Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below
napsgear
genezapharmateuticals
domestic-supply
puritysourcelabs
UGL OZ
UGFREAK
napsgeargenezapharmateuticals domestic-supplypuritysourcelabsUGL OZUGFREAK

Another Marine up for Murder after defending himself and his men?????

KA-BAR

Life Taker, Heart Breaker
Platinum
I am not on the boards much so this might be a repost. What are your thoughts on this? I myself and outraged.

they train our guys to kill plus defend themselves and their men, and when they do, our higher ups court martial them as murderers!!! Whats wrong with this picture??? Our troups get sent to a war zone, they get blown up at check points, shot at by fundamentalist murderers, and they are supposed to smile and wave at the insurgents??? Geeesh!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did Marine murder Iraqis? Hearing to weigh evidence
A former Wall Street trader who rejoined the Marines after the Sept. 11 attacks faces a preliminary hearing starting Tuesday after allegations that he murdered two Iraqis
http://g.msn.com/0MNBUS00/2?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7640703&&CM=EmailThis&CE=1
 
the higher ups need to stop sitting behind a fucking desk questioning the shit the guys on the ground do,they have seconds to decide while these pencil pushing bitches have all the time in the world to judge these decisions and then charge them.

so to all you higher up pussy officers doing this FUCK YOU SIR
 
KA-BAR said:
I am not on the boards much so this might be a repost. What are your thoughts on this? I myself and outraged.

Outraged about what? That someone who clearly murdered another human being -- was caught?

Granted I wasn't there, but this is what I've gleened:

"The case stems from an April 15, 2004, incident in which Pantano’s unit was ordered to search a house in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. Marines stopped Hamaady Kareem and Tahah Ahmead Hanjil as they tried to drive away.

According to charges, Pantano ordered other troops to remove the suspects’ handcuffs and look away, then shot the pair in the back, vandalized their vehicle and hung a sign over their corpses bearing a Marine slogan: “No better friend, no worse enemy.”

Pantano's description
In a statement, Pantano told investigators the two men had their backs to him and continued talking to each other despite warnings to be quiet.

... “After another time of telling them to be quiet, they quickly pivoted their bodies toward each other. They did this simultaneously, while speaking in muffled Arabic. I thought they were attacking me and I decided to fire my M-16A4 service rifle in self-defense,” the statement said."

--------------

Sounds clear cut murder to me.

They were searched.

They were handcuffed.

He told his fellow soldiers to turn away.

He shot them in the back.

Sounds like murder in any textbook to me.

Being a soldier does not give you the license to murder. Nowhere in the US Army does it say that. And seeing how we, the US Army, are held to higher standards then the cretinous, savage enemies that we are fighting (which is why we are GOOD and they are BAD remember?) -- we need to take the higher ground.

If we are out there murdering innocent, unarmed people. And they are too. Are we really that different then?

And this is not even taking into accord global public opinion on incidents of our screwups and us "looking the other way" on them and thereby condoning it. And if the US Army does _nothing_ -- next time a bunch of liberals hold up signs calling "US Soldiers, MURDERERS!" ... they will probably be correct.

Amazing. People will set out the bulls on someone who deserts -- but defend someone who murders innocent people in cold blood. Who would YOU want living next door to you and your children?
 
only the people who were there know the truth of the situation
 
Razorguns said:
Outraged about what? That someone who clearly murdered another human being -- was caught?

Granted I wasn't there, but this is what I've gleened:

"The case stems from an April 15, 2004, incident in which Pantano’s unit was ordered to search a house in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. Marines stopped Hamaady Kareem and Tahah Ahmead Hanjil as they tried to drive away.

According to charges, Pantano ordered other troops to remove the suspects’ handcuffs and look away, then shot the pair in the back, vandalized their vehicle and hung a sign over their corpses bearing a Marine slogan: “No better friend, no worse enemy.”

Pantano's description
In a statement, Pantano told investigators the two men had their backs to him and continued talking to each other despite warnings to be quiet.

... “After another time of telling them to be quiet, they quickly pivoted their bodies toward each other. They did this simultaneously, while speaking in muffled Arabic. I thought they were attacking me and I decided to fire my M-16A4 service rifle in self-defense,” the statement said."

--------------

Sounds clear cut murder to me.

They were searched.

They were handcuffed.

He told his fellow soldiers to turn away.

He shot them in the back.

Sounds like murder in any textbook to me.

