I read a lot of the Arab, Muslim, and extreme Left press. If I had a dollar for every time they accused American troops of committing "attrocities", "massacres", and "war crimes", then I'd be a very rich man.

How often do these groups make such accusations? Every time a civilian in Iraq is caught in the crossfire and killed. Every. Single. Time.

These groups already know what American troops are reallly like.

The most sympathetic opinion of our troops from these groups is that they are children. They do these bad things not because they are bad people, but because Bush-hitler and co. have put them in a bad situation.

Our childlike troops--who really signed up so they could go to college but were tricked and drafted into fighting a war for Haliburton's gain--snap every time an IED goes off and indiscriminately kill civilians.

The least sympathetic opinion of our troops, especially prevalent among Islamist sources, is that our troops like to kill Arabs. You know, it's just fun.

So, with this view of American troops in mind, every time a civilian gets killed in Iraq, it is our fault. It's not the fault of the terrorists who use mosques as command-and-control centers. It's not the fault of insurgents who--contrary to the Geneva Conventions--try to hide their identities by blending in with the local population. It's not the fault of these minute-men who fire on U.S. troops from the roofs, from the alleys, and from the windows of civilian homes.

No, it's always the fault of the U.S. troops.

So, when I hear that U.S. troops have been cleared in the alleged massacre at Ishaqi, I can't help to think about Haditha.

What do we really know about Haditha? So far, the allegations seem par for the course. The usual accusations. Civilians were killed and Americans must have massacred them.

But word massacre has a distinct connatation. It implies that American troops intentionally killed civilians. That civilians were rounded up and shot, or that our Marines went room to room methodically murdering children.

What we know is only that civilians were killed. What we know is that Marines originally reported that they were killed by a roadside bomb, but that those Marines later reported that they were killed in crossfire.

This is the major cover-up of a massacre that I've been hearing about?

We have dead bodies. The dead bodies reveal that the civilians were shot. But, isn't that what we've already known for some time now? That civilians were shot?

The only questions that remain, then, are two-fold. First, what were the Marines motives? That is, did they intentionally kill these civilians, or were they shot accidentally? Either in cross-fire, or because the Marines were careless.

If the former, then we do have a massacre. These civilinas were murdered.

But if the latter, then at worst we have some careless Marines who ought to be jailed for negligient homicide or not following the rules of engagement. Which is equally tragic, but far more mundane explanation than a massacre. It's also far more likely.

The second question is about the alleged "cover-up" and, according to Rep. Murtha, "how high it went." Of course, to the far Left it doesn't really matter how high up it went, because in their minds, it always goes up to the Sec. of Defense or the President of the United States. So, the real motivation here is not to get at the truth, but to score political points.

What we know is that an NCO filed an erroneous field report. There is no evidence--none--that even a single officer knew the report was wrong.

Will it turn out that Haditha was a massacre in its true sense? Did Marines go on a rampage murdering women and children? Maybe. As I've said in the past, if this is the case, I personally volunteer for the firing squad.

But since I've heard these accusations so many times before, let's just say I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by: Rusty at 05:44 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 680 words, total size 4 kb.