Propagandists, Murtha, & someone on this site

[Wes Tausend]

Originally Posted by BeanCounter

In the past I've gone at it with a certain individual(s) on this site concerning labeling our military as indiscriminate killers in Iraq. Another thread cited a Russian KGB agent as stating that such misleading statements was part and parcel of an effort to undermine every US President since Truman. I see we have one more example of it and yet some still seem to side with enemy over their own individual countrymen.

" In exonerating Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt of all charges against him arising out of the incident in Haditha in November 2005 including murder, Lt. Gen. James Mattis praised the young Marine who is among the Marines who were accused of cold-blooded murder by Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa.

As correspondent Nat Helms has written, Murtha publicly labeled the Marines cold-blooded murderers and liars who covered up the crime to protect their skins last year. He repeatedly told reporters interviewing him on CNN and other news outlets that he obtained his evidence from the Time magazine stories, which he failed to explain were based on statements by two known insurgent propagandists.

After agreeing with the Investigating Officer's recommendation that all charges against Sharratt, a veteran of the bloody battle of Fallujah in 2004 and the insurgent ambush in Haditha on Nov. 19, 2005, Mattis assured Sharratt that he could reflect with satisfaction over his service in Iraq. "

And finally I hope Murtha and the others some day have to stand up for the unbelievably callous and yes traiterous way they have portrayed our military.

Bernie,

First, I'm certainly no fan of Murtha. He seems to shoot first and then not even bother with any questions after. But...

Only some of our military are indiscriminate killers in Iraq. Probably about the same percentage as reside in the general populace of any given nation. But I suppose there are some. War and murder must never allowed to be the same. There probably were some "engagement rules" slightly bent by other members of Sharratts squad under some very extenuating circumstances, I might add. Full investigation will usually reveal the final truth.

I think our in-country police forces are a lot more careful than our general military presence in Iraq. As an example consider part of the story as told by the Associated Press ( http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_6582889 ) :


***"The women and children died in a different house and Sharratt was not charged in their deaths.

Prosecutors alleged that Sharratt and other members of his squad did not properly identify their targets before opening fire, but Mattis concluded Sharratt acted appropriately and within his rules of engagement.

'Our nation is fighting a shadowy enemy who hides among the innocent people, does not comply with any aspect of the law of war, and routinely draws fire toward civilians," Mattis wrote. "With the dismissal of these charges, you may fairly conclude that you did your best to live up to the standards followed by U.S. fighting men throughout our many wars.'*** "


If collateral police damage such as this occurred in the U.S. involving U.S. citizens, there would be hell to pay. Keeping in mind almost all criminals amongst us are "a shadowy enemy who hides among the innocent people". Another similar outcry would arise if an occupying military force in the U.S. accidently killed our families during routine war. So it seems that we must be above reproach lest the situation ever be reversed.

As far as "certain individual(s) on this site" being critical of US Presidents, it's probably a good thing overall. We wouldn't have caught Clinton with his pants down without occasional effort to undermine the chief.

P.S. Steve's OK. He has some good and provacative posts. I don't think he's Russian KGB.
Wait? Is that chopper blades I hear?


...