Being a soldier does not give you the license to murder. Nowhere in the US Army does it say that. And seeing how we, the US Army, are held to higher standards then the cretinous, savage enemies that we are fighting (which is why we are GOOD and they are BAD remember?) -- we need to take the higher ground.

If we are out there murdering innocent, unarmed people. And they are too. Are we really that different then?

And this is not even taking into accord global public opinion on incidents of our screwups and us "looking the other way" on them and thereby condoning it. And if the US Army does _nothing_ -- next time a bunch of liberals hold up signs calling "US Soldiers, MURDERERS!" ... they will probably be correct.

Amazing. People will set out the bulls on someone who deserts -- but defend someone who murders innocent people in cold blood. Who would YOU want living next door to you and your children?



That's "according to charges"

Why should you believe those any more than you would believe him?
 
KA-BAR said:
I am not on the boards much so this might be a repost. What are your thoughts on this? I myself and outraged.

they train our guys to kill plus defend themselves and their men, and when they do, our higher ups court martial them as murderers!!! Whats wrong with this picture??? Our troups get sent to a war zone, they get blown up at check points, shot at by fundamentalist murderers, and they are supposed to smile and wave at the insurgents??? Geeesh!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did Marine murder Iraqis? Hearing to weigh evidence
A former Wall Street trader who rejoined the Marines after the Sept. 11 attacks faces a preliminary hearing starting Tuesday after allegations that he murdered two Iraqis
http://g.msn.com/0MNBUS00/2?http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7640703&&CM=EmailThis&CE=1

without reading it, i would only say each individual incident needs to be evaluated indivually with proper rules of engagement applied.
 
ChewYxRage said:
That's "according to charges"

Why should you believe those any more than you would believe him?

I don't. Like I said -- I wasn't there, nor am I a judge. Meaningful opinions require meaningful accurate details.

But if everything said _is_ true -- then my opinion of the incident stands.
 
All war sucks but.....

this war sucks perfectly.

nothing meaningful will come from it.




OH FUCKING WELL right?
 
CFZB said:
All war sucks but.....

this war sucks perfectly.

nothing meaningful will come from it.




OH FUCKING WELL right?

well you havent defined the word meaningful. so therefore your post is meaningless. and i havent defined meaningless. so there.
 
KA-BAR said:
I am not on the boards much so this might be a repost. What are your thoughts on this? I myself and outraged.

they train our guys to kill plus defend themselves and their men, and when they do, our higher ups court martial them as murderers!!! Whats wrong with this picture??? Our troups get sent to a war zone, they get blown up at check points, shot at by fundamentalist murderers, and they are supposed to smile and wave at the insurgents??? Geeesh!!

I was having this conversation with another veteran and he told me the reason is because most of the Marine units are commanded by Navy Officers, usually Admirals and they have all jurisdiction over UCMJ action that is taken against Marines as well as Navy, so there is a bit of friction there. From what he told me, the Marines are usually railed by the system in these cases because it's not a Marine legal counsel who is pressing the charges, it's usually some Navy Lt. I don't have specifics on this case, but I'd imagine this was the case here as well.



DIV
 
Razorguns said:
I don't. Like I said -- I wasn't there, nor am I a judge. Meaningful opinions require meaningful accurate details.

But if everything said _is_ true -- then my opinion of the incident stands.

Let me know when you have some vacation time coming up, -=NAV=-

---

Marine to Run Gauntlet of the ‘Law of War'

Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Monday, Feb. 28, 2005

Sometime between mid-March and late April, 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano, U.S.M.C., is scheduled to appear before a Uniform Code of Military Justice Article 32 investigating officer at Camp Lejeune, N.C., Maj. Matt Morgan, II Marine Expeditionary Force public affairs officer tells NewsMax. At issue: Are there reasonable grounds to believe Pantano committed a pair of murders on April 15, 2004 while serving as a platoon commander in Iraq?

At the conclusion of the pre-trial investigation, where the respondent is represented by counsel and can cross-examine witnesses and present his own, the investigating officer will prepare a report – including a recommendation for the disposition of the charges – and forward it to the commanding general.

Story Continues Below

Reasonable enough on its face – the Art. 32 proceeding is compared to the civilian grand jury or preliminary hearing – but there is a growing cadre of critics that wonder why Pantano in doing his duty must now face what they see as an ill-advised game of second-guessing a military leader's actions in the field.

