21 May 2007

Guilty until proven to be a Scapegoat.

New information has come to the fore in the trials of the Haditha Marines.

You all remember the Haditha Marines? Tried and convicted in the court of the Press, with Surrender-Monkey-in-Chief "Semper I" Murtha himself presiding over their presumption of guilt.

The initial investigation conducted by the unit found that after an IED attack, the Marines were attacked by terrorists fighting from a house nearby. The Marines attacked the house, and some civilians used by the terrorists as human shields were killed. It sucks, but that's pretty much the nature of the game as played by the terrorists. You can't let them get away with it, even at the cost of human life. Sucks, but there it is.

The jihadists told the media, however, that all 24 killed were innocent civilians and that the Marines basically went berserk. So of course, the Media trumpets this claim from the hills, dismissing with a sentence or two the fact that the Marines on the scene determined that at least 8 of those killed were definitely terrorists. This is defined for purposes of this discussion as 'person with an AK-47 shooting at Marines'.

So the Marine Corps, in an attempt to shut up the media, begins a series of court-martials.

On trial now is a Captain Stone, a young JAG. Unfortunately, things just aren't going as the media, the terrorists, and the politicians want. Seems they are repeating their story that weapons found on the scene and the eyewitness testimony agrees that at least a third of the dead were actually fighters. Now, 2 civvies for every 1 terrorist killed in a firefight may be a sucky ratio, but I can see how it happened, and anyone who hasn't been in a situation like that probably can't.

As the Prairie Pundit remarks, the real question of war crimes centers around the actions of the terrorists who fought from houses also occupied by civilians and knowingly exposed civilians to Marine Corps fire in hopes of staging an incident for propaganda purposes.

It's all part of Information Warfare, but it is still a crime.


Anonymous jdub said...

How about a link to the organization that helps fund legal defense of servicemen charged with these types of crimes? (I forget what it is, unfortunately).

Never having been in the thick of it, I can't comment on the 2:1 ratio, but that is the nature of jihadi battles. Look at last year's war in lebanon. Hizb'allah deliberately hides among civilians, daring Israel to attack, knowing the PR battle goes against them.

keep up the good work.

4:20 PM  
Blogger David M said...

Trackbacked by The Thunder Run - Web Reconnaissance for 05/21/2007
A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention.

6:52 PM  
Anonymous Yuri said...

Your post is the first I have seen stating there were fighters in the house. Including not-short interviews on NPR covering this.

Do you have a site for that?

And killing 2-1 will probably never end us the insurgency. Its not good enough.

12:34 AM  
Blogger Just A Decurion said...

Click on the link to the US Today story, and you find the line, buried in the middle of the 13th paragraph,

"The Marine Corps asserts the 24 slain were civilians, but several witnesses have testified eight were insurgents."

If you think you can do better, feel free to enlist and show me how it's done. Until you have 25 months downrange, feel free not to lecture those who do on tactics.

5:20 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home