’)The right sees a problem with America, and especially if it could hurt a Republican, they deny it or minimize it – Abu Ghraib, for instance.
The left sees a problem with America, and we want to expose it, excise those who caused it and make our country better.
We may be seeing that again with the Haditha Incident. What we know so far is that the initial story offered by the military was not true and the three marines involved were relieved of duty for “lack of confidence in their leadership abilities stemming from their performance during a recent deployment to Iraq”. Rep. Murtha has said he believes that when the full story comes out, it may be murder of innocents.
The right is reacting as you would think they would – calling Murtha a traitor. American marines are under investigation for a possible murder and John Murtha is the target of ire? Come on, people. I know your whole movement is designed around defense of the indefensible, but this is is the time to at least pretend to be grown ups.
The United States of America does not willingly kill innocent people. That that even has to be stated shows how far down the rabbit hole we’ve gone.
Poor Dugger.
The fact is Murtha was commenting on a Pentagon investigation which says the same thing.
Hearts and minds…
Actually, dugger, the problem is that the only way to make sure this sort of thing actually gets investigated when your party is in power is to make a bunch of noise and get public opinion to force the investigation, one way or the other. If we “wait of the investigation”, as you would love us to do, your leadership EXCELS at brushing it under a rug to be forever forgotten. If you were, I don’t know, responsible adults, then democrats wouldn’t have to make a bunch of noise that seems a bit out of line just to make sure proper procedures are followed.
yea wolf, we have seen that in action before….
Remember Tailhook?
How many innocent officers had their careers ruined by partisan democratic hacks looking to make the front page?
Semanticleo has it right, these people are in combat. To wander around declaring “Mai Lai” before the inquest is finished is not in keeping with the american tradition…unless you are a partisan intent on winning elections at the expense of the country.
An yes, this is just one instance that demonstrates Ollie’s blatant hypocrisy. Remember Ollie….? No comment on Mollohan until all the facts are in?
Why don’t our Marines get the same treatment?
So Murtha thinks the marines may have committed murder. Why doesn’t he wait for the investigation. Could it be that he is one of the most rabid partisan Democrats on the Hill and wills top at nothing, including sliming the armed forces, to gain benefit for his political party. Perhaps Murtha also knows the true story of the Duke laCrosse scase. Why wait for an investigation: DEMOCRAT Rep Murtha already thinks the Marines are guilty.
Sheesh. First Durbin and his nazi metaphors, and now Murtha prejudging. Is it any wonder soldier tend to vote Republican.
Dugger, Spare me Murtha’s military pedigree. He could be the God of War and this pre-judgement wouild be wrong.
12 hour rotating shifts with NO days off. What is it like to live in a pressure
cooker? Wouldn’t anyone snap? My BushHate compels me to blame the
Snapper, and not the snappee.
Yea Pedro! Just like that drunk-driver Patrick Kennedy! Oh wait…
when the Marines admit they did it and check into the mayo clinic for therapy, then your idiotic comment will make some sense
“If we wait of the investigation , as you would love us to do, your leadership EXCELS at brushing it under a rug to be forever forgotten.”
I am appalled to think that an investigation is even under way! It is absolutely unconscionable that we all didn’t just take at face value the Marines’ initial report that a firefight broke out and that the civilians were killed by a terrorist bomb.
So, if I understand right from drpedro and dugger, it’s bad to critize any one currently in the military for any reason?
How many innocent officers had their careers ruined by partisan democratic hacks looking to make the front page?
Ummmm…none.
Let’s not forget Tailhook occurred on the watch of Bush the Smarter. It was his Secretary of the Navy that conducted the investigation.
No, Sundown, it’s bad to criticize anybody serving in the military unless they criticize Republican policy. If that happens, though, it’s open season.
Taken directly from Kerry/Edwards 2004.
Let’s assume, for a moment, that a group of Marines are guilty of such an atrocity. Does anyone here actually believe that this type of behavior is common in the US military? Does anyone here actually believe that Bush et. al. are responsible for such behavior, and not the perpetrators themselves?
Here are Murtha’s words, quoted verbatim:
Does anyone see the problem with this statement? If there was no provocation, in the form of gunfire or IED, exactly what caused these Marines to overreact? And, if they were overreacting to some provocation, how could that be labelled as killing in cold blood?
No, what Murtha is doing here – besides presuming the guilt of Marines who, as I understand it, have yet to be charged, much less tried – is exploiting, for political gain, an isolated case of soldiers committing atrocities, already being investigated by the Pentagon. He wishes to deflect blame from the presumed guilty soldiers, to their commander in chief, with his claims that pressure from above is the root cause of their behavior. This is a disgusting insult to anyone who has honorably worn the uniform, not among them, Murtha himself. He is a supreme disgrace, and that is that provokes the ire of his critics.
