May 05, 2005
Marine Cleared in Shooting, Kevin Sites Silent
Look, I don't know whether or not this guy should have been charged with anything. What I do know is that the images broadcast by Kevin Sites of the shooting has served as a propaganda tool of our enemies. This Marine may have killed 3 men. Kevin Sites film has inspired many more to take up arms against the U.S. and resulted in many many more deaths.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
The investigation into a controversial shooting of a wounded Iraqi by a U.S. Marine has ended with a determination the Marine acted in self defense.Hat tip: HowieThe Marines announced no charges will be filed in the incident last November in which a Camp Pendleton infantryman shot a wounded Iraqi insurgent following a firefight around a mosque in the city of Fallujah.
The Marine told investigators he had, in fact, killed three wounded Iraqi fighters he feared still posed a threat to his unit.
Natonski reportedly gave serious consideration to intelligence reports that said injured insurgents in Fallujah had feigned surrender and then attacked American troops as they approached.
Posted by: Rusty at
10:20 AM
| Comments (44)
| Add Comment
Post contains 190 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This was a horrible decision.
This mosque had been cleared the day before and the dying and the dead were left there overnight. The next day soldiers return, find some still alive and assasinate them.
First, it was a poor decision to leave them there overnight.
Second, had the wounded not been seriously incapacitated they would have scurried away from the mosque to safety in the dark of the night. That they were still laying there in a mortified state the next day is a clear indication that they were fully subdued and not a threat.
I'm not surprised by the verdict. America will never admit to wrong doing unless the evidence against them is so overwhelming that they can't wiggle their way out. Bottom line...this was a war crime.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 11:02 AM (/+dAV)
2
Bottom line, Greg's an idiot.
Posted by: Laura at May 05, 2005 11:29 AM (L3PPO)
3
Greg is also a slandering liar. But you knew that.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 05, 2005 11:34 AM (xauGB)
4
"Greg is also a slandering liar. But you knew that." Robin Roberts
Robin,
What part of my post is a lie? Please elaborate.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 11:38 AM (/+dAV)
5
If its ok to fire then why is it a problem to tape it?
Posted by: actus at May 05, 2005 11:59 AM (CqheE)
6
Something may not be criminal and yet be a mistake. That is probably the case here. But the mistake of a Marine under extreme circumstances of stress should not be broadcast to the world so that jihadis can recruit more shaheeds for martyrdom.
Again, this is a pro-American site. That is the worldview from which I operate.
Posted by: Rusty Shackleford at May 05, 2005 12:08 PM (JQjhA)
7
WAAAAAHHHHHH!!!
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 12:15 PM (0yYS2)
8
Sorry, couldn't resist. That last one was me channeling greg, since he isn't articulate, or honest, enough to express himself clearly.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 05, 2005 12:16 PM (0yYS2)
9
Greg,
I don't think it was ashame for the soldier to get off. I do
believe, and Laura can vouch that I feel this way, is that his action did need to be investigated. Since he was investigate and found innocent, we have to live with it. The same way we live with O.J.
walking around free right now.
But I do think you did make a good point about the wounded not
crawling away.
Now about the leaving them there, some time in combat, you don't always get to do the things you want to do or need to do. This could
of been the case with these wound Iraqis. The first patrol may of not had a chance to properly (and I mean healing not killing) take care of the prisoner's due to their mission.
I will admit that about 80% of your posts I have read are very
articulate and very logical. Unfortunately most of the people on
this site, are not. You can tell by their one line responses.
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 12:42 PM (Gqhi9)
10
Greg the class A Dick with another triumph!
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 05, 2005 12:47 PM (yBHNA)
11
Charges should not have been considered in the first place. These are not wounded "soldiers"- They are terrorists. Terrorists who give no quarter and yet Greg and his ilk demand we give quarter and hugs. Terrorists who fake surrender and then open up on our guys. Terrorists who fake being dead and then kill our troops.
I have no problem with our boys killing the wounded terrorists.
Greg, Why don't you write the soldiers a letter and tell them how you feel.
Posted by: Ob Snooks at May 05, 2005 12:51 PM (yBHNA)
12
You always know which side Greg Fonda will be on.
Posted by: Harold T. Fancypants at May 05, 2005 01:10 PM (yBHNA)
13
Thanks Butch, I'll try to get that 80% closer to 100% in the future.
Greg the class A Dick with another triumph!-Filthy
Filthy, you are a class B Dick.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 01:12 PM (/+dAV)
14
"Charges should not have been considered in the first place. "
Why are you questioning the decisions of our military?
Posted by: actus at May 05, 2005 01:13 PM (CqheE)
15
We have the freedom to question you stalinist shit.
Posted by: Filthy Allah at May 05, 2005 01:27 PM (yBHNA)
16
Soldier shouldnt have left the guys wounded overnight. Should have shot their asses the first day. Then there wouldnt a been a problem.
