He also bizarrely states that the IVAW should not have been founded because the war lasted only a month. If they would have named their organization the IVAO-Iraq Veterans Against the Occupation- would that have somehow made it more valid? Their name does not take anything away from what they witnessed and/or participated in while being in Iraq. The pseudo expert may wish to avail himself of a book which deals with what Iraq veterans have gone through, entitled Mission Rejected-U.S. Soldiers Who Say NO to Iraq by Peter Laufer. That is, unless the pseudo expert is going to claim that Laufer and these Iraq veterans have made up what they went through in Iraq for absolutely no justifiable reason whatsoever.

Kilo, like so many of the other super patriotic Americans, cannot possibly conceive that the U.S. military could be culpable of committing war crimes. Twenty four Iraqi civilians were killed at Haditha, seven women and three children, and not one American was held responsible for this atrocity. The U.S. did it during World War II, in Vietnam, and is certainly doing it now in Iraq and Afghanistan. But, as previously mentioned, for flag wavers like Kilo, American Exceptionalism must always win out.

Stav: Its Corps, unless you meant that it is a corporation, which may be more correct….

That’s not what I’m saying at all. Do you understand what “cut a deal” means? It means they admit guilt. You don’t have to cut a deal if you’re not guilt of something.

That’s my point. There were several people who made deals in this case. When the Right reports those stories they shout “CHARGES DISMISSED” – as if it means “found innocent.” That’s my point to ThinkProgress.

It certainly seems credible that a bomb went off killing a few Marines before this incident took place. It would then appear that the Marines killed these civilians as an act of vengeance as retaliation for their comrades being killed, even though there is absolutely no evidence linking the Iraqi civilians to the deaths of those Marines who were blown up. But according to the pseudo expert, any testimony given by an Iraqi is not to be believed because he or she is Iraqi while the testimony of an American serviceman is to be given credence because that person is American. The bottom line, as Tombaker at #29 has observed “… Iraq is still full of graves where there should be people [who wouldn't be dead if we hadn't unnecessarily invaded their country].”

But, as I previously mentioned, what happened at Haditha does not surprise the Iraqis at all since they know that atrocities take place against them on a daily basis. They also know that the words of the occupiers will always be believed and accepted in the vast majority of the cases over that of the oppressed. As long as the United States continues to illegally occupy Iraq, there will be more atrocities committed against the Iraqi people. The difference is that those daily outrages will not receive the attention that the massacre at Haditha did [as evidenced when the American military killed and harassed Iraqis at the hospital in Fallujah in 2004, I believe]. Unfortunately, the wanton slayings of the 24 Iraqis who were massacred at Haditha has gone unpunished, apparently proving that international law does not apply to anyone wearing an American uniform.

We had to kill them to save them. We had to bomb the fu(king world to save it. What heroes we are. All hail US.

Fu(king karma in the shitter for eons. Sob and weep.

FTMarines, lying, asscovering, testosterated simps that they are.

But perhaps the most egregious error the pseudo expert has committed is to shrug off the killing of civilians during a time of war. As the Geneva Conventions, the UN Charter, the Nuremberg Principles and the Army Field Manual [27-10 Section II 498-504]makes abundantly clear, “Any person, as a member of the armed forces, who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment.” These offenses, as the Army Field Manual indicates, constitutes:

a. Crimes against peace.
b. Crimes against humanity.
c. War crimes.

Renowned scholars such as Richard Falk, Professor Emeritus of International Law at Princeton University and expert on international relations, law of war and global institutions, Benjamin G. Davis, Associate Professor of Law at the Univ. of Toledo and expert on law war, Harvey Tharp, former U.S. Navy Lieutenant and Judge Adjutant General [JAG] stationed in Iraq and the first officer to resign due to the war, Marjorie Cohn, President of the National Lawyers Guild and Associate Professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, have all, among others, agreed that the killing of civilians during a time of war or occupation is expressly forbidden by the above mentioned sources.

I would rather trust the judgment of the previously referenced scholars as well as the testimony of U.S. soldiers of what they had witnessed and/or participated in than that of the pseudo expert named Kilo.

Kilo Says:
Fred, we just established that you can’t tell the difference between right and wrong when it comes to reciting basic facts about news stories, because you can’t be bothered informing yourself about those stories to begin with.

The only thing we have established is your departure from the real world. Get some help.

Kilo:
The reaction of US troops and the death of civilians at Haditha was exactly what insurgents wanted to engineer with these 3 ambushes.
Once you figure out that the same insurgents who organised this attack also organised the videotape and therefor the TIME reporting of this, you’ll have a little more perspective.

You are kidding, right? You think our people got duped into killing up to 24 people by the “insurgents”. Seriously, you need help. In the next breath you will talk about how dumb these insurgents are.

Why are you so sure we are doing the right thing by killing 10’s of thousands of people and creating a war zone for people to live in.

One in which, since it is a war zone….terrible things will be done by both sides….give your apologizing for criminals a rest.

LT,
The charges were not simply “dropped” – they were “dropped in exchange for testimony against other guilty parties.” They “cut a deal.”

The move leaves just one Marine — Staff Sgt. Frank D. Wuterich — facing charges in connection with the shootings Nov. 19, 2005. As many as two dozen civilians were killed that day after a roadside bomb hit the Marines’ convoy and killed a member of their unit.

So your point is that this one guy did all of the killing?

The charges were not simply “dropped” – they were “dropped in exchange for testimony against other guilty parties.” They “cut a deal.”

Congrats on all the links for your one mistake. Hilarious.