-phil
This isn’t a systemic problem, it’s just a few bad apples blowing off steam at the expense of the occasional human life. What’s the fuss? Just because the Red Cross estimates that some 90% of detainees are innocent and many are teenagers or younger is no reason to overreact. Sure the military tried to quiet the story, and many of their initial statements were not entirely accurate, but I am sure that they would have gotten around to fully disclosing the facts had the press not gotten wind of what was going on and forced their hand. They caught and prosecuted the lone female private responsible, didn’t they? As for those treacherous dogs who foolishly believe that exposing the supposed ethical shortcomings of our military to the bright light of day is somehow patriotic, all I can say is there’s plenty of room at Club Gitmo.
Wait, is this the Abu Ghraib thread?
Your assertion that the military tries to cover-up such stories is not supported by the facts. The Abu Ghraib abuse story, for example, was first reported by the military, and ignored by the media for months, until 60 Minutes broadcast photos.
“On January 16, 2004, the Headquarters United States Central Command issued a press release that stated:”
As for your general indictment of the military’s handling of prisoners and detainees: I would think twice about using the highly politicized Red Cross as your main source, and perhaps research the trips made to Gitmo by officials from both sides of the aisle, none of which reported any mistreatment of detainees. In fact, if anyone is abused at Gitmo, it’s the soldiers that guard them.
-phil
jade I was on the aviation side of the Navy when tailhook went down. I was forced to sign a “loyalty oath” type of document saying I wasn’t anywhere in La Vegas went tailhook went down….I don’t remember the ACLU coming to defend my “right” either…..
Patricia Schroeder *spit* wrecked the careers of HUNDREDS of naval and marine officers. There was maybe ONE marine found guilty of wrongdoing after years of investigation.
Yea you lefties love our troops alright, when they can get you on the front page
f’ing hypocrites
Does anyone see the problem with this statement? If there was no provocation, in the form of gunfire or IED, exactly what caused these Marines to overreact? And, if they were overreacting to some provocation, how could that be labelled as killing in cold blood?
Youre misreading Murtha. The original reports were that an IED killed a Marine and some innocent civilians, and then a firefight with insurgents killed some more.
What seems to be coming out of the report is that a Marine, but no civilians, was killed by an IED. The civilians were instead killed by the dead Marine’s comrades, as an act of “revenge.”
“f ing hypocrites”
Civil discourse, I presume?
Sundown said:
Based on what do you assert that soldiers have been refused anything they might need, that is readily available? As for body/humvee armor: soldiers often opt-out of such protection because it reduces mobility. Not to mention, this armor in question is not very effective against the IEDs being used in Iraq, which are responsible for the overwhelming number of casualties. If these soldiers are, and have been, so neglected, why would they vote in overwhelming numbers to re-elect the President that put them there?
-phil
BD, I did not misread Murtha’s statement. I clearly explained why his statement is self-contradictory, and just a partisan attack, made at the expense of the US military. Perhaps, you should re-read it.
-phil
Right back at you, drpedro.
You always invoke military matters on Oliver’s comment boards just to justify your pathological, irrational hatred of left of center people, or “lefties” as you so orignally call us.
In truth you probably support lots of politicans who boast of supporting the troops and then refuse to let them have decent body armor, and who cut back veterans health benefits all the time.
Total opportunist, that is what you are.
Pedro,
I remember Tailhook also. It was a royal crock and agree with you 100%. And who was out in front ruining the careers of these young officers? Patsy Schroeder and feminists. Sometimes ably abetted weak kneed Repubs.
Phile,
Good round of posts.
Murtha is rapidly transitioning into a congressional Ramsey Clark .
Dugger
“Good round of posts.”
Ya and about those veterans administration cut backs …
“Republicans voted down a Democratic alternative that contained more funding for popular domestic programs such as education, veterans health care and health research while balancing the budget by 2012 — but only by allowing hundreds of billions of dollars in GOP-passed tax cuts to expire.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/18/AR2006051800012.html
duggerpedro have made a valid point. Tailhook was worse than Haditha and Abu Graib put together. A fine round of posts!
jade I was on the aviation side of the Navy when tailhook went down. I was forced to sign a loyalty oath type of document saying I wasn t anywhere in La Vegas went tailhook went down& .
No, “Dr”P—you weren’t.
OTOH, I was.
First, there was no “loyalty oath.” It was a declaration that you weren’t a participant at TailHook and it was voluntary. This arose from the NCIS charging some poor shnook with some offense at TailHook when he wasn’t even there.
What you continue to ignore is the fact the Navy–under a GOP admin, a GOP SecNav, and a GOP SecDef ran this investigation.
The Navy admitted TailHook was a bad thing and that they botched the investigation from the get-go. But blaming Dems is just ludicrous.
What a timely report at WaPo:
…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060519/ts_nm/security_guantanamo_dc
But, of course, the “progressives” see these detainees as innocent victims, and will no-doubt consider this behavior acceptable civil disobedience. Meanwhile, the reality is that these animals would slit all your throats in a heartbeat, despite the fact that your tax dollars pay for their “culturally sensitive” meals, standard issue prayer rugs, and personal copies of the Koran – the text that THEY remind us is their inspiration.
Bless the souls of those guards, they’re better people than all of us.
-phil
But, of course, the progressives see these detainees as innocent victims, and will no-doubt consider this behavior acceptable civil disobedience.