Posted by: angryblackman_1@hotmail.com at May 05, 2005 01:31 PM (x+5JB)
17
"We have the freedom to question you stalinist shit."
Enjoy. After the revolution? Nyet!
Posted by: actus at May 05, 2005 01:34 PM (CqheE)
18
"Thanks Butch, I'll try to get that 80% closer to 100% in the future."
Greg, he wasn't talking about you, you dipstick.
Here, let me pick your statement apart, Greg:
"This mosque had been cleared the day before and the dying and the dead were left there overnight. The next day soldiers return, find some still alive and assasinate them
First, it was a poor decision to leave them there overnight."
How do you know whether they even could get in there? And assassinate? You have the gall to say this after knowing that it's entirely probable that other terrorists could have been in there and rigged the bodies with bombs; even those still living.
"Second, had the wounded not been seriously incapacitated they would have scurried away from the mosque to safety in the dark of the night. That they were still laying there in a mortified state the next day is a clear indication that they were fully subdued and not a threat."
See above rebuttal.
"I'm not surprised by the verdict. America will never admit to wrong doing unless the evidence against them is so overwhelming that they can't wiggle their way out. Bottom line...this was a war crime."
See above rebuttal again. So exactly how much footage did you see, Greg? About as much as the rest of us did. It was EDITED footage right from the start.
You are so blind and so wrongly opinionated it is absolutely insane. While this guy is over there doing the best he can in probably the most stressful situation one can be in, you're condemning him without knowing the facts. What's the most stressful situation you've ever been in, Greg? Huh? The day you ran out of Haagen Daaz?
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 02:03 PM (fl6E1)
19
Rather than shoot the terrorist, the smart play would have been to deny him food and water for a couple of weeks. This would get the liberals on board and show your compassionate side.
Posted by: Judge Greer at May 05, 2005 02:07 PM (aUEhc)
20
Oyster,
Your rebuttal is so weak that there is really not enough material for me to respond to.
Maybe you could take another stab at it. I'll give you a second chance to try and make some sense.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 02:16 PM (/+dAV)
21
Greg, your statements are so weak; hardly motivation for anything more than what I said.
These soldiers have repeatedly been faced with situations where they tried to help someone only to be rewarded with a bomb in the face that the wounded terrorist was concealing. In many instances the wounded or dead have had bombs not only planted on them, but in the case of the dead, inside them. This soldier was faced with that possibility. When the guy made a sudden movement the soldier reacted - and I might add that it was dismissed because it was found that he acted appropriately and without undue malice even though these guys were there the previous day - in a mosque - with every intent of killing them. he acted not only in his own interest, but that of his fellow soldiers.
Do you even read the news? Or do you intentionally block out that which you don't want to hear? I don't know why I bother.
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 02:41 PM (fl6E1)
22
Greg is just a mirror - from being a War Photographer and the meme that logs-into that I kinda expected Sites to be more aware of the grit, blood, feces and vomit in war, somewhat more than a ego-driven Performance Artist, even knowing that he could go one way or the other in his editorializing, and photography is nothing if not lens-selective micro-second editorializing - or in his case 30fps.
Enemies sneak back into places of relative safety once they've been "cleared" and the wounded pretend to lie dead in order to set off bombs so they can kill more enemies - it's not paintball.
Posted by: -keith in mtn. view at May 05, 2005 02:50 PM (sE9R7)
23
"When the guy made a sudden movement the soldier reacted"-Oyster
Oh really! He made a sudden movement now and before we said he was playing dead. Which is it?
Did all 3 insurgents who were assasinated make a sudden movement?
That's just a bunch of Bovine Excrement. It sounds like if you don't feign death you get assasinated and if you do feign death you get assasinated.
Face it. Just like Hitler's children, you're a Nazi.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 02:56 PM (/+dAV)
24
correct spelling - assassinate.
With love,
Your favorite Nazi
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 03:08 PM (fl6E1)
25
Greg - you moron. There were no soldiers involved! These warriors were Marines. The fact you do not know the dif shows how little you do know about freedom and its cost. It aint free bonehead.
The guy killed 3 ragheads, at least he should get a meritorious mast if not a star.
Posted by: Rod Stanton at May 05, 2005 03:13 PM (Kkge+)
26
Oyster,
That's right, wiggle your way out of an argument that you're losing by distracting with irrelevant minutia.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 03:14 PM (/+dAV)
27
"There were no soldiers involved! These warriors were Marines."-R Stanton
More distractive irrelevant minutia.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 03:17 PM (/+dAV)
28
You're all a bunch of yellow ribbon sticker pussies. Blog this, blog that...pussies. Drive your SUV's down to the recruitment building nearest you and enlist if you support the marines so much. Don't send your sons and daughters like a bunch of cowards. Oh yeah, and stop blaming free press (duh....freedom?) for Iraqi insurgency. That's the lamest excuse I've ever heard...
