On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 10:30:32 -0500, DSK wrote:

JohnH wrote:

all the congratulatory messages from Harry, jps, basskisser, gould, et al.
our capture of Saddam.

I don't know if I'm included in "et al" but I say congrats and job well done. I
really hope the attacks in Iraq drop off now. If he was captured with $3/4 mill in
cash then he was probably financing a lot of trouble (or perhaps it was merely his
kitty for bribing people to help him hide). In any event, it's a big success.


Harry, I could imagine the glee in your eyes when you
came across the video of the Iraqi getting (supposedly) murdered by a Marine
after being wounded. Yes, I would call it murder, if it occurred. I have doubts
about the authenticity of the video. For one thing, why has it not been shown on
any of the networks? Surely, if it were substantiatable, NBC, ABC, CNN, etc.
would showing it every five minutes.

The US just fined a soldier about $5000 for shooting a pistol near a man's head.
The officer is undoubtedly being forced to retire early. How do you reconcile
this action with the "inaction" for the shooting depicted in your little video.

Same way I reconcile the My Lai massacre or the Phoenix program with the Memorial
Wall. There are some bad people in every big organization. There are some good
people who occasionally do bad things. Not everything that denigrates BushCo or the
Army _has_ to be a fake just because you wish it to be so.

What do you think about the blockbuster bomb they dropped to try and get Saddam at
the war's opening? They bragged plenty about it for two or three days, then shut up
quickly and haven't heard a word since. Does that mean it suddenly didn't happen,
it's become un-history? The US murdered a whole block in downtown Baghdad to get one
man. And didn't get that man until now. Let's see more denials about 'collateral
damage.'




Well guys, how do you turn this into a negative for the administration? This
should be cute.

That's already too long of a list.

DSK


You miss the point, I think. If the Uniform Code of Military Justice is applied
to a Colonel who fires a pistol to scare someone, then I would expect the UCMJ
to be applied to a Marine who shoots a wounded, unarmed (if that be the case)
Iraqi. That would not be collateral damage. It would, if it occurred as
depicted, be murder. Collateral damage is, by definition, unintended. The
shooting of the Iraqi, as depicted, was intended. I see no comparison.

John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD