Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

How about a little less emotional rant…something factual and ramifications…and you might want to re-read what Murtha actually said, not just someone’s interpretation of it…

I can’t wait to see what the libs will say about this. Good post SE.

Here’s what one lib has to stay: SE’s only telling half of the truth. Other Marines have still been charged.

If Murtha said anything against this guy Sharrat personally, he certainly owes him an apology.

Rachel

Rant? I think not. It came from an AP story. TWO marines will have had charges dropped. When Murtha got before every camera he could find, the way he came across was that his inside info was unimpeachable…that the marines were guilty, and that a cover-up had occurred.

I screamed (ranted) then. As a lawyer, him painting the picture that he painted without due process of the law sickened me. Except for one very important thing that he has that I do not: He is a profoundly powerful member of Congress and what he says gets broadcast by everyone. THAT was the problem. No due process.

Woody

Two innocent marines is way too much. He should have kept his yap shut.

How about a link?

Whoa, SE, slow down. Ya might want to get all your facts straight before you go off on a rant like this. Check this out from the Washington Post.

Sharratt, 22, of Canonsburg, Pa., did not take part in the first shootings on Nov. 19, and he has acknowledged killing a group of men in a home later that day, when, he said, he believed they raised weapons at him. Sharratt told investigators that he used a 9mm pistol to shoot them as he and Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich searched the home.

“He responded instinctively, assaulting into the room and emptying his pistol,” Ware wrote. “Whether this was a brave act of combat against the enemy or tragedy of misperception born out of conducting combat with an enemy that hides among innocents, LCpl Sharratt’s actions were in accord with the rules of engagement.”

The rules of engagement have become central in the Haditha cases, as defense attorneys have argued that the troops used aggressive but approved tactics to assault what they thought were enemy targets. The first shootings have garnered more investigative attention because they came immediately after a Marine was killed in an explosion and because unarmed people were killed.

Sharratt’s incident in 2005 came hours later, after Marines swarmed the scene to secure the area. Sharratt and others noticed suspicious behavior in the home before entering and shooting, they said. Marines reported finding two AK-47 rifles in the house.

There are multiple investigations and multiple incidents going on here, and several court marshals have already begun. For the full article, go here.

Wash Post Article

In a nutshell, SE, just because one person in a separate incident may be cleared does not mean that there are others that do not deserve to be “crucified”

L

Boy that last sentence is garbled. You know what I meant. :-)

L

I realize you can’t let this go, SE. For me, I am still angry that the reports of women being raped in Abu Ghraib still haven’t been released.

And not today there’s this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/11/washington/11surgeon.html?em&ex=1184385600&en=8636051afba0a657&ei=5087%0A

Sickening.

KAP-
I’m fine with the man being exonerated. Evidence shows something did happen, but if it also shows that the evidence is too thin for this one guy doing what he supposedly did, then I’m fine with him getting off.

Sicilian Eagle-
Your trouble is, though, you want more than just presumption of innocence. You want the whole thing to go away, and that’s a different thing entirely.

Keeping secrets about something happening will not help us, because secrets have a tendency to come out, and bring harm with interest. If discipline at Abu Ghraib had been carried out as a matter of course, if operations at the place had been carried out with the possibility of disclosure firmly in mind, what happened there would not have happened. When we keep secrets like this, the corruption and the continuation of bad practices erode both discipline, and America’s reputation.

It’s ironic, but your accusation towards us of throwing these men under the Bus itself represents a prejudgment of our motives. Our concern is for the good name of our country, for the proper airing of issues of a war being fought on our behalf. The unwillingness of this administration to deal with problems, its tendency to try and keep us in the dark to manipulate our opinion of the war.

Haditha, whatever occured there, is a symptom of the failure of this war, the failure to maintain a calm post-war occupation. We’re not still in Iraq because the job proved more difficult than anticipated. We’re still in Iraq because invading the country was far easier than controlling it, and this administration myopically focused on speeding up and optimizing the invasion, while neglecting the nation building and occupational measures necessary to successfully carry out the war.

Haditha is symptomatic of the Right’s failure to support the troops, the Right’s failure to match words and feelings to troop levels, equipment, and strategy. Don’t blame us for the fact that you’ve made the soldier’s situation in Iraq increasingly intolerable.

Woody
Some still have charges against them such as darelection of duty for 4 officers for not properly reporting the insident. I just googled Haditha and read some of the stories.

Thanks KAP,

I was about to side with WOODY until I read that and did some research.

“In a nutshell, SE, just because one person in a separate incident may be cleared does not mean that there are others that do not deserve to be “crucified‎”

That is not the point L.
Murtha “crucified” all of them before all of the facts were known.
A statesman such as Murtha knows better than that and a veteran should have more respect for his fellow soldiers than that.

http://abcnews.go.com/ThisWeek/story?id=2013939&page=1

The fact is Murtha should have keept his big mouth shut until the NCIS made it’s investigations. So far 2 have been cleared, 1 is suing Murtha for defamation, he is still awaiting his hearing, 1 Officer will be tried for derelection of duty. I think Murtha owes those Matines an apology for being presumptious and accusing them before all the facts are in.

Who exactly did Murtha crucify? What is the standard?

KAP,

If you are suggesting that all of remaining charges are minor ones, that contradicts what was in WaPo today. They say that two guys (Wuterich and Tatum) are still charged with murder.

Woody

Serious charges against the others remain…..that is not the point of my post though.

Murtha painted All of them with the same brush.

Stephen

Your post is partisian…I am suprised at you. A Congressman wrongly accuised two Mariens…one of murder…the other of a cover up prior to a trial on the merits.

That, my friend is the issue. The rest is nonsense….utter nonsense.

Woody
Wuterich is the one suing Murtha.

Why is that you’re so fanatical about Murphy apologizing, and care nothing about Bush’s misleading statements that drove us into this war? Or the steps he took, or didn’t take, that led to so many soldiers dying? Where’s the apology for leading us down a path that strengthened, as opposed to weakening terrorism? What about the stain he put on the honor of our troops by allowing something like Abu Ghraib to happen?

Wow Max, I didn’t think you guys liked it when the subject was changed or the questions were dodged? And I also seem to recall that comparing this administrations wrongs to similar wrongs committed by the previous administration, isn’t fair to do either. Its history or “different” in someway, is the usual response to info showing that.

Murtha put politics before his country and his fellow soldiers and he was wrong to do so.
IF, it is the wrongs done by this administration that upset you and not the party, then stand up against all wrongs done by anyone.