What Facts Are Known

On April 15, 2004, while serving as a platoon commander in Easy Company, 2nd Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment in Iraq, Pantano was ordered to reconnoiter a reported terrorist hiding spot. He led his "quick-reaction" platoon to the site, a home in the town of Mahmudiyah, south of Baghdad and not far from the bloody town of Fallujah.

Pantano's orders were to raid the house and neutralize the reported nest of insurgents holed up there with their arms cache.

The intelligence turned out to be correct, and Pantano's Marines discovered weapons and bomb-making equipment in the house. As the Marines were securing the building, two Iraqis bolted from the site to a nearby truck, a sport utility vehicle.

The Marines charged after the suspects and brought the vehicle to a halt by shooting the tires out. Pantano ordered the pair out of the truck and, in accordance with standard operating procedures, told the captives to tear the interior of the truck apart to ensure that it was not booby-trapped.

What exactly happened next remains uncertain.

The Marine Corps has not released any official rendition of what it alleges happened. However, Pantano's civilian attorney, Charles Gittins, says that the two Iraqi men began chattering to one another, then the Iraqis made what Pantano determined to be a threatening move. When told to stop in their native language by Pantano, they continued in his direction.

As Pantano described it to the Naval Investigative Service:

"After another time of telling them to be quiet, they quickly pivoted their bodies toward each other. They did this simultaneously, while still speaking in muffled Arabic. I thought that they were attacking me, and I decided to fire my M-16A4 service rifle in self-defense. ..."

After the fact, it is determined that neither suspect was armed nor rigged with explosives.

Gittins advises, however, "After the killing, the number of attacks in that area went down to almost zero."

It was not until months later when Pantano returned to Camp Lejeune that he was informed he was being charged with premeditated murder in the deaths of the two Iraqis – a charge that theoretically could carry the death penalty.

A Dangerous, Dirty Environment

The incident occurred at a time in which casualties to coalition forces increased by 400 percent, to 1,000.

Pantano's platoon was billeted with the 200 members of Easy Company in an abandoned administrative building with 10 rooms. Devoid of any semblance of creature comforts, the Marines slept in their clothes, weapons at the ready. Ready-to-eat meals and drinking water were trucked in daily from the Marines' headquarters at Camp Fallujah, 40 minutes away.

Pantano's world is certainly different now that he is back at Camp Lejeune with his wife and young children, but the atmosphere is still dense with danger as the Marine faces another adversary: the system and the Law of War.

The spokesman for the Marine Corps' 2nd Division, Maj. Matt Morgan, recently remarked:

"Americans have seen what is in the press, and they have a tendency to support the Marines. On the other side of that, completely unconnected, there is something called the Law of War, and it is possible for a Marine to violate that. To say you can't second-guess a Marine – well, every Marine who deploys has the experience that anything they do can be second-guessed."

Rules of Engagement

At the heart of that Law of War is the often nettlesome subject of the Rules of Engagement (ROE). Although these rules get tailor-made for various missions, an example of the rules are these ROE training cards, once issued by judge advocates to a Marine Expeditionary Unit:

"Nothing in these rules limits your Authority and Obligation to take all necessary and appropriate actions to defend yourself and your unit

Right to defend Always return fire with aimed fire. You have the right to use force to repel hostile acts.

Anticipate attack You have the right to use force to respond to clear indications of hostile intent.

Measure your force When time and circumstances permit, use only that force which is necessary and proportional to protect lives and accomplish the mission.

Protect with Deadly force only human life and sensitive mission essential property designated by the commander.

USE OF FORCE Force includes everything from shouting a warning up to the use of deadly force. Use as much force as is necessary to decisively end the situation in your favor. You are authorized to use force against another person or group to protect yourself and others and you may use force to accomplish your mission.

SELF-DEFENSE You will always protect yourself and others against anyone who uses or is clearly about to use force against you. You may initiate or use preemptive force against those who indicate "hostile intent" against you or other friendly forces. "Hostile Intent" is the threat of imminent use of force by an opposing force or terrorist unit against friendly forces.

