WP: Marine Officer considered Haditha massacre routine, didn't merit an inquiry

Thorgrim · 08-19-2006, 09:18 PM

Officer Called Haditha Routine
Marine Said Deaths Didn't Merit Inquiry

By Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, August 19, 2006; Page A01

The Marine officer who commanded the battalion involved in the Haditha killings last November did not consider the deaths of 24 Iraqis, many of them women and children, unusual and did not initiate an inquiry, according to a sworn statement he gave to military investigators in March.

...

It also provides a glimpse of the mind-set of a commander on the scene who, despite the carnage, did not stop to consider whether Marines had crossed a line and killed defenseless civilians.

...

A separate review of decisions by Marine officers, including Chessani and his superiors, was conducted by Army Maj. Gen. Eldon A. Bargewell. The findings of his investigation, which concluded many weeks ago, has not been released, but people familiar with its contents have said that he found multiple failures by Marine leaders in the training they mandated, in the tone they set and in how information was reported up the chain of command.

^^

Hopefully the full report will come out soon so we can get a better idea at how much they have dishonored this country

motivez · 08-19-2006, 10:45 PM

It's pretty disturbing to hear him say he didn't consider it "unusual".. does that mean there are many other instances where people under his command committed atrocities like this?

It's really sad to think they value the life of the Iraqi people so little, but I guess they just snapped.

When is the full report due?

Diesel66 · 08-19-2006, 11:39 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

It's pretty disturbing to hear him say he didn't consider it "unusual".. does that mean there are many other instances where people under his command committed atrocities like this?

Or he witnessed numerous attacks in which the enemy used women and children to fight/hide behind and just didnt think this was any different.

Thorgrim · 08-20-2006, 12:08 AM

Originally Posted by Diesel66

Or he witnessed numerous attacks in which the enemy used women and children to fight/hide behind and just didnt think this was any different.

thats not what happened at Haditha...they went into buildings where no fire was coming from and killed little girls begging on their knees for life

Diesel66 · 08-20-2006, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

thats not what happened at Haditha...they went into buildings where no fire was coming from and killed little girls begging on their knees for life

And when did I say that didnt allegedly happen ?

Did this officer know that at the time or was he just looking at the scene and going off of the platoon's word ?

kinggovernor · 08-20-2006, 02:46 AM

Originally Posted by motivez

It's pretty disturbing to hear him say he didn't consider it "unusual".. does that mean there are many other instances where people under his command committed atrocities like this?

it wasn't unusual because it was a coordinated attack, that happens alot.

It's really sad to think they value the life of the Iraqi people so little, but I guess they just snapped.

When is the full report due?

"They" have done more for the Iraqi people than anyone else

Thorgrim · 08-20-2006, 02:48 AM

there was no coordinated attack...it was an IED there were almost 3000 IED attacks last month alone, unless you are telling me there are 100 coordinated attacks involving IEDs on US forces every day?

Marines can't handle that kind of combat pressure so they started breaking into innocent homes and killing women and children begging for their lives

kinggovernor · 08-20-2006, 02:56 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

there was no coordinated attack...it was an IED there were almost 3000 IED attacks last month alone, unless you are telling me there are 100 coordinated attacks involving IEDs on US forces every day?

small arms fire as well

Marines can't handle that kind of combat pressure so they started breaking into innocent homes and killing women and children begging for their lives

I always forget that you have been there and done it

Thorgrim · 08-20-2006, 03:19 AM

Originally Posted by kinggovernor

I always forget that you have been there and done it

Just as every Vietnam veteran didn't understand they were losing the war, and many other soldiers never understood they were in a losing war, you too clinge to false premises which cloud your judgement.

The Marines have been in Iraq for over 3 years now, what have they done? The insurgency is stronger than ever, and civil war is breaking out, and all I hear from them is the same argument every army has used in their failed occupations throughout history.

Fallujah is again falling into Islamist hands, what next, are we going to take it back a 3rd time? a 4th? a 10th? a 100th?

If you want to stay in Iraq for the next 1000 years, go right ahead, but don't ask everyone else to pay for you so we can read about the next time Marines kill an innocent 6 year old girl on her knees begging for her life

Diesel66 · 08-20-2006, 03:27 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Just as every Vietnam veteran didn't understand they were losing the war, and many other soldiers never understood they were in a losing war, you too clinge to false premises which cloud your judgement.

The Soldiers fighting in Vietnam didnt lose the war though. The VC was destroyed, the NVA was in hiding and it took them two years after we left to capture Saigon.

kinggovernor · 08-20-2006, 11:56 AM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Just as every Vietnam veteran didn't understand they were losing the war, and many other soldiers never understood they were in a losing war, you too clinge to false premises which cloud your judgement.