“What about the stain he put on the honor of our troops by allowing something like Abu Ghraib to happen?”

That “stain” was put on the honor of ALL of our troops by people with a politcal axe to grind. Rational people know that this was just a small group of soldiers and that it in no way represents what the ENTIRE US military is made of.

And, as far as your OPINION of Bush “allowing something like Abu Ghraib to happen,” I will say that at least it was just mistreated enemy POW’s rather than the execution of 70+ of our fellow Americans again.

Perhaps Murtha’s own words best explain his motivations:

Murtha issues statement on lawsuit

JOHNSTOWN, PA, Aug. 2, 2006 - Congressman John Murtha today released the following statement about a lawsuit filed by a Marine Corps staff sergeant who led the squad accused of killing two dozen civilians in Haditha in November 2005. An Associated Press story filed earlier this morning said that evidence collected in Haditha “supports accusations that U.S. Marines deliberately shot” 24 civilians, including unarmed women and children.

“I don,t blame the staff sergeant for lashing out. When I spoke up about Haditha, my intention was to draw attention to the horrendous pressure put on our troops in Iraq and to the cover-up of the incident.”

“Our troops are caught in the middle of a tragic dilemma. The military trains them to fight a conventional war and use overwhelming force to protect U.S. lives. I agree with that policy, but when we use force, we often kill civilians. What are the consequences?”

“Three years ago, there were fewer than 500 foreign fighters in Iraq. They were called ‘dead enders., Then there were 5,000, and they were called ‘terrorists., Now there are 20,000, and the administration calls this ‘sectarian violence.,”

“All this time, we,ve had at least 130,000 U.S. troops on the ground in Iraq. In the last year, incidents have increased from 49 per day to 100 per day. About 14,000 Iraqis were killed in the last year, mostly in the last six months. Oil and electricity production are below pre-war level, and unemployment is 60 percent throughout most of the country. Our troops are in 120-degree temperatures with 70 pounds of equipment on their back, and they don,t know who the enemy is.”

“This conflict cannot be won militarily. Our troops are caught in the middle of a civil war. It,s well beyond the time to redeploy from Iraq.”
Source URL:
http://www.murtha.org/node/56

Kansas Dem

Where does he say in his quote that it is permissible for him to be the judge and jury in front of the world PRIOR TO a trial on the merits?

Missed that, I guess.

Would you, or any other liberal/dems at least for once agree that he misspoke…or is that too partisan a request?

leatherankh

“In a nutshell, SE, just because one person in a separate incident may be cleared does not mean that there are others that do not deserve to be “crucified‎”

maybe we ought to give them the benifit of the doubt. sounds like you’ve already made up your mind. this statement says it all. murtha used the incident as a photo op, and slandered these marines in front of the entire country before the facts were out, or they had thier day in court, so SE has this one right. personally this one really disgusts me. murtha wasn’t there and niether were you i’m guessing, how can you even make an assenign statement like that ? you’de think being a marine himself, that he’d have given these men the benifit of the doubt. what a partisan piece of crap he is, and not much of a marine either.

stephen

“It’s ironic, but your accusation towards us of throwing these men under the Bus itself represents a prejudgment of our motives. Our concern is for the good name of our country, for the proper airing of issues of a war being fought on our behalf. The unwillingness of this administration to deal with problems, its tendency to try and keep us in the dark to manipulate our opinion of the war.”

“Haditha, whatever occured there, is a symptom of the failure of this war, the failure to maintain a calm post-war occupation. We’re not still in Iraq because the job proved more difficult than anticipated. We’re still in Iraq because invading the country was far easier than controlling it, and this administration myopically focused on speeding up and optimizing the invasion, while neglecting the nation building and occupational measures necessary to successfully carry out the war.”

“Haditha is symptomatic of the Right’s failure to support the troops, the Right’s failure to match words and feelings to troop levels, equipment, and strategy. Don’t blame us for the fact that you’ve made the soldier’s situation in Iraq increasingly intolerable.”

you protest to much. it was your party who slandered these men in the press before the facts were out. so all of this ranting about this is actually the republicans fault is pointless.

max

“Why is that you’re so fanatical about Murphy apologizing, and care nothing about Bush’s misleading statements that drove us into this war?”

because thats not the issue we’re disgussing here, and bringing up bush is nothing more than trying to divert attention away from what we’re actaully talking about. i have marines in my family, and several that have done tours in iraq, and this one realy pisses me off, it’s personal !

I am sure no one you have ever suggested that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, or Albert Gore ever did anything illegal. None of them have ever been indicted for, much less convicted of, a crime.

And Murtha didn’t even identify anyone by name, as far as I know.

Murtha is a disgrace! He owes those troops and the American people an apology; immediately! I don’t care what political party he is affiliated with and I don’t care that he served in Vietnam; it is an (absolute) g*d damn disgrace to accuse our troops before they even had a trial!! He ought to apologize or resign!!!

Just because charges were dropped does not mean he is innocent, it just means that there might have not been enough evidence for a convication, and if they were dropped maybe with prejudice, that means that if more evidence becomes available, the charges can be reinstated.

Do to all of US, not having the facts or even access to them, we have to go by what the news or lack of news, and the pr that the attorneys put out to make our case. Then again Bush did not give all the facts except what he twisted to get the war started, therefore I guess you could say Bush is an accessory to murder, and torture.
I wonder if any of the defense attorneys thought about sending Bush a summons to appear on their clients behalf?

To explain a bit - that is always my reaction when conservatives apply the “innocent until proven guilty” standard to merely TALKING (as opposed to locking someone up). It’s a lovely ideal, but conservatives only apply to people they are sympathetic with.

g*d damn disgrace to accuse our troops before they even had a trial

That’s what prosecutors do all of the time.

I agree Woody.
The Conservatives could really learn a thing or two from liberals concerning “innocent until proven guilty.”
President Bush has never been “indicted for, much less convicted of, a crime” either and the far left treats him as one of their own.

And way to hold Murtha to the same standards you all hold Bush and Republicans too.

Yep. You guys are the real deal.

woody

“I am sure no one you have ever suggested that Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, or Albert Gore ever did anything illegal. None of them have ever been indicted for, much less convicted of, a crime.”

they’re not in the middle east putting thier lives on the line either, and once again this is nothing more than a attempt to change the subject.

“And Murtha didn’t even identify anyone by name, as far as I know”

who cares, he should have kept his big trap shut and give these marines the benifit of being assumed innocent until they were proven guilty. thats the least former marine can do for his fellow marines. this was just political posturing at thier expense, absolutly disgusting.

kctim,

There is no hypocrisy on my part. I’m not the one claiming that you can’t ANYTHING about a criminal situation until after the trial. It’s an impossible standard, and I don’t hold either side to it.