Always apply the Principles of the Law of War in using force. They are:
1. MARINES FIGHT ONLY ENEMY COMBATANTS.
2. MARINES DO NOT HARM ENEMIES WHO SURRENDER. YOU MUST DISARM THEM AND TURN THEM OVER TO YOUR SUPERIOR.
3. MARINES DO NOT KILL OR TORTURE PRISONERS.
4. MARINES COLLECT AND CARE FOR ALL WOUNDED, WHETHER FRIEND OR FOE.
5. MARINES DO NOT ATTACK MEDICAL PERSONNEL, FACILITIES, OR EQUIPMENT.
6. MARINES DESTROY NO MORE THAN THE MISSION REQUIRES.
7. MARINES TREAT ALL CIVILIANS HUMANELY.
8. MARINES DO NOT STEAL, MARINES RESPECT PRIVATE PROPERTY AND POSSESSIONS.
9. MARINES SHOULD DO THEIR BEST TO PREVENT VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW OF WAR; THEY MUST REPORT ALL VIOLATIONS OF THE LAW OF WAR TO THEIR SUPERIORS."

It is principle No. 9 that may have put Pantano in harm's way.

According to Gittins, the incident would have remained laid to rest but for the complaint by a person he describes as a "disgruntled sergeant," who apparently reported what he interpreted as a violation of the rules.

The Marine sergeant, who accused Pantano of outright executing the two men – but who came forward only weeks later – told investigators that he did not understand why the officer had the Iraqis search the vehicle, because a Navy corpsman already had done a "full search," according to a report in the Washington Post.

"As soon as I turned my back, Lt. Pantano opened [fire on] them with approximately 45 rounds. After the shooting, Lt. Pantano let everyone know on the [radio] that he was the one that shot. ... Me and [the corpsman] were both shocked about what just happened."

Inherent in the rules is the principle that the alleged violation must be investigated.

Whether or not the Corps is simply going by the numbers and is as anxious as Pantano is see the incident closed without further harm to Pantano, at this point, says Gittins, his client "feels betrayed."

A Mother Takes the Offensive

Meanwhile, Pantano's mother is leaving nothing to chance – telling her son's remarkable story on the World Wide Web and asking for donations for his defense, as well as for the defense of others whose actions may be questioned. At DefendtheDefenders.com, she writes:

His father emigrated from Italy, and I was born in Kansas and grew up in the West. Ilario was born in NYC in 1971 and raised in "Hell's Kitchen", a working class neighborhood on the dock-side of Manhattan. His first volunteer job was when he was 13. It was on the U.S.S. Intrepid, long before it became the world class Air Sea and Space Museum it is today. During his high school years in his free time he could always be found on that hallowed ship, associating with veterans of WWII, Korea and Vietnam who were also donating their time and energy to saving the ship and its history.

With the help of financial aid and a lot of luck, Ilario got into Horace Mann, one of New York City's private high schools. He enlisted in the Marine Corps "Delayed Entry Program" before he even started his senior year in order to make sure he would have a spot in the "Infantry" when he graduated. At 17, he was off to "boot camp" at Parris Island, SC while his buddies were off to Ivy League universities.

At 19, Marine Lance Corporal Pantano served on the frontlines in the first Gulf War, Desert Storm, with an anti–tank platoon in the 6th Marine Regiment. After the war, Corporal Pantano was fortunate enough to become a Marine Scout Sniper with 1st Battalion, 6th Marines with whom he deployed off the coast of Yugoslavia in support of peacekeeping operations from 1992-93. While training off the coast in the Adriatic Sea, Ilario applied, and was accepted to New York University, so upon his return, the 21 year old Marine Sergeant left the Corps for college.

He began his civilian life in New York as a young man filled with fervor, receiving his degree in business from NYU while working as an energy trader with Goldman Sachs. Uninspired by working with companies like Enron, Ilario traded Wall Street for media where he worked on a number of film, television, and technology projects.

Life was beautiful. He was planning to marry a splendid young woman. Then the 9/11 terrorist acts occurred on a bright September morning. Watching from Manhattan's 23rd Street and Fifth Avenue while on his way to work, he saw the Twin Towers burn and fall. Like so many of us, he lost friends and colleagues in that cowardly attack on America's soil, including a former boss and fire fighters who were former Marines working out of the firehouse next door to his home.

As a thirty two year old husband and father he returned to the Marine Corps, this time as an officer. It wasn't easy. He was almost considered too old! But after almost a year of trying, he got his package through and got his commission as a Second Lieutenant of Marines in March of 2003. We were a country at war and the tempo of his training reflected it.

