Haditha

Wobbie

From what I can tell, this was last "discussed" here about a year ago. Did anyone else see 60 Minutes tonight?

Reader's Digest version: In 2005 a vehicle in a Marine Corp. "convoy" was hit by an IED. One guy dies, 2 others are hurt. The squad leader (who was in Iraq because he "wanted to see combat." WTF?) focuses in on a car in the area. The five Iraquis who are in the car don't get on the ground ("They all know the drill") and they are shot. The squad leader then focuses on a house because "it seemed" some gunfire might be coming from there. The Marines "clear" the house, killing a man, 2 women and 4 children in the process. They run out of house #1 and into a second and third house. Long story short, 24 civilians are killed with scant evidence that any were involved in the IED.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings

Here's what struck me:

The squad leader "wanted to see combat." He wasn't there to spread democracy, free the Iraqui people, find WMD, etc.

He felt justified in everything he did.

It seemed he felt like Iraquis should do (without question) anything the occupying force tells them to do.

Charges have been dropped against 7 Marines involved in this. Only the squad leader is still facing a court martial. His charges have been reduced to manslaughter.

I mean, WTF???? Is it any mystery why the Iraquis never welcomed us and want us out now? I think the whole mission is so convuluted that many soldiers have different reasons or beliefs as to why they are there. The 24 deaths in Haditha are just 24 of 40,000. What ever happened to "winning hearts and minds"? Our soldiers are pawns of the original Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield/Wolfowitz charade and that's what's so sad and infuriating to me. :mad:

There is nothing that anyone can say to convince me this was ever a necessary or righteous war.

fuck

those 40,000 deaths in Haditha are just 40,000 out of 1,200,000.

Wobbie

_outlaw wrote:

those 40,000 deaths in Haditha are just 40,000 out of 1,200,000.

I was talking about what I thought was a conservative estimate of 40,000 Iraqis killed in the course of this war

fuck

imalive wrote:

I was talking about what I thought was a conservative estimate of 40,000 Iraqis killed in the course of this war

I'm actually confused by what I even wrote, but 40,000 Iraqis haven't died in the war, it was 1.2 million.

Wobbie

_outlaw wrote:

I'm actually confused by what I even wrote, but 40,000 Iraqis haven't died in the war, it was 1.2 million.

Too fucking many, at any rate :mad:

fuck

Blackwater gets away with plenty of killings as well, like the Nisour Square 'shootings'...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blackwater_Baghdad_shootings

spyguy

_outlaw wrote:

those 40,000 deaths in Haditha are just 40,000 out of 1,200,000.

are Muslims responsible for any of these deaths?

spiral out

spyguy wrote:

are Muslims responsible for any of these deaths?

Why, do you feel it is mostly Muslims who are responsible for these deaths?

Open

spyguy wrote:

are Muslims responsible for any of these deaths?

.

Im sure there are muslims in the us military....

spyguy

Open wrote:

.

Im sure there are muslims in the us military....

dont edit your insult. please keep it there. how about all the sunni-shitte killings. that went on for years. are they responsible for death? they are people too right?

spyguy

spiral out wrote:

Why, do you feel it is mostly Muslims who are responsible for these deaths?

for a large # of them, yes. do you remember the sunni-shiite "civil war" ?

spiral out

spyguy wrote:

for a large # of them, yes. do you remember the sunni-shiite "civil war" ?

So are you just trying to deflect from the fact our soldiers have killed many innocent people?

I mean does it matter if 50% were killed by the sunni-shiite civil war and the other 50% were killed by our soldiers?

Does this somehow make all those innocent peoples deaths somehow ok?

Or are those deaths from the civil war far worse? and ours were just sad mistakes that happened?

Come on man get real the fact is, if we had never invaded all these people would never have died, trying to share out the blame for the deaths does not minimize the fact that these people died.

polaris

spyguy wrote:

for a large # of them, yes. do you remember the sunni-shiite "civil war" ?

uhhh ... if a country is being occupied and a civil war breaks out - who's fault is that?? ...

spyguy

spiral out wrote:

So are you just trying to deflect from the fact our soldiers have killed many innocent people?

no absolutely not.

spiral out wrote:

I mean does it matter if 50% were killed by the sunni-shiite civil war and the other 50% were killed by our soldiers?

yes

spiral out wrote:

Does this somehow make all those innocent peoples deaths somehow ok?

no

spiral out wrote:

Or are those deaths from the civil war far worse? and ours were just sad mistakes that happened?

yes, I do think anytime US soliders killed innocent civillians, it was a sad mistake. still horrible though.

spiral out wrote:

Come on man get real the fact is, if we had never invaded all these people would never have died, trying to share out the blame for the deaths does not minimize the fact that these people died.

maybe, maybe not. one side would have continued to be oppressed tortured and killed however. all I'm saying is that violent muslim extremism is to blame for massive death in Iraq. is the US to blame as well, absolutely.

spyguy

polaris wrote:

uhhh ... if a country is being occupied and a civil war breaks out - who's fault is that?? ...

there are many to blame.

polaris

spyguy wrote:

there are many to blame.

primary fault falls to the occupying force ... by dissolving the army and gov't (both secular agencies) and replacing them people that favoured sectarianism - they caused this civil war ... which was the intention all along ...

maintaining political instability has always been the goal of this administration and the resulting deaths of innocent iraqis along with its continued suffering is but little consequence to an empire ...

spyguy

polaris wrote:

primary fault falls to the occupying force ... by dissolving the army and gov't (both secular agencies) and replacing them people that favoured sectarianism - they caused this civil war ... which was the intention all along ...

you want to place the US as the primary one at fault. ok. doesnt mean there aren't others to blame.

polaris wrote:

maintaining political instability has always been the goal of this administration .

thats just your opinion. I very much disagree.

Wobbie

polaris wrote:

uhhh ... if a country is being occupied and a civil war breaks out - who's fault is that?? ...

The fault would have to fall on the force who de-stabilized the country. Before we invaded, the Iraqis knew how to stay alive but once we were there, all bets were off. It basically became a "wrong pace at the wrong time" situation, as the Haditha incident illustrates :mad:

spyguy

imalive wrote:

The fault would have to fall on the force who de-stabilized the country. Before we invaded, the Iraqis knew how to stay alive but once we were there, all bets were off. It basically became a "wrong pace at the wrong time" situation, as the Haditha incident illustrates :mad:

I keep hearing this and it just doesnt sound right to me. Iraqis "knew how to stay alive" Iraqis "knew how to avoid the wrath of saddam" thats not a good way to live. i'm not justifiing the invasion but to go on living like that is wrong. maybe now that the cycle of broken, ALL Iraqis can live in peace.......sometime down the road.

polaris

going with _outlaw's figure of 1.2 million iraqi deaths since this occupation ...

that's 400 times the casualty rate of 9/11 and that is not including the death toll in afghanistan ... 1.2 million deaths based on lies ... all in the name of greed ... how anyone can support a gov't like this is what makes this even more tragic ...

Strangest Tribe

We are are simply creating more terrorists by our actions...

Yeah, we're to blame... no question about that...

we shouldn't be surprised by any repurcussions... but many will be