, you think that we are the good guys simply because we always have been. You think it is OK to put aside what we stand for because of extenuating circumstances. I think we have to continue to earn being the good guys, and you don't do it by allowing things that run counter to Truth, Justice, and our Constitution. Ever.

Steve

[BeanCounter]

Well Steve if you had gone to what you sneeringly call "CPA school" you would have been taught the concept of materiality. Your constant harping on the few incidents shows that you have no idea what that means. While you drone on and on about what amounts to fraternity hazing pranks you never ever talk about the daily bombings that kill 30 to 100 people at a shot. Hearts & Minds? How can you possibly think that Al Qaeda is winning them killing dozens of people every day while we have very few incidents. The two you cite were from the same incident. And if Qaeda is winning their hearts it's not based on what we're doing, it's inherent within the mindset of the population. To both you and them we can do no good, only evil. You talk about hunting down Osama but you don't tell us how we can possibly go into Pakistan and get him. All talk, no solutions. Your egotistical and elitist ideas are a distinct minority amongst anyone I talk to or even most of the members here. Even the Democratic party knows the danger of your positions. Maybe you should look inside yourself as to why you're so off base.

Oh, and I don't THINK we're the good guys, I know we're the good guys.

[Cobrabill]

By Steve" I think we have to continue to earn being the good guys, and you don't do it by allowing things that run counter to Truth, Justice, and our Constitution. Ever."

That's funny.We were the good guys.We ARE the good guys.And no matter what we do,we will still BE the good guys regardless of what any puke on the planet thinks or says.

[petek]

It is all well and good to be found innocent, but how do they regain their reputation. There will still be many who will say that he (and others) were "charged" while ignoring that they were also exonerated.

Bad news sells. Retractions, clarifications, and exonerations don't sell. When the front page announces atrocities and later a section B, inside, below the fold contains the retraction, clarification, and exoneration... well, what does John-Q Public remember?

[VRM]

Bernie,

With regards to hunting down Bin laden, perhaps he would not have escaped if our eyes had not been off the ball. If we had had 160K troops in Afghanistan instead of just 20K perhaps that country would not be falling apart. We now have to resort to diplomacy. If we had not invaded Iraq that diplomacy would have been a lot easier.

Nope, I don't know materiality. Perhaps you are familiar with the term 'cause and effect' or 'if/then' statements. Us engineer types use it all the time. It can be applicable to situations like this.

Unfortunately, we have a lot more incidents that you think. At last count there have been about 60 soldiers court martialed on murder related charges. And did you know that those contractors over there do not have to obey any laws? The coalition has no authority over them like they do the regular military, and they are also exempt from Iraqi authority. Blackwater, Custer-Battles, Aegis Defence Services, and Triple Canopy have been involved in controversy. Private sercurity personnel also fired on civilians, and a Marine observation post. The Marines arrested them, but they were releasd when the NCIS couldn't prosecute them. These things are front page news in many other parts of the world.

Everyone hears the stories that Americans are the most generous, just, and competent people in the world. Well, residents of Bahgdad have electricity and water a lot less often now than they did under Hussein. Right or wrong, the perception is that we destroyed them in the first place, and that we are either too incompetent or weak to remedy the situation. This is another reason that going in to Iraq was a really bad idea - there is too much infrastructure to try and secure. Afghanistan had a lot less - having electricity 3 hours a day there would actually be an improvement in many cases.

This is a war about perceptions. The Iraqis don't give a hoot what you say you know. It also does not matter what your friends or people on this forum say. That is why you have no clue about what is going on. From the average Iraqis perspective our actions are not always that of good guys, both from a governmental and an individual standpoint. Many of them think that the new government is worse than Hussein. And we prop up that government, so in their minds we end up being guilty by association.

You can say anything you want, but it does not make it true for someone else.

Steve

[BeanCounter]

Steve,

As usual all talk and no solutions. I didn't ask you about history, I asked you about a solution. You say maybe he wouldn't have escaped. Well he might have escaped if we had had 10 times the troops in that god forsaken terrain. That's water under the bridge now except for your muckraking it up constantly to put America in a bad light. Let's look forward and you tell me how you'd root Bin Laden out of Pakistan. You hold yourself up to be smarter than everyone else so let's hear your plan.

Oh, and your peace loving buddies are up to it again.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293284,00.html

Let me hear you rant about how they're child abusers. Let's see you condemn them in several paragraphs like the never ending stream of criticism l you pour forth about the US. Do something of merit to society and work to save those children from their crazed society.