He completed the Infantry Officers Course, voted class commander by his peers, at Quantico, VA in December of 2003, and he reported to the 2nd Battalion 2nd Marines, "The Warlords" at Camp Lejeune, NC. He was Third Platoon commander of "Easy" Company 2/2, Three months later his battalion was attached to the 1st Marine Division in Iraq, and they were all fully engaged.

Everyone knows the insurgency exploded in April when the number of Killed In Action (KIA) jumped 400%, from 31 in March of 2004, to 126 in April, 2004 (Armed Forces Medical Examiner System). God bless our fantastic corpsman and medical personnel for saving so many lives. The real story is the number of Wounded In Action (WIA) in April 2004, which according to the Associated press, surged to almost 1,000 as compared to the 3,000 heroes who had been wounded in the thirteen months leading up to that point, including the entire opening ground war of OIF1!

Ask anyone on the ground in the "Sunni Triangle" at that time what it felt like after the American contractors had been hung charred on that bridge in Falluja. Dozens of Marines killed in ambushes and mortar attacks by tools as barbaric and malicious as animal carcasses loaded with explosives to satellite phone triggered bombs.

Think of the peacekeeping and cultural sensitivity training that my son's men and the many brave men and women like them had received. They were prepared to be our ambassadors of the best intentions, to help and to rebuild, and now, not even a month in country they were in engaged in full combat. They were fighting for their lives.

My son and his brave brothers-in-arms spent seven months in the notorious Sunni Triangle, from the "Triangle of Death" just South of Baghdad to the alleys of Falluja. The violence of the first Marine onslaught into Falluja in early April, (refer to TIME magazine, May 10, 2004), was just a few days in the life of my son and his fellow combat fatigued Marines. There were the nightly patrols and ambushes, daily rocket and mortar attacks, remotely detonated bombs and suicide bombers in cars full of explosives, all trying to kill or wound as many Marines and Iraqis as they could.

They tried to kill our sons and daughters with no regard even for their own children, as many bombs were placed in the vicinity of schools. These Marines were not eating in air-conditioned mess halls in Baghdad, watching TV. They were living in fighting holes repelling attack after attack, wave after wave of brutal and cunning enemy who are willing to sacrifice their own life in a moment of opportunity for their twisted cause.

Reporters walked with our troops and scrutinized them and beamed tales of their heroics around the world. The BBC lived at their "Camp Impact" in the suburbs of Falluja, so named because it was shelled daily. Speak with the mothers and fathers, sisters, brothers, and wives of the men in Lt. Pantano's Platoon, Company and Battalion.

He was fierce in battle and compassionate at home as any of his friends or colleagues can tell you. He has often demonstrated he would do anything to protect and save the lives of his men, and until he received a charge sheet for murder, he was preparing to go back to Iraq with his brothers and do it again.

------

http://www.defendthedefenders.org/quotes.html
 
Razorguns said:
Sounds clear cut murder to me.

They were searched.

They were handcuffed.

He told his fellow soldiers to turn away.

He shot them in the back.

Sounds like murder in any textbook to me.

Being a soldier does not give you the license to murder. Nowhere in the US Army does it say that. And seeing how we, the US Army, are held to higher standards then the cretinous, savage enemies that we are fighting (which is why we are GOOD and they are BAD remember?) -- we need to take the higher ground.

If we are out there murdering innocent, unarmed people. And they are too. Are we really that different then?

And this is not even taking into accord global public opinion on incidents of our screwups and us "looking the other way" on them and thereby condoning it. And if the US Army does _nothing_ -- next time a bunch of liberals hold up signs calling "US Soldiers, MURDERERS!" ... they will probably be correct.

Amazing. People will set out the bulls on someone who deserts -- but defend someone who murders innocent people in cold blood. Who would YOU want living next door to you and your children?

just for clarification purposes, he is US Marine, not US Army. but you could be using the term in the broad sense, but then i would have used the term US Military.
 
reading up on it a little bit, i would lean towards he did something wrong here. just a trivial opinion though.

me biggest question is why in the hell would anyone leave such room for judgement error if it were on the up and up?

just me, i would ensure enough safety gap between the enemy and i to leave no room for monday morning quaterbacking.

they were disarmed, there were other soldiers around and he should have been standing 20ft away from them. something doesnt add up here.
 
juicedmohawk said:
LOL Razorguns, the king of conjecture. You must have had streaming video of the whole incident.

Please, just finish your degree so we can have you write scripts already...... :rolleyes:




DIV
 
Even if its the case, BIG FUCKING DEAL HE KILLED TWO TERRORISTS!!!