But if you guys want to claim that as a standard, you should use it for both sides or you are simply being partisan.

that is, “…say ANYTHING…”

KT

“Just because charges were dropped does not mean he is innocent, it just means that there might have not been enough evidence for a convication, and if they were dropped maybe with prejudice, that means that if more evidence becomes available, the charges can be reinstated.”

sounds like your minds made up, and you’re hoping these guys are convicted at a later date. no predjudice in that statement at all. boy wouldn’t that be great for the dems if these marines are found guilty. glad your not covering my back. no agenda there. if anyone deserves the benifit of the doubt it’s these guys, but your more concerned with saving the party image.

woody

“that is, “…say ANYTHING”

it’s one thing to throw around acussations between politicians and political parties, thats expected. but using our troops as anti war propaganda is a whole nother story. disgraceful to say the least.

Woody,

“but conservatives only apply to people they are sympathetic with…That’s what prosecutors do all of the time.”

The “sympathy” is with our troops; do liberals not agree with the troops?!* By the way, that is not sympathy; it is giving our troops a fair trial. Is that too much to ask, Woody?!!

KT,

“Just because charges were dropped does not mean he is innocent, it just means that there might have not been enough evidence for a convication, and if they were dropped maybe with prejudice, that means that if more evidence becomes available, the charges can be reinstated.”

A politician should not accuse our own troops of committing crimes until they have had a trial and they are found guilty. Murtha called them “murders”; that is DISGUSTING and DISGRACEFUL!!!

dbs-
The Bush administrations use of the military has been spineless. They pushed a military doctrine of pre-emption, of a transformational light-mobile invasion forces, of putting Iraqi exiles, particularly Ahmed Chalabi’s people in charge.

Then when events invalidated the legitimacy of our pre-emption, proved the insufficiency of the military’s plan A, and dumped the control and administration of Iraq in our laps, this government was not only unprepared, but had intentionally barred people from preparing for such eventualities! People who did try to get them to think of such things were called defeatists, by people too chickenshit to discuss the merits of the plans, and take suggestions for backups.

Beforehand, rather than get Americans into this war by honest means, they intentionally included what they knew to be questionable, while intentionally giving the world the impression of a Slam Dunk.

Because 2003 and 2004 were going into election years, there was of course no way to get Bush to admit there were problems, even as these problems became abundantly clear. After all, then he might have to face political consequences. Cowering in fear of being a one term president, he did nothing that might admit problems, like actually increasing the size of the military to handle the strain he was putting them under, admitting that there were no WMDs, admitting that the insurgents were more than dead-enders, and that security was lacking.

Heedlessly, Bush pushed on through the deadlines, never missing these timetables as he did his best to make Iraq the Iraqi’s problems, even as they had little unified political functioning.

At every turn, it mattered more that some problem might give an opening to Bush’s political opponents than that not taking care of it would make things harder.

It’s into this environment, day in and day out, that we put the Marines in question: an environment where the President’s nervous-nelly politicized decision making has deprived them of the leadership, the manpower and the resources to do the job. The Republicans all say they support the troops, but then they hand them this situation and tell them, without further help, to win the war for the country.

This is something that the ancient sage Sun Tzu actually warned against: generals trying to get the soldiers to win the battles that they hadn’t properly strategized.

Meanwhile, they get to be human shields for the very war policy that’s stuck them hip-deep in shit. How wonderful. That’s what Murtha objects to, and it’s why I object to as well.

Something did happen in Haditha, something that at the very least was complicated by extenuating circumstances. I don’t condemn what happened, but I believe the public had the right to know, and this administration had a duty to first act to make these incidents rare to non-existent, and to secondly act in full candor with the American people, rather than withhold such news to convince us thing were better than they were.

It has not been the insurgents who defeated us in this war, it’s all these damn secrets that the Bush adminstration has been keeping, having deemed us too reactionary, too queasy about war to properly digest the news. It’s also the irresponsibility that this attitude of secrecy has both fed and been fed by, this sense that this administration has that it is entitled to a certain amount of good coverage for the war whether it’s going well or not.

Such attitudes lead to strategies and decision making that are seriously divorced from reality, from outside expertise. It prevents America’s marketplace of ideas from moderating radical and incompetent sensibilities in policy, and also lets problems go on far to long to make the endeavors that they plague recoverable.

But never mind, let’s blame the people who speak up about the problems for them.

“Two innocent Marines.”

Sic Eagle is claiming that because the Marines are now choosing not to hold their own accountable for murder, it means they are innocent.
The problem with that is that if the Marines involved in the Haditha incident had actually been innocent, then they wouldn’t have chosen to lie, and try to cover up what had occurred. But this group of Marines did lie and try to cover up.
Such things are not a good indicator of innocence — and these two “innocent” Marines participated in that lie and cover up.

During the first meeting between families of the Haditha victims and US military officers, the family members were told that the 24 deaths were caused by a roadside bomb and by “terrorists.” The reason that was said by the officers is because none of the Marines involved were telling the truth.
Despite the fact that “insurgents” were blamed for these killings, our military paid these families 2,500 dollars for each person who had been killed in the incident roughly a month after it took place. This compensation money is NEVER paid out when our soldiers kill people in a battles where innocent civilians die alongside actual combatants. It is only paid out when clear incidents of wrongful death have occurred.

Murtha, a former Marine, knew this before he ever said a word. Indeed, this seemed obvious not just to him, but to another former Marine who also understands the Marine’s Code Of Honor.
That would be Republican Representative John Kline, who at the same time made this statement:

“There is no question that the Marines involved, those doing the shooting, they were busy in lying about it and covering it up.”

Sic Eagle won’t acknowledge Kline’s statement. None of the Republicans will. They don’t want any of us to know about it, or mention it. Because once you do, you’ll then notice that what Kline said is an even more emphatic statement on the perceived guilt of these Marines. No question about it, he said. That goes far beyond any of the comments which Murtha made at that time.
But Kline has said that his comments, while “accurate,” were “taken out of context.” (How can you take that statement out of context?)And then he apologized, and so, he is not being sued as Murtha is being sued for his comments.

The attacks on Murtha continue — and they are as transparently politically motivated today as they ever were.

stephen

what does any of that have to do with a politician making inflamatory statements about or troops before they’ve thier day in court ? i’ll answer that one. nothing.