Perhaps Phil would enlighten us: how many Gitmo prisoners have been convicted of anything?
Roughly a thousand (‘roughly’ because the US Govt refuses to account for those in detention) have been detained at Gitmo. Of this number, about half have been released after years of detention with no charges filed or any semblance of due process.
There have been detainees as young as 12 and as old as 92.
Yet, the Govt has yet to convict anyone at Gitmo of anything.
Makes you proud, huh, Phil?
Jadegold,
Perhaps, you’d like to enlighten me as to how many of the several hundred thousand German prisoners of war, brought to the US and forced to work in labor camps for years, were charged with anything.
This is war, not a police raid on a crackhouse.
-phil
Perhaps, you d like to enlighten me as to how many of the several hundred thousand German prisoners of war, brought to the US and forced to work in labor camps for years, were charged with anything.
They were POWs.
And they were treated as POWs–with rights under the Geneva Conventions such as notifying their families and Governments where they were, medical attention, correspondence with their families, etc.
The vast majority of those detained at Gitmo were not captured in combat. They have no access to the outside world and the US Govt won’t even confirm who is being held and who isn’t.
And Italian POW’s, who my mother saw walking around town during WW II
Even if half of the prisoners at Gitmo were not enemy combatants when they went there, they sure as hell will be when they leave.
Yum yum, that’s good Kool-aid.
Google, try it some time.
Try:
“Abu Ghraib +cover up”
or
“Gitmo +abuse”
I’d say there’s plenty worth investigating.
The number of results, many with photos, and even video, makes your assertions of a good hearted, responsible military look ridiculous. Sure the majority of personnel are good eggs. No sh*t. It’s clowns like Rumsfeld that are enabling the “bad apples” and trashing our reputation around the world.
As for the Red Cross, the American Red Cross has a bad rep, but the International Red Cross is pretty damn well respected, unless they cross the U.S. of course, then, like Amnesty International, they’re just political tools and terrorist enablers.
Yeah, it really is hard to believe that a muslim prisoner being held for years without trial might lose hope and resort to violence. That, or suicide, real suicide, as there have been 41 known attempts since the camp opened in 2002. That’s what happens when you are treated to sumptuous meals and free Qurans. I’m not excusing those prisoners that attacked the guards. For all I know they may actually be dangerous terrorists. That’s the problem, though, isn’t it? I don’t know. Nobody does. Fair trials and adequate representation are so pre-9-11 thinking.
B..bu..bu…but the DOD issued a press release that said they looked into abuse!
Christ.
The detainees at Gitmo are treated far better than any legitimate POWs have ever been treated – in the history of warfare – despite the fact that they were captured as illegal combatants. Furthermore, hundreds of them have been released, several of which have been recaptured on the battlefield. Your little sob story about their lack of access to the outside world doesn’t move me, or any sane person, in the least. If not for our intervention, these people would be living in caves, planning our demise. Let the military release those they deem not a danger, and the rest can rot for all I care.
By the way, it’s pretty outrageous to claim,
and then,
I suppose you came by this information from an anonymous informant, code-named Mohammed?
-phil
The detainees at Gitmo are treated far better than any legitimate POWs have ever been treated – in the history of warfare – despite the fact that they were captured as illegal combatants.
And you know this how? Certainly not from the Red Cross–they’ve been denied access.
Furthermore, hundreds of them have been released, several of which have been recaptured on the battlefield.
When confronted with the truth, you opt to make up things.
Why on Earth would we release folks who have been illegal combatants? Out of the goodness of Rummy’s heart?
Jadegold said:
I find it rather interesting that you imply that I “opt to make up things”.
http://www.redcross.org/news/in/intllaw/guantanamo1.html
Seriously, why should anyone trust that anything you have to say isn’t what you wish to be fact, as opposed what is actually fact?
That one is from an article on msnbc.msn.com.
All that being said, the International Red Cross has become so politicized, that they can no longer be thought of as “neutral”. This same IRC were the willing dupes of Hitler, during the infamous, and orchestrated visit to a concentration camp, where reality was sanitized for their viewing pleasure.
In other words: I don’t give a rat’s ass what the IRC thinks, or has to say.
Ok, so what you’re saying here is that all these detainees are just a bunch of Afghan farmers that were rounded just for kicks, by the evil team of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld? Seriously.
-phil
In other words: I don t give a rat s ass what the IRC thinks, or has to say.
Shorter PhilE: From George Bush’s rear end to my lips
Ok, so what you re saying here is that all these detainees are just a bunch of Afghan farmers that were rounded just for kicks, by the evil team of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld? Seriously.
Seriously.
Read it and weep
The International Red Cross is easily manipulated to political ends. Hitler did it, right? You know, the orchestrated visits to camps where conditions were sanitized to give the illusion that Hitler gave a sh*t about human rights?
Oh, and everyone needs to acknowledge that Gitmo is clearly a country club for the “detainees” since it was visited by, what, a whole 4 congressmen on a scheduled visit under military supervision. Do I need to bring up the military press release where they made it clear that they thoroughly investigated claims of abuse and found themselves innocent? How much more ironclad can you get?
Doh!