You think for a second they wouldn't of done the same to the soliders or any one of you here if given the opportunity? Im prettys ure we all know they would prob do worse

Good for him he killed a couple slime balls that were making bombs to kill our men, saves us the trouble of having to feed them and all that other nonsense. If he was smart would blown up the truck they were trying to drive away with and not just shot the tires out, Wouldn't even be an issue
 
Damn, there are a lot of idiots on this board. First, he's been charged, not convicted. The purpose of the trial is to present the facts. Some right wingers refuse to believe that a US soldier could possibly do something wrong. Face it, the military has criminals too. Also, I'm certain that the military gives these guys a lot of benefit of the doubt. It's in their best interests NOT charging soldiers with crimes as it gives bad press and provides the enemy with propoganda. The fact that they are willing to brave the bad press and bring these charges means that there must be some compelling evidence of wrong doing.
 
As I understnd it (and I acknowledge I havent read much) the charges agaisnt him were made by one guy who he had reprimanded some time earlier and possibly even and demoted for putting his men in danger (not certain).
 
jerseyart said:
As I understnd it (and I acknowledge I havent read much) the charges agaisnt him were made by one guy who he had reprimanded some time earlier and possibly even and demoted for putting his men in danger (not certain).

The military usually goes out of it's way to protect their people from these kinds of charges. If there weren't some supporting facts these charges would not have been filed. Face it, there is no "Left Wing God Damned Liberal" conspiracy to charge Red Blooded American soldiers with murder.
 
I'll read this post later b/c I have to go to work, but if I was over in Iraq I'd shoot first and ask questions later. Better to be judged by 12, than carried by 6.
 
Fast Twitch Fiber said:
Damn, there are a lot of idiots on this board. First, he's been charged, not convicted. The purpose of the trial is to present the facts. Some right wingers refuse to believe that a US soldier could possibly do something wrong. Face it, the military has criminals too. Also, I'm certain that the military gives these guys a lot of benefit of the doubt. It's in their best interests NOT charging soldiers with crimes as it gives bad press and provides the enemy with propoganda. The fact that they are willing to brave the bad press and bring these charges means that there must be some compelling evidence of wrong doing.

As a veteran I can safely say you have no idea what you're talking about. When a soldier is charged with an offense by his chain of command it's taken to JAG, where a counsel will decide whether it's worthy of prosecution. They don't look at it in terms of what's best for the soldier, they have guidlines they go by in doing their job and they don't give a shit about the soldier. The JAG are officers usually captainor higher, and they will railroad an enlisted soldier if it furthers their own career, the politics are pervasive. The way the UCMJ works is basically conducive to punishment, there's not much chance you can be found not guilty under the premise, it's a "guilty until proven innocent" justice code, much worse than civilian law. There are ciminals in the military, sure, but most of them are not your "thug" types, they are the "white-collar" criminals who happen to be officers. They are above reproach and have alot more freedom to commit their crimes without fear of reprisal.



DIV
 
I still say give the man a medal for ridding of the world of 2 people who probably would of killed a bunch of their own people as well as a few of ours. Shouldn't even be taking POW's should be eradicating these scum from existance
 
Fast Twitch Fiber said:
The military usually goes out of it's way to protect their people from these kinds of charges. If there weren't some supporting facts these charges would not have been filed. Face it, there is no "Left Wing God Damned Liberal" conspiracy to charge Red Blooded American soldiers with murder.

have you ever served in the military, if not what do you base your opinion on?
 
Austin316 said:
I still say give the man a medal for ridding of the world of 2 people who probably would of killed a bunch of their own people as well as a few of ours. Shouldn't even be taking POW's should be eradicating these scum from existance
einsatzgruppen eh?
 
hey if you like the idea of people that will casualy kill countless numbers of innocent civilians running around free tehn feel free and act like Im being a Nazi, otherwise get a fucking clue
 
Austin316 said:
hey if you like the idea of people that will casualy kill countless numbers of innocent civilians running around free tehn feel free and act like Im being a Nazi, otherwise get a fucking clue
and people question how Adolf and the boyz came to power
 
The military usually goes out of it's way to protect their people from these kinds of charges

Yeah, they did a great job at Abu Graib (sp). What a lot of this boils down to is this....any militant group in the world can mutilate the bodies of our soldiers and civilians and the whole world just sighs and lets it pass because it is expected. Our men and women are held to a standard that they can not possibly maintain 100% of the time and when they fall short of that standard, they are immediately held accountable. This is war, these things happen, we are all human and make mistakes when pushed to the breaking point.
 