So, if this administration wasn’t so secretive, Murtha wouldn’t have called those Marines murderers without knowing the facts?

Great, what Murtha says is now Bushs’ fault too.

rahdigly

No, a fair trial is not “too much to ask”. Everyone wants these guys to get a fair trial.

If a bunch of people raid the barracks and lynch these guys, you can complain about how they didn’t get a fair trial.

adrienne

my point is not about guilt or innocents, only that the presumtion of innocents until proven guilty, should be the standard. what comes out in the discovery and trial is what it is. if found guilty they should be punished appropriately. i was not aware of klines statements, but would hold him to the same standards as murtha. he should have kept his mouth shut until all the evidence was available, and weighed appropriately.

dbs
The reason you did not hear much about Klines statement is because he was refering to what could have been a cover-up by “those doing the shooting.”
His statement showed a black eye and didn’t really make the US or its entire military look bad, so Bush didn’t look bad. Hardly somebody the left would want to embrace.

Murtha called that entire group of U.S. Marines murderers who killed “innocent” people in cold blood. His comments make the whole military look bad, the US look bad and that makes Bush look bad.
Do that and the far left takes everything you say as gospel.

And you are right, BOTH should be held to the same standards. But Murtha was made into an idol so his comments were widely bragged about while Klines faded off.
It is fun to watch all his supporters defend and excuse him now though.

Kline got a free pass because he is a Republican. That’s why his comments “faded off”.

Of course, his comments really prove that all Republicans hate the military, Bush, and America itself. It stands to reason…

Reading all the remarks from the Lib/dem side I know now that they really don’t care about justice. If a Rep said the same thing Loud Mouth Murtha did they would not only crucify him but also draw and quarter them. Republicans are no angels and by far have made many mistakes. I am glad I don’t claim any party affilliation. Those Marines deserve their day in court, but they sure don’t need any liberal ignorant remarks especially when they weren’t there.

dbs, there WAS evidence available when both Murtha and Kline made their comments. The evidence was the fact that the US Military had paid out wrongful death compensations to the victims of the Haditha. That’s how they knew that these Marines had lied, and that some sort of a cover up was taking place.
I also think it’s clear that the reason that both of these Representatives spoke out is because as former Marines themselves, they were understandably alarmed by the fact that the Marine’s core values and code of honor no longer seemed to apply.

Honor, Courage, and Commitment:

Honor

Honor guides Marines to exemplify the ultimate in ethical and moral behavior; to never lie cheat or steal; to abide by an uncompromising code of integrity; respect human dignity; and respect others. The quality of maturity, dedication, trust and dependability commit Marines to act responsibly; to be accountable for their actions; to fulfill their obligations; and to hold others accountable for their actions.

Courage

Courage is the mental, moral and physical strength ingrained in Marines. It carries them through the challenges of combat and helps them overcome fear. It is the inner strength that enables a Marine to do what is right; to adhere to a higher standard of personal conduct; and to make tough decisions under stress and pressure.

Commitment

Commitment is the spirit of determination and dedication found in Marines. It leads to the highest order of discipline for individuals and units. It is the ingredient that enables 24-hour a day dedication to Corps and country. It inspires the unrelenting determination to achieve a standard of excellence in every endeavor.

As Marines, both Murtha and Kline knew that Semper Fi (Always Faithful) means that they had to speak out about what they saw as something very wrong taking place regarding the actions of these particular Marines, and perhaps, even the actions of The Marine Corps itself.

adrienne

what troubles me about the payout is that it was done before these marines had been tried or convicted. obviously evidence of a cover up is troubling, and if proved should be used against them as evidence at trial. it would also be a breach of those principles. i have several marines in my family, so i’m pretty familiar with them.

i think there is a difference though between the gov’t paying those claims based on guilty verdicts at a court martial, and a guilty conscience. with out the first being the case, that only leaves the last. this in my opinion makes the statements of those two congressmen out of line, and prejudicial. while it’s reasonable to be concerned with up holding of moral standards in an orginization you are proud of, it is still not justification for making inflamatory statements that could cause people to prejudge these men before they’ve had thier day in court.

“Where does he say in his quote that it is permissible for him to be the judge and jury in front of the world PRIOR TO a trial on the merits?”

Sicilian Eagle,

Who assumed that he was “judge and jury”?

Murtha expressed an opinion.

Show me a direct quote where he NAMED any individual Marine (or Marines) as being responsible for the suspected wrongdoing at Haditha?

His focus was on “leadership” and “mission”.

Anyone who’s ever served in the military knows very well that shit, er—uh—oops—guess I should say BLAME, rolls downhill. I believe Murtha was trying to stress that the mission, and those who defined it, were responsible for events such as that in question.

I certainly don’t see any evidence that Murtha used his political power to influence the outcome of a military investigation or any court proceeding.

dbs-
There is a profound disconnect between those who write the policy, and those called upon to carry it out. In an effort to shore up the politcs of the war, the Bush administration made it clear to commanders on the ground that requests for more soldiers would not be smile upon. Hell, they made it clear a large invasion force would not be smiled upon when they gave the Army Chief of Staff the lame duck treatment, and publically chastised his words.

Do you call what they did to Eric Shinseki, who testified truthfully before Congress, an encouraging message to those who want reinforcements?

This lead to a rather chronic problem of security throughout the war, and a situation win which we never had stable control of territory. Haditha is part of the Sunni Triangle, a hotbed of such insurgents as those who took advantage of the hatred for Americans in that place.

Bush sent those soldiers into Haditha with no real strategy to clear and hold. They became targets of a hostile enemy supported by unfriendly civilians. Unfriendly but civilians nonetheless.

We ask our soldiers, especially in the midst of an occupation that could faced an inflamement of civil discord, to target combatants, and not civilians. Had the security situation been better, and those soldiers been in there with greater force, restraint on both sides would have prevailed.

But when faced with a situation like that in Haditha, morals and rules of engagement can seem like terrible parodies of what is right, a straitjacket to the kind of all out fight we really want to do against our enemy and those who support them.

The Haditha Massacre is a product of policies where the right questions were not asked soon enough to make sure the right outcomes prevailed. Murtha merely brought it to our attention.

KAP-
I don’t think you know anything of the kind. I think you believe that we have no interest in justice. I can speak for myself in saying that if any man among them is innocent, let them go free. I would not take, though, that presumption to mean that we cannot frankly state what the facts seem to indicate: that Americans were involved in these killings. The Presumption of innocence does not prevent the media from speaking about murder suspects ahead of time, or what they are accused of doing. How is it that we get this kind of gag rule for Murtha?