Please point to any military defeats during Vietnam. The war was lost in America not in Vietnam

The Marines have been in Iraq for over 3 years now, what have they done? The insurgency is stronger than ever, and civil war is breaking out, and all I hear from them is the same argument every army has used in their failed occupations throughout history.

Fallujah is again falling into Islamist hands, what next, are we going to take it back a 3rd time? a 4th? a 10th? a 100th?

If you want to stay in Iraq for the next 1000 years, go right ahead, but don't ask everyone else to pay for you so we can read about the next time Marines kill an innocent 6 year old girl on her knees begging for her life

occupations always fail

kinggovernor · 08-20-2006, 11:57 AM

as that was a good point to concede the fact that they were hit with a coordinated attack

Thorgrim · 08-20-2006, 12:25 PM

I didn't say occupations always fail or it was coordinated...I think pretty much the WP is calling him an idiot, and if you don't think this occupation is a failure...go ahead and use your vast personal experience and take on George Will and other conservative intellectuals who are very well versed in American-occupied Iraq, tell them they are fools and wrong because they weren't stationed in Iraq

motivez · 08-20-2006, 12:26 PM

I think it's important, again, to point out that our problems in Iraq have not been of a military nature, they've all been political.

The troops have performed brilliantly, doing the best they can in a shitty situation in a war that's been run poorly by a bunch of blubbering idiots that refused to take the pre-war advice of their Generals

In no way should a few soldiers going off the deep end totally ruin the reputation of our fighting forces, and similarly, the military branches should not be blamed for what's gone wrong with the war.

Thorgrim · 08-20-2006, 12:35 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

I think it's important, again, to point out that our problems in Iraq have not been of a military nature, they've all been political.

The troops have performed brilliantly, doing the best they can in a shitty situation in a war that's been run poorly by a bunch of blubbering idiots that refused to take the pre-war advice of their Generals

In no way should a few soldiers going off the deep end totally ruin the reputation of our fighting forces, and similarly, the military branches should not be blamed for what's gone wrong with the war.

I disagree, the officers swore an oath to protect the constitution, not to protect GWB

Also many of them swore after Vietnam that "never again" would they let themselves slide into an quagmire (See statements by Powell about that)

Yet look where we are, retired generals have called upon officers to remember their oaths and promises, and they haven't...once you get to that point I think you have to fault military officers

Then you get into the lower ranks, and we've all seen footage of extensive and almost brutal raids in the middle of the night on random suspects because of their extreme lack of intelligence, its not just atrocities its also mistreating common Iraqis, I don't grunts should have to be taught basic rules of respecting Iraqis after Haditha like they were...I think it should be something they themselves are responsible for...winning the hearts and minds is not just a failure of neocons, its also a failure of the military

motivez · 08-20-2006, 12:40 PM

Politics often trumps promises, and I think when it comes to 'retired', that's classified as 'civilian'.

Our civilian leadership are the ones who've lead us down the road to where we currently are. Lack of post war planning, a rush to judgement and war, refusing to listen to Generals about troop levels, etc..

We wouldn't be in the bad position we are within Iraq had steps been taken by the Administration that weren't.

The lower ranks are following orders when it comes to raids, they don't decide to just pick up and go raid a house.. and again, guilt by assosciation is bullshit.

Just because some people fuck up does not mean the entire organization deserves to be labeled the same way those people do, in the exact same way that I'm arguing in other threads about Arabs / Muslims not being branded as terrorists because of the color of their skin and religion.

Thorgrim · 08-20-2006, 12:51 PM

Their are good guys in practically every army that ever existed, I am just saying that this "99% are great heroes and 1% are bad" is a little misleading, I am not going to put an exact numbers but I think more than 1% are conducting themselves in a way that fuels the insurgency and thats why the commanders forced them to go through re-education, which again I think shows a lack of intelligence in the basic "Should I respect this person or shouldn't I?"

If they have problems, they should report that they are unfit for duty, they shouldn't just go out there to fight a counter-insurgency by making more enemies

motivez · 08-20-2006, 01:42 PM

I don't think there's any evidence to support the assertion that it's even 1% of the Armed Forces that are 'bad'. I think so far, from what we know, it's much less than that.

And, I think cultural sensitivity isn't a bad idea to train people. I think the majority of Americans aren't culturally sensitive when it comes to Arabs and Muslim people..

And yes, that is what they should do.. but they are fighting for the guy next to them.

kinggovernor · 08-20-2006, 02:34 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

I didn't say occupations always fail or it was coordinated...I think pretty much the WP is calling him an idiot, and if you don't think this occupation is a failure...go ahead and use your vast personal experience and take on George Will and other conservative intellectuals who are very well versed in American-occupied Iraq, tell them they are fools and wrong because they weren't stationed in Iraq

Do I think that this will end in a perfect democracy for Iraq, I don't know. Are we killing young militant Muslims that will travel far distances to do harm to America, yes.