Austin316 said:
Even if its the case, BIG FUCKING DEAL HE KILLED TWO TERRORISTS!!!

You think for a second they wouldn't of done the same to the soliders or any one of you here if given the opportunity? Im prettys ure we all know they would prob do worse

Good for him he killed a couple slime balls that were making bombs to kill our men, saves us the trouble of having to feed them and all that other nonsense. If he was smart would blown up the truck they were trying to drive away with and not just shot the tires out, Wouldn't even be an issue
hell ya
 
For all you guys know ,when they were babbling in Arabic and then turned their bodies as he claimed they did,how in the hell would you still stand there ,i would have opened fire too.........People! these guys are nortorious for detonating body Explosives!!!


RADAR
 
spongebob said:
have you ever served in the military, if not what do you base your opinion on?

The "Tailhook Scandal". They did their damndest to try to deny wrong doing at first but when the evidence became too overwhelming they had to give in.
 
Fast Twitch Fiber said:
The "Tailhook Scandal". They did their damndest to try to deny wrong doing at first but when the evidence became too overwhelming they had to give in.

you was part of the tailhook scandel yuou scoundral.
 
WolfPack Charlie said:
Yeah, they did a great job at Abu Graib (sp). What a lot of this boils down to is this....any militant group in the world can mutilate the bodies of our soldiers and civilians and the whole world just sighs and lets it pass because it is expected. Our men and women are held to a standard that they can not possibly maintain 100% of the time and when they fall short of that standard, they are immediately held accountable. This is war, these things happen, we are all human and make mistakes when pushed to the breaking point.

I assume you are being sarcastic about Abu Graib. However, your sarcastic remark is actually correct. They did a hell of a job protecting their own. Did you notice how nobody high up in the chain of command went down over Abu Graib? The highest they nailed was a Brigadier General who commanded a bunch of reservists. They pinned the whole thing on a few low ranking soldiers. Do you really believe nobody higher up knew what was going on at that prison?
 
DIVISION said:
As a veteran I can safely say you have no idea what you're talking about. When a soldier is charged with an offense by his chain of command it's taken to JAG, where a counsel will decide whether it's worthy of prosecution. They don't look at it in terms of what's best for the soldier, they have guidlines they go by in doing their job and they don't give a shit about the soldier. The JAG are officers usually captainor higher, and they will railroad an enlisted soldier if it furthers their own career, the politics are pervasive. The way the UCMJ works is basically conducive to punishment, there's not much chance you can be found not guilty under the premise, it's a "guilty until proven innocent" justice code, much worse than civilian law. There are ciminals in the military, sure, but most of them are not your "thug" types, they are the "white-collar" criminals who happen to be officers. They are above reproach and have alot more freedom to commit their crimes without fear of reprisal.



DIV

So what you are saying is that you know for certain that this soldier is being railroaded by the evil JAG officers who are part of the liberal conspiracy against American soldiers.
Get real, you weren't there when this happened. I wasn't there either. Neither one of us knows what really happened. That's what the trial is for.

Not all American soldiers are good people. There are murderers among them. Jeffrey Dahmer was once a member of the US Army.
 
Do you really believe nobody higher up knew what was going on at that prison?

Everyone knows that the soldiers were told to do whatever it takes, and everyone knows that a soldier does only what he or she is told. My point is that they did not protect their own in this situation. Every enlisted person associated with this scandal was raked over the coals not only by the press, but also the pussy ass american public as well as the US Military. So to say that that anyone was protected is retarded.
 
CFZB said:
bottom line.............

there wouldnt be a problem if it wasnt for the bush admin period.

You're right! The problem wouldn't be there, it would be HERE! Kerry the fairy wouldn't do half of what Bush is doing to prevent terrorism.
 
WolfPack Charlie said:
Everyone knows that the soldiers were told to do whatever it takes, and everyone knows that a soldier does only what he or she is told. My point is that they did not protect their own in this situation. Every enlisted person associated with this scandal was raked over the coals not only by the press, but also the pussy ass american public as well as the US Military. So to say that that anyone was protected is retarded.
yeah they got fucked for chicken shit offenses
 
Clean said:
You're right! The problem wouldn't be there, it would be HERE! Kerry the fairy wouldn't do half of what Bush is doing to prevent terrorism.
lol....yeah.


sheep.jpg
 
Fast Twitch Fiber said:
So what you are saying is that you know for certain that this soldier is being railroaded by the evil JAG officers who are part of the liberal conspiracy against American soldiers.
Get real, you weren't there when this happened. I wasn't there either. Neither one of us knows what really happened. That's what the trial is for.