How is it? Put simply, Murtha spoke out before, and it has been the pattern of many on the right to target those who have been vocal in the past to be bashed again and again every time they open their mouth. This is the politics of personal destruction, not justice for wrongly accused soldiers.

I think this shows a divide.

Murtha jumped immediatley on the guilty bandwagon. He might have give marines working under difficult conditions the benefit of the doubt, but he obviously took sides AGAINST them.

Many of the writers defending Murtha are trying very hard to call attention to their countries sins, real and imagined. Instead of taking the side of their and giving thier people the benefit of a doubt, they jump on the anti bandwagon with crooked old Murtha driving.

This is bad enough, but when we are talking about detainees, these same guys give suspected terrorists the benefit of a much bigger doubt than they ever give to young Americans doing a hard job.

Why?

Conservatives sometimes do not give the presumtion of innocence to murder suspects. Yes, I still think OJ did it. I thought Ted Bundy deserved what he got.

Our soldiers and marines deserve BETTER. Nobody was out to get OJ or Ted. Terrorists and enemies of America are trying very hard to demonize our soldiers and marines. They will lie to do it. WE Americans do not need to become their allies.

Murtha is a discrace. The dishonored his previous honorable service. He deserves no respect. It is a tragic fall, but it is his fault. He let his dishonest politcal judgement trump his patriotism. Shame on him.

I am only “expressing an opinion” but I would not cross the street to help Murtha climb out of a sewer.

The point being missed is that these Marines shouldn’t be in a peacekeeping role at all. Does anyone think sending highly-trained killers (God bless ‘em) to direct traffic and “escort kids to school” is the right mission for them?

George Bush and Condoleezza Rice certainly didn’t think so — nor did Republicans in general — until this fiasco in Iraq. Bush is using combat-trained Marines as policemen. That’s not right.

Here we go again trying to paint a Dem. war hero that trys to do so much for the brave people that are serving this country by twisting words and telling lies to promote a right wing neo-con agenda. When will the lies stop.

When Murtha stops telling them.

I’m telling you (all), if some (out there) would just drop the anti-Bush hatred and the bias partisanship for two friggin seconds, you would see how ridiculous the comments, of defending Murtha, actually are. I’ve seen some comments where conservatives are attacked for giving the benefit of the doubt to our troops, yet not to “criminals”. UH, YEAH!!!! Another where there is concession that the troops should get a fair trial, yet shouldn’t the enemy, killing our soldiers, get a fair trial, too? UHHHHHHH!!!!!

And still, “I certainly don’t see any evidence that Murtha used his political power to influence the outcome of a military investigation or any court proceeding.”

Please show me I’m wrong!

Jack, your rabid partisanship is once again on blatant display. You attack Murtha, and like Sic Eagle, are refusing to acknowledge Kline’s even more emphatic statement — and only because he is one of you own. How typical you are.

rah:
“concession that the troops should get a fair trial,”

No one has said the Marines shouldn’t have been given a fair trial. That includes Murtha and Kline. But the fact remains that they were only making some public statements about something which had already been made clear by the actions of our military. No matter how you rabid partisans try to twist this, the truth is that the US military did not wait for any trials before paying out compensation money to the victims families after that incident. By this action, they were basically admitting that THEY believed these Marines had lied, and had been guilty of a bunch of wrongful deaths that included women and children.
I know you don’t like this, but I think it says a lot about what real Marines are made of that a couple of former Marines, one from each side of the political aisle, were clearly so outraged by what they saw as a clear cut case of an obvious subversion of their own code of values, that they naturally had to comment upon it.
Rather than villanize and dump all over them, you should be applauding that kind of faith toward such a sterling code of honor, and praising the integrity it takes to speak out whenever that code is being broken.

Kansasdem
No where do we say he used his influence We just say he shouldn’t have opened HIS BIG MOUTH and accused those marines of murder before the investigation and trials. Yes there were mistakes made by 4 officers who should have done a better job of reporting on the insident. He,Murtha jumped to a conclusion before all the facts were presented, and I hope all those marines are found innocent and Murtha has to grovel and ask for forgiveness for being a BIG ASS.

Adrienne
It is a possibility that the payments were made because the people that got killed might have been killed in a cross fire between the marines and insurgents? The insurgents are known to hide behind women and children.

Freedom fighters hiding behind women and children??? You must be mistaken.

Adrienne

If this Kline guy said that, he too is an Ahole. We then agree. You say Murtha is a retrograde fool and I will say the same about Kline. I got no sympathy for such people on either side.

We agree, Adrienne. You hate what Murtha said and admit he was a fool and we both feel the same way about Kline. We are both good Americans. I understand that Kline appologized for his foolishness. Did Murtha?

Andy

The terrorist often dress AS women. Transvestite terrorists is the new thing, as we saw in Pakistan and London. They enjoy the feeling of the long, black dresses. That is one of the perks of being a terrorist.

“Murtha jumped to a conclusion before all the facts were presented”

KAP,

As I said before Murtha’s conclusion was that the leadership and the mission itself were to blame as much, if not more so, than any individuals actions on the battlefield. He’s been steadfast in his position that it’s time for an orderly redeployment of our troops.

Spin it however you wish, but the facts are the facts!

SE
I have the suspicion that you believe Mai Lai never should have become public either. Yes or no?

KAP:
“Adrienne
It is a possibility that the payments were made because the people that got killed might have been killed in a cross fire between the marines and insurgents?”

No KAP, it isn’t. As I mentioned before in my first post, our military doesn’t pay out these compensations to the families of civilians who are accidentally killed when our soldiers are engaged in fighting the enemy. It is only given when our military views the incident as wrongful death(s).

“As I said before Murtha’s conclusion was that the leadership and the mission itself were to blame as much, if not more so, than any individuals actions on the battlefield.”

Sounds like another anti-Bush, partisan attack to me. Murtha was absolutely wrong and should be forced to apologize or resign. Period!

“He’s been steadfast in his position that it’s time for an orderly redeployment of our troops.”

Yeah, to Okinawa! He was also “steadfast” in his vote for the Iraq war in 2003; don’t suppose you supported him then, did ya?!*

Jack-
What lies?

Rahdigly-
Have you seen anybody here on this site say that these people shouldn’t have their day in court, that they should be strung up outside the courthouse right here and now?

The lynch mob hasn’t shown up yet, and it’s probably not going to any time soon. It’s too bad, given how much effort the Red Column is putting into vilifying us.