Your lack of balance is amazing.

[Roscoe]

The left has always used Bin Laden as the fulcrum for their criticism. Killing him (and he may be dead already) would have no effect on the war against Islamists. Did we kill Hitler before the war was over? Bin Laden is a red herring.

Roscoe

[BeanCounter]

Steve,

Here's 250+ more just today!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,293288,00.html

How about a little pontification on how evil these guys are. Of course I expect you to spin how the bad old USA caused them to do it. Jaysus, you sound like the little brother. "The US made me do it".

Have you ever stopped to think that their's are all premeditated???? Our's are generally heat of passion of the moment. Even our justice system recognizes the difference. Why don't you???

[VRM]

Roscoe,
I agree with your comment about Bin Laden - we do need to be going after him and others like him. Killing him (if he is not already dead) would only have the effect of removing one of their smarter leaders. Someone else would pop up to replace him. We need to be going after the entire organisation from all avenues of attack. This includes military and non-military.

Bernie,
I've given you solutions before and you do not understand them. You are quite fond of telling me that the only thing that will work is a bigger hammer.

We have squandered the goodwill of the world because of people like you, and that makes our job of finding the real bad guys harder.

We have thrown away billions of dollars and thousands of lives to gain a country that will only end up falling into Irans sphere of influence. That is also because of people like you.

People like you took a bad-but-workable situation (Hussein and WMD) and turned it into a nightmare with no good solution.

You call me un-American, and yet you are too chickensh!t to defend your position and tell me why Scowcroft was wrong. It is not water under the bridge because people like you are still ruining things. As far as I am concerned people like you no longer have any place in the national debate as to what to do, as you have only proven that you only know how to make things worse. I really wish that people like you would just shut up, get out of the way, and let people like Scowcroft and Baker implement their suggestions.

And yes, I agree with just about all of their suggestions. There are a couple I disagree with that have to do with Iraqi decision making that should not involve us. Interestingly, they made some suggestions about policing which you shoot down over and over again. BTW, I was making the exact same suggestion regarding policing as the ISG a couple of years before they did. Have you even read the ISG report?

Steve

[Roscoe]

Oh man....I'm getting dragged into this again. Let me explain.

Since the 7th century muslims have been expanding their power, off and on, through invasion, slaughter and/or conversion. Countries like Egypt, Iran, etc were not muslim countries as they are now and had large Christian populations.

The first Crusades were to free Christians from muslims who invaded the Holy Land. Remember, that area of the world is the birthplace of Christianity.

Muslims took Spain for 900 years. Only the Pyrenees kept them from France. Spain kicked them out in 1492.

In the mid 1600's muslims were at the Gates of Vienna and eventually driven back by a Polish General and his forces.

The centuries are rife with other examples of muslim expansionism through invasion. You do the research.

THE BEHAVIOR IS THE SAME. THE ONLY THING THAT HAS CHANGED IS THE TECHNOLOGY.

This situation the world is in now is nothing new. It may be new here in the US but it's happened countless times in history throughout the world.

We are not in some little skirmish over oil, territory or power. This is bigger and much, much more dangerous.

"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"......George Santayana

[Roscoe]

You want propaganda? I just caught this: at

http://news.yahoo.com/photo/070814/p...WPjG9x9dcFO7gF

Tue Aug 14, 6:58 PM ET
An elderly Iraqi woman shows two bullets which she says hit her house following an early coalition forces raid in the predominantly Shiite Baghdad suburb of Sadr City. At least 175 people were slaughtered on Tuesday and more than 200 wounded when four suicide truck bombs targeted people from an ancient religious sect in northern Iraq, officials said.(AFP/Wissam al-Okaili)



Anything wrong with this picture??????

Roscoe

[VRM]

Roscoe,
What you say is true, but only for a really tiny portion of Muslims. Even in Al Quaida I would suspect the portion is smaller than the whole because people join Al Quaida for revenge purposes as well. If there was a single unity of purpose behind all the Muslims in the world then things would be a lot different. Christians and Mongols did the same thing - not because they were Christians or Mongols, but because someone in charge wanted more power, and they used being Christian or Mongol to aid themselves to that end. Most Muslims are just like us, and want nothing to do with running empires or anything like that. Don't allow the handful of Muslim crackpots to speak for the whole. That would be like saying that all of the US troops in Iraq are evil simply because a handful of them are. And, No Bernie, I do not think all of them are evil, but unlike you, I am not willing to ignore the ones who are.

Steve