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 04:08 PM (FogDg)
29
Steven,
Where's Colin these days? Rumor has it that he and Rooster are yachting together in the Caribbean.
Posted by: greg at May 05, 2005 04:15 PM (/+dAV)
30
Last I heard, they were both forced to look for Osama. Speaking of which, if anyone in here lives in NYC: ever see those stencils around the lower east side that say 'Osama is a Bush'? or the ones on stop signs saying 'Oil'? Damn, those fired people up. The same artist had a really cool one that he put on construction sites that said, 'PAY NO BILLS'....hahaha. Anyway, Greg...see you at the Communist moonbat America-haters support group tomorrow? I might be late if my cell is activated...
Posted by: steven baber at May 05, 2005 04:23 PM (FogDg)
31
Snook,
You are wrong. From the footage there was enough of a question for the MarineÂ’s action to investigate. Now once the military has decided he did nothing wrong, that is great, but if one cannot defend their action, maybe that action should not be committed. Also it makes no difference or not if the Iraqis were militia, regular army or terrorist. The U. S. Military should not go around killing incapacitate people. Just because the rag heads go around torturing our wounded, does not mean we have to lower our selves to their level.
As for OysterÂ’s comments, I was referring to GregÂ’s comments about the 80%. Also, I do feel in this instant, AngryblackmanÂ’s comment about just killing them all the previous night should hold true. I say this because if their mission was so critical that they did not have time to help the wounded or take prisoners, then maybe they should have been killed out right.
Posted by: Butch at May 05, 2005 04:36 PM (Gqhi9)
32
Greg packs heat to a f*cking BBQ and it's ok but when a marine shoots one faking enemy (possibly armed or rigged) he gets all whiny about it, f*cking hyporcite..
Kevin (Scoopy-Doo) Sites knows diddly-squat about combat.
Posted by: Talking head at May 05, 2005 04:47 PM (a9tRx)
33
That marine should be given a medal, and an apology. The terrorist got what he deserved.
Posted by: Carlos at May 05, 2005 07:48 PM (tFXpR)
34
Carlos, are you one of those "Every towelhead is a terrorist!" kinda guy?
Posted by: Solrac at May 05, 2005 10:18 PM (w3zHI)
35
Okay, Butch, you lost me at "Greg's 80% accuracy rate". I suppose if I omit a lot of pertinent data, quote three year old news items to bolster my arguments, call everyone a Nazi and take the other side simply to be contrary even if I contradict myself, I could win the distinction of a high percentage of accuracy too?
Man! I've been doin' this all wrong!
Posted by: Oyster at May 05, 2005 10:56 PM (YudAC)
36
Carlos, are you one of those "Every towelhead is a terrorist!" kinda guy?
Not at all. I'm an "every terrorist is a towelhead" kinda guy.
Posted by: Carlos at May 05, 2005 11:43 PM (iOGzJ)
37
Butch, Greg has cited the looney bin "What Really Happened.com". 80%? More like 99% wrong.
Greg's favorite headgear.
Posted by: Robin Roberts at May 06, 2005 12:41 AM (xauGB)
38
Oyster,
The 80% I was referring to was of all of his posts,
not just this one only. As far I can see, I don't see any
lies with this post. I might of used a different word instead of
assassinate, but the main jest is correct.
Posted by: Butch at May 06, 2005 07:42 AM (Gqhi9)
39
"then maybe they should have been killed out right."
Butch: We need more liberals like you.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 06, 2005 08:38 AM (x+5JB)
40
Carlos, "Not at all. I'm an "every terrorist is a towelhead" kinda guy."
--Hahaha. There are a lot of them, BUT! What about the Oklahoma bombing? That guy was white as wonderbread.
Posted by: steven baber at May 06, 2005 10:34 AM (w3zHI)
41
steven,
not to mention the guy who killed Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
Oh wait, I think he WAS muslim!
Posted by: Carlos at May 06, 2005 11:01 AM (tFXpR)
42
I am just trying to be a realist also. Having been in the Army and the Marine Corp, I know that some time, a unit can not take pows. When
this is the case, and I do hope they are few, then we should put them out of their misery instead of letting them suffer.
Posted by: Butch at May 06, 2005 03:10 PM (Gqhi9)
43
Butch: I don't believe in putting people out of their misery, but I do believe in killing enemy combatants.
Posted by: Young Bourbon Professional at May 06, 2005 03:48 PM (x+5JB)
44
I'm glad the Marine got off...which is not what's gonna happen in the Abu Graib abuse. Too bad. I wish Zarqawi and his cohorts coulda hung underwear around Eugene Armstrong's head, and all the others, instead of sawing them off.
Posted by: Laura at May 06, 2005 03:54 PM (L3PPO)
37kb generated in CPU 0.0178, elapsed 0.1511 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.1425 seconds, 288 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
118 queries taking 0.1425 seconds, 288 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