Murtha is known for having the inside track on military matters, which means he did not make his comments in ignorance. Trouble here is that the Red Column is looking for us to act as traitors, and think of us largely in that way.

This administration has done it’s best to keep its errors secret, which while understandable, is not permittable. We have an interest in knowing how well, or how poorly this administration is waging the wars it fights, and in pulling the plug if we believe it’s lost them.

Many will support this war to the bitter end, no matter what opportunities are lost. They will have us pay and pay and pay, perversely doing the very damage our enemies wished to inflict on us by our government’s own hand. They are willing to sacrifice our economy, our army, everything, just to avoid admitting the problems of the war to a public they largely think is below explaining things to, a public they think has chickened out on the war.

They miss the role their folk’s misbehavior has had, the morale drop that their unwillingness to end terrible, counterproductive strategy has had on people. They didn’t chicken out. They lost faith in the leadership, in their ability to deliver on promises, in their competence to carry out the mission to the extent it could be carried out. Anybody who reads the actual comments that Murtha made will see that the themes that his words, taken at face value, present to the audience, are those that relate to the quality with which the war has been managed by the president.

This is not merely about some soldiers that snapped and killed civilians. This is about the policy that put them in that position. This about the denial that the Right practices, which which poisons its ability to halt this kind of dysfunction, to prevent these kinds of debacles from taking place.

The time has come to see the criticism of Murtha on this matter for what it really is at its origins: a means of diverting attention from the seriousness of the conditions that would bring an ardent hawk like John Murtha, a man who fought in two wars, whose base is highly patriotic, and apt to not take any wavering lightly, to state the cause in Iraq is lost. We have to ask ourselves: why pick Murtha as a punching bag?

The answer is simple: because Murtha’s background gives his change of heart more credibility and impact. They cannot bear to have a critic such as him not humiliated, not discredited, not vilified, because otherwise they have to face that they’ve lost many who they can’t honestly claim never wanted America to win the first place. If the people who never wanted to lose are giving up on the war, they have no defense against the final public disapproval of the war.

The Administration hasn’t done its job, but it expects everybody to let it continue doing that job indefinitely. That’s not going to happen, no matter how many John Murthas they slime.

This is bad enough, but when we are talking about detainees, these same guys give suspected terrorists the benefit of a much bigger doubt than they ever give to young Americans doing a hard job.

Bulls__t!

All we ever wanted for the detainees is some semblance of due process instead of locking up them up forever on a suspicion.

In the case of the soldiers, the are being tried (or not) according to military law. The possibility of them being locked up indefinitely without a trial was not even on the table. If Bush deprives them of their rights, we will complain.

(I say Bush because he is the guy in charge of the proceedings. Jack Murtha couldn’t lock them up if he wanted to.)

“Murtha is known for having the inside track on military matters, which means he did not make his comments in ignorance.”

Ok, so who are the others, that saw this report initially, and said: “These were wanton killings done in cold blood”?!!!! I will condemn them equally as Murtha. Until then and if not, then he should apologize or resign!!!

“Many will support this war to the bitter end, no matter what opportunities are lost. They will have us pay and pay and pay, perversely doing the very damage our enemies wished to inflict on us by our government’s own hand. They are willing to sacrifice our economy, our army, everything, just to avoid admitting the problems of the war to a public they largely think is below explaining things to, a public they think has chickened out on the war.”

The “they”, you were referring to, includes the military by the way; the ones that VOLUNTEERED and RE-ENLISTED for this mission. Yet, the “arm-chair” generals (bloggers who haven’t served) don’t want to hear that, mainly b/c it gets in the way of Blaming Bush!!!

“This is not merely about some soldiers that snapped and killed civilians. This is about the policy that put them in that position.”

Ahh, sounds like the Bush bashing I referred to earlier…

“The point being missed is that these Marines shouldn’t be in a peacekeeping role at all”

Good point indeed AP, but it still does not excuse what Murtha said.

Stephen
“Have you seen anybody here on this site say that these people shouldn’t have their day in court, that they should be strung up outside the courthouse right here and now?”

And how many people have said Murtha should not have brought this incident up?
Most people are pissed at Murtha because he tagged Marines as being murderers, cold blooded ones at that, BEFORE a proper investigation was done and ALL the facts were known.

You can blame policy, Bush or Republicans all you want in your attempts to defend and excuse Murtha, but that still does NOT change what he said.

People are upset because of his words, not because of his party.
And others choose to ignore his words and defend him because of his party.

As usual, Murtha is a target. He has the temerity as a former vet to disagree with the military, and thus has a big ol’ paritsan bullseye painted right on his backside. Don’t believe me? Take a look at the posts by dbs, rahdigly, and Jack. Lots of loud opinions, not many facts, lots of namecalling. So let’s ask this: if one or more of he accused Marines are convicted of premeditated murder, will there be apologies to Murtha? I will eat my keyboard if I ever see one. This is about discrediting the anti-war movement, not about right and wrong.

Adrienne, as usual, wonderful posts. I had no idea about the payouts by the government. Thank you for the breath of fresh air.

And before anyone accuses me of being against the troops, let me say this. My nephew is currently serving in Iraq. I have all the respect in the world for our troops and the job they are doing over there. What I have no respect for is the government that put them there. I have serious worries, considering what my nephew has seen and been through, as to what state he will be in when he comes back, if he even does in one piece. Thus I have all the sympathy in the world for the Marines accused in the Taditha situation. I hate to draw similarities, but this is so very like Vietnam. Our boys are facing a faceless enemy in unfamiliar settings, fighting a type of warfare they were not trained for. If a few of them snap and do something horrible, is it so very surprising? I would never support death or life in prison for any of these boys, no matter what they did, because I blame the government for putting them there. What does bother me is the attempt at a cover-up. If this does prove true, I hope we come down on those bastards like a ton of bricks. While Murtha may have been inflamitory in his remarks, he wants what I want: to bring them home. That I support.

“So let’s ask this: if one or more of he accused Marines are convicted of premeditated murder, will there be apologies to Murtha?”

No! And, that is b/c he accused our troops without them having a fair trial. He basically took the word of the Iraqis and insurgents (in the “fog of war”) over our own soldiers!!! I’ll say this, if those soldiers actually did do this, I will speak out against them; just like I did with the troops at Abu Ghraib. Right now (though), those of you defending Murtha need to admit he is wrong and urge him to apologize or resign!!!

“My nephew is currently serving in Iraq. I have all the respect in the world for our troops and the job they are doing over there.”

