previous post next post  

Haditha and rumors of Hadithas

This is a thorny one.

First - read Michelle Malkin's post about the Camp Pendleton 8 . Follow the links.

However - for a slightly more reasoned, and perhaps *informed* view - check out what Army Lawyer has to say over at Milblogs.

Apropos of that, I got this in an email this weekend, from Kevin F. in Houston.

A Plea for Context in War Reporting

Context is vital in all news reporting, because without it one cannot make reasoned judgments about the importance of any event. Sadly, context is almost always lacking in coverage of both the Iraq conflict and the War against Islamo-Fascism. As the events surrounding Haditha or future such incidents unfold, the public will be subject to countless impassioned harangues from commentators and reporters. Far too many of these efforts will fail to provide a context to understand the events in question.

What makes incidents like No Gun Ri, My Lai and perhaps Haditha noteworthy is not the scale of death, but that such incidents are so very rare. The US military takes its obligations under both the Rules of War and its own Rules of Engagement very seriously. All personnel are accountable, unlike our current enemies, for upholding these standards. Those who do not, a remarkably tiny number of people, will face consequences ranging up to criminal punishment. This accountability is painful to watch and even provides succor to both our enemies and our critics. These groups however fail to grasp the fundamental truth: today the US holds itself to a high standard of conduct. Whenever violations occur the US is moving to ensure that the resolution is swift and transparent.

The same cannot be said of our enemies: the Islamo-Fascists and rejectionist Baathiststs. Contrast the US incidents, which were committed by isolated groups without policy sanction, with those committed by our enemies. These groups target as a matter of policy and procedure innocents and often random noncombatants. Consider the weapons that are the hallmark of our enemies: IEDs, blades, and passenger planes.

Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs), hundreds and hundreds of IEDs, ranging from car bombs to homicide bombers to roadside bombs continue to be used in Iraq and around the world. Despite the method of delivery high explosives are indiscriminate killers. Indeed, many thousands of Iraqis: men, women, children, and elderly have been killed, maimed, and traumatized by the IEDs of our enemies. These IEDs have created a toll of carnage vastly exceeding the US troop losses, which is a fact only very rarely noted in media coverage of the conflict.

Blades are yet another weapon of choice for our enemies, but not for combat. They employ blades for the torture and murder of their prisoners. Our enemies butcher, there is no other word for it, they butcher their prisoners The Islamo-Fascists not only behead their prisoners as a matter of policy, but broadcast the grisly spectacle on the internet and film for a worldwide audience. Note the pride of our enemies in this activity and contrast that with the aftermath of the Abu Ghraib incident, where those responsible are facing judicial proceedings. A simple question: By which group would you rather be held captive the worst of the Americans at Abu Ghraib or the leaders of the Islamo-Fascists?

Any of you remember 9/11? The Islamo-Fascists hijacked 4 passenger planes, which contained scores of noncombatants, and used them for their kamikaze attacks. Reflect for a moment on the cold blooded planning and equally cold blooded execution which was required to carry out this plan. Years of preparation and sizable, for Al Qaeda, commitment of resources went into this terrorist plan. The result: nearly three thousand dead noncombatants and our enemies only regret, that many more thousands of noncombatants were not killed.

These and many other factors should form the basis on which to evaluate events occurring in our continuing struggle against Islamo-Fascism and the Baathist rejectionists.

2 Comments

OK, I don't see Army Lawyer's point. Michelle Malkin does not ever say that what the USMC is doing to the 8 men is illegal; she just says it's wrong. Surely a lawyer should know that the 2 are not (nor have they ever really been) mutually inclusive. Obviously, he is one who totally believes in the system and obviously, he has never been in leg shackles in pre-trial confinement upon returning from defending his country. Being a retired NCO, and always suspicious of officers in general and lawyers in particular, I’m not real sure the system isn’t overdoing it to play to muslim opinion.
 
And therein lies the crux that lots of people get hung up on. Is right legal? Is legal right? And where sits the agreed-upon bedrock that serves as the basis for it. It *used* to be in western society, that bedrock was derived from judeo-christian beliefs, anchored in the 10 Commandments. Of course, things like that are always inconvenient to the societal elites, who tend then to build a different ruleset for themselves, vice the ones for the hoi polloi. When you *owned* the enforcement mechanisms *and* the educational system, that worked out well. But with all us plebs with generally (not always, heh) better educations than a medieval peasant, and modern media (including this medium) able to put the elites on display - the net result is that the elites have had to push their agenda on us so that they can continue their paths unmolested and bebothered. This post isn't really all that coherent (though more so than this comment) - which, if you think about it - reflects the state of play on the issues highlighted herein.
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.