Not all American soldiers are good people. There are murderers among them. Jeffrey Dahmer was once a member of the US Army.

You missed the point, sir.

Based on experience in the Army, I'd say that politics are abound in all these cases. Nothing is as cut and dry as it would seem and you have to keep that mind when looking at the big picture. Get real?

I'm the realest muthafucka here, been in the military, done my thang......

Have you served?

Please enlighten me.

I wasn't speaking of specifics to this case, I was only stating what I know from experience being in the military. Read the words, comprehend the words, then open your mouth.



DIV
 
Razorguns said:
Outraged about what? That someone who clearly murdered another human being -- was caught?

Granted I wasn't there, but this is what I've gleened:

"The case stems from an April 15, 2004, incident in which Pantano’s unit was ordered to search a house in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. Marines stopped Hamaady Kareem and Tahah Ahmead Hanjil as they tried to drive away.

According to charges, Pantano ordered other troops to remove the suspects’ handcuffs and look away, then shot the pair in the back, vandalized their vehicle and hung a sign over their corpses bearing a Marine slogan: “No better friend, no worse enemy.”

Pantano's description
In a statement, Pantano told investigators the two men had their backs to him and continued talking to each other despite warnings to be quiet.

... “After another time of telling them to be quiet, they quickly pivoted their bodies toward each other. They did this simultaneously, while speaking in muffled Arabic. I thought they were attacking me and I decided to fire my M-16A4 service rifle in self-defense,” the statement said."

--------------

Sounds clear cut murder to me.

They were searched.

They were handcuffed.

He told his fellow soldiers to turn away.

He shot them in the back.

Sounds like murder in any textbook to me.

Being a soldier does not give you the license to murder. Nowhere in the US Army does it say that. And seeing how we, the US Army, are held to higher standards then the cretinous, savage enemies that we are fighting (which is why we are GOOD and they are BAD remember?) -- we need to take the higher ground.

If we are out there murdering innocent, unarmed people. And they are too. Are we really that different then?

And this is not even taking into accord global public opinion on incidents of our screwups and us "looking the other way" on them and thereby condoning it. And if the US Army does _nothing_ -- next time a bunch of liberals hold up signs calling "US Soldiers, MURDERERS!" ... they will probably be correct.

Amazing. People will set out the bulls on someone who deserts -- but defend someone who murders innocent people in cold blood. Who would YOU want living next door to you and your children?

good post props
 
CFZB said:

I don't see how someone who's never served can argue with me about the potential politics involved in UCMJ proceedings.

Hilarious....




DIV
 
DIVISION said:
I don't see how someone who's never served can argue with me about the potential politics involved in UCMJ proceedings.

Hilarious....




DIV
Its your story bra ...tell it.
 
Razorguns said:
I don't. Like I said -- I wasn't there, nor am I a judge. Meaningful opinions require meaningful accurate details.

But if everything said _is_ true -- then my opinion of the incident stands.

And my opinion stands with you . . . if that's true. :qt:
 
DIVISION said:
I don't see how someone who's never served can argue with me about the potential politics involved in UCMJ proceedings.

Hilarious....




DIV
I think perfectworld has served.
I'm surprised he didn't speak up and mention this in his defense
then again he's not very good at that
 
4everhung said:
I think perfectworld has served.
I'm surprised he didn't speak up and mention this in his defense
then again he's not very good at that

pworld is pretty humble about his service
 
See now its these kinda posts/stories that make me ashamed to be a marine, They can stick your ass in MP for just about ANYTHING THESE DAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
viciousness said:
See now its these kinda posts/stories that make me ashamed to be a marine, They can stick your ass in MP for just about ANYTHING THESE DAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Vic, you're a marine?

How the fuck do you keep any muscle mass running that much each day?

That's insane.....




DIV
 
Well after boot camp back in the day I went to more training only to rebound all the fat/muscle back (THANK GOD) I came back looking like a skinnier version of charlie sheen LOL.... How cant ya when ya used to drink like a true marine???????? LOL
 
Top Bottom