Excellent. Your nephew is a good American for serving his country; especially, in wartime. I have clients and military brethren that are (or have been) over there fighting in Iraq. I’ll give you a piece of advice that I learned from each (and everyone) of them; listen to the troops who are over there fighting in Iraq real good about what is actually going on over there. Every person I know that has been over there have told me that the news and politicians (here in the States) are not being honest. They all have concluded that the bad is being magnified more than it should. Just a little food for thought.

“I hate to draw similarities, but this is so very like Vietnam. Our boys are facing a faceless enemy in unfamiliar settings, fighting a type of warfare they were not trained for.”

This is not like Vietnam; one particular reason is that, in Vietnam, there was a draft; today’s military does not have that. Your nephew and my friends & Clients had a choice to enlist (or re-enlist) during this war.

“While Murtha may have been inflamitory in his remarks, he wants what I want: to bring them home. That I support.”

So, you would be ok if Murtha said: “These were wanton killings done in cold blood” about your nephew and his company, you would be ok with that?!! Even if you talked to your nephew and he swore it was legit and it was a setup by the insurgents (like these troops Murtha accused have said)?!?! Because, I wouldn’t be ok with those comments for my friends and clients serving over there.

Rahdigly-
It’s convenient to your rhetoric to suppose that Murtha and those who defend him are taking the word of the enemy over our soldiers. One problem: much of what we know about this is coming from the soldier, from the investigators.

I’ve seen it time and time again: support the soldiers, until they complain or come out against the war. Then beat the shit out of them, because they’ve turned traitor in your eyes.

That is the way you support the soldiers: supporting the President’s politics and policies on the war. Anytime they deviate from that, they’re traitors.

I find it rather sickening. Truth is, I don’t blame many soldiers for believing the media’s overhyped the violence. Depending on where you’re stationed, you might see little violence, and a lot of support from the people around you. It happened with Vietnam, too, as General Zinni (I think. It’s been a while) recounted in Battle Ready, the book he did with Tom Clancy. He observed that folks serving in the Delta had a different experience than those who served in the mountains, those who served in the North of the country different from those who served in the South. You casually talk about the Fog of war, but fail to consider that it might extend to those whose combat assignments take them far away from the parts of the war which have the most problems.

As for the Draft? It might have been a good idea. Nobody likes to be conscripted, and the Vietnam War gave it a bad name, but WWII, which you are so fond of was also fought under a draft. As superior as a purely volunteer army might be, it’s letting the perfect become the enemy of the good to not bow to strategic necessity and find some way of increasing the army’s size to deal with the mission at hand.

Never mind reenlistements, the Army’s been consistently missing enlistment goals for the last two years. We’re to the point where we have to start withdrawing troops in April because of the shortfall in numbers of fresh troops. We literally can’t get them back in their fast enough, the way Bush is pushing them. He’s got people on multiple deployments, he’s pushed the reserves and the national guard in, and has tried every trick in the book to continue the war like this. It’s depriving our soldiers of necessary training, working equipment, and the rest they need to recuperate from the pressure cooker that even a good war can be.

The worst part is, he’s fooling nobody except for his supporters. Everybody else is astounded at how thin he’s wearing these volunteers.

The President is responsible, on multiple levels, for the environment these troops find themselves in. His manpower policies, his failures in getting the occupation right. You folks worry about the objections people would have to a draft. But if that’s what it takes to win, why are you folks sitting on your backsides on this issue? As quick as you are to take down critics of the war, you fellows seems slow when it comes to advocating for what it takes to win a war.

I never had a problem calling for that, and I was a critic of how Bush got into Iraq. What the hell were you folks doing?

kctim-
My impression was that the first part of the investigation was mostly over with when Murtha talked about it. The article on the matter showed up in either Time or Newsweek in March of that year.

May of 06

Warner, chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the former Secretary of the Navy, said the Senate will proceed with its own investigation and hearings into the Haditha killings if and when they can do so without interfering with the military’s formal inquiry. (ABC News)

Warner pleaded for a “sense of calmness” as the military conducts their investigation, but Murtha contended, “I understand what happened, but I don’t excuse what happened.”
(ABC News)

Investigations were not complete, but Murtha understood what had happened?

And now, AFTER investigations, we get:

“An investigating officer in the case against a U.S. Marine accused of murdering civilians in Haditha, Iraq, has recommended that charges against him be dropped, concluding that the government’s allegations that the Marine executed a group of men are “unsupported and incredible.”
(Washington Post)

IF, this is the outcome, then these Marines are not the cold blooded murderers that Murtha “understood” them to be and he was wrong to tell the world they were murderers before he knew all of the facts.

I don’t care if he resigns or not. I don’t care if he apologizes or not.
Our country is getting ready to go through a lot worse in the next 4+ years and a politician trying to score political points pales in comparison.

But wrong is wrong and Murtha was wrong.

“That is the way you support the soldiers: supporting the President’s politics and policies on the war. Anytime they deviate from that, they’re traitors.”

It is not about the President and his policies; I have said that in a previous comment about hating Bush. It is about how a congressman, who voted for the troops to go to Iraq, turns on the troops and says: “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood…These were wanton killings done in cold blood”. He is rendering a verdict before the trial. And, I saw that Congressman Kline made conclusions about what happened at Haditha before reports were finalized and hearings were convened. That is bullshit! Kline is wrong!! As is anyone leaking this story; regardless of whether it is the soldiers, the press, or Pentagon officials. It is wrong!!

So, stop with this partisan bullsh*t and come out and defend these soldiers presumption of innocence and demand that Murtha be forced to apologize or resign!!!

Ahhh…. rahdigly solely determining which rhetoric and analysis is “partisan bullsh*t”

Priceless.

Leatheranhk:
“Adrienne, as usual, wonderful posts.”

Thank you. Very kind of you to say, and right back at you, sir.

“If a few of them snap and do something horrible, is it so very surprising?”

No, it isn’t surprising at all. And that is exactly what the majority of Murtha’s comments on this incident have been about. As AP astutely mentioned, our soldiers weren’t trained to be police officers, but were trained for combat missions. Therefore, none of us should be shocked when and if any of them (most especially the Marines) suddenly turn into cold blooded murderers from the first instant they are attacked in the midst of trying to do peacekeeping patrols in insurgent stronghold territories.

“I would never support death or life in prison for any of these boys, no matter what they did, because I blame the government for putting them there.”

I have to agree with you here. I think they should serve time in jail for these murders (if proven), but it should not be for life. It isn’t their fault that they’ve been put into such an untenable situation by a government guided by chickenhawks that don’t know the first damn thing about waging war — and who haven’t even the sense to listen to what any of their generals have been telling them all along.

“What does bother me is the attempt at a cover-up. If this does prove true, I hope we come down on those bastards like a ton of bricks.”

Again, I agree. And I believe that being Marines themselves, Murtha and Kline both felt the need to make public statements about this incident due to what smacks as the attempt to cover-up. Because I’m certain it appeared to them (as it appears to many of us) that the screwed up way this administration has chosen to wage their wars could actually damage and subvert the core values of The Marine Corps, and that should not be allowed to happen. The long running tradition of honor, courage and commitment of our Marines (our proudest, best, bravest), or those of any of our armed forces, should not be allowed to fade away merely because a deluded, moronic, and clearly callous leader has been the Commander in Chief of our Military.

“While Murtha may have been inflamitory in his remarks, he wants what I want: to bring them home. That I support.”

That’s what I support too, but I think his inflammatory remarks were, and still are, entirely necessary. It’ll be two years in November that Murtha first submitted the resolution to remove our armed forces from Iraq, and things have only gotten more insanely untenable, and whole lot bloodier for them since.

Again, my thanks to you, and my best to your nephew. I appreciate his service.

Stephen, excellent, very well written posts in this thread — even more so than usual.

“The “they”, you were referring to, includes the military by the way; the ones that VOLUNTEERED and RE-ENLISTED for this mission.”

Does that they include those National Guard troops that have seen their tours extended again and again?

“Yet, the “arm-chair” generals (bloggers who haven’t served) don’t want to hear that, mainly b/c it gets in the way of Blaming Bush!!!”

So what you’re saying is that anyone that has served gets a pass, and only their opinion counts?

Bush’s desk is where the buck is supposed to stop, but from what we have seen, the buck doesn’t even slow down any where near his desk.

Murtha said he “understood what happened… but he didn’t condone it”.
Sounds to me like he understands that there is no on/off switch that can be thrown at a moments notice in the “fog of war”.
Murtha’s comment sounds like he understands that shit sometimes happens in the pressure cooker we have placed these Marines in, but that doesn’t mean their actions were right and proper.

kctim-
Nothing about what you argue speaks to the degree of the investigation’s completeness. It’s one thing to suggest that Murtha’s information was insufficient for his conclusions, it’s yet another to say that for sure. The whole point of the presumption of innocence is that folks making an accusation are not omniscient. That includes people making accusations about Murtha.

Note, for example, the singular number of that Washington Post excerpt: “the marine”. One guy. What logically necessitates that his guy’s innocence implies that of the others, especially if this is the guy who was involved in a separate incident at Haditha? That is the logical fallacy at the heart of this article, and the true target of Liberals like myself. The right, from good intentions or cynical, wishes to sweep this all under the rug, wishes to pretend that this and other symptoms of the problems of this war simply don’t exist. Unfortunately, you can’t pretend awaqy realities on the ground, and they remain to plague those troops that we commit to this war.

Rahdigly-
This story was not leaked by these men. It was out in March; they commented in May. You want to know something creepy? I heard something about this in December of the previous year.

The reporting on this was already out in the Arab Media. If it was a secret, it was poorly kept, and mostly kept from the American people. How many of these poorly kept secrets are in play? How many things are Americans not hearing about that affects how others regard them as a people? We have a right to know what is done in our name.

We also have a right to know what this war is doing to our people, what it’s driving them to. I think it would also be be informative to know what kind of conditions the Kilo Company Marines themselves had to live under According to Wikipedia:

On June 20, 2006, the BBC ran an article alleging that conditions in the Kilo company headquarters were “feral.” The four hundred men were based at a dam three miles from Haditha. The camp was described as a “decaying rabbit-warren.” As a result, unofficial shacks had been set up outside the building to house Marines. Oliver Poole, a reporter who visited the camp, called the conditions filthy and disgusting. He said:

The fact that the officers had let conditions deteriorate to the level in which where people living [sic] in such basic environment, that says something,” he said. “Where were the officers keeping the standards that the US military keeps in the field?” [54]

Conditions in Haditha itself were known to have been deteriorating under militant rule, and attacks on U.S. troops as well as executions of suspected informants were common.[55]

Even today, conditions on the Marine Forward Operating Base still have not improved. The base located near Haditha Dam is regarded by Marines as one of the worst places to be stationed due to living conditions. There is no running water, so Marines who need a shower are required to use a water bottle as a “field shower.”

This is one of a number of reasons that I find it galling to be told to support the troops out there by keeping quiet, and not dissenting. What service do I do these people by keeping quiet about what’s happening to them? From the beginning of the war, I have shown these people the respect due them by not being silent about the ordeal this president has put many of them through. I had hoped early on that by point these things out, we could push the President to take care of these things, but I watched in dismay as this President stood apart in his own little world, and let these things continue on.

To me, it’s beneath us that we would maintain our troop levels at an insufficient level to win, if that is our goal. It’s beneath us to send our soldiers out to battle riding in vehicles retrofitted with scrap iron, sandbags, plywood, and compromised ballistic glass. It’s beneath us to allow our soldiers to be quartered in Rabbit Warrens without running water. It’s beneath us to have them coming home to insufficient health and mental care, to have those staying in Apartment’s sharing their residence with roaches, mold, and putting up with walls, ceilings and other parts of these homes in disrepair.

We are dedicating two thirds of a trillion dollars to our defense, and it doesn’t buy us better than this? What good are all these arms we’re buying for a Cold War long past, if they don’t help us win wars in the now?

Murtha merely pointed out what these soldiers had been reduced to, and if you look at the quote, you’ll see how my comments about Bush’s management of this war relates to all this.

We cannot ask our soldiers to do the impossible in an impossible situation, watch their comrades die, and not see men snap as the worse these men see in their lives lies before them. What the right offers these troops is not support, it’s a continuation of their failure to support them, along with more secrecy to hide their failure from those who might take sides against the adminstration if they knew the full extent of the foul-ups of this administration.

Stepehen et al

This is the difference between conservatives and liberals. We all have our blind spots. We conservatives give US marines and soldiers the benefit of the doubt over terrorists. Your side gives the terrorists the benefit of the doubt. Maybe we are wrong, but at least we know the who are friends are.

Murtha is not keeping faith with his country or his our soldiers and marines. Like Benedict Arnold, he may have been a hero is times past, but like Benedict Arnold, he threw that away in the hopes of political gain. He no longer deserves our respect.

We should give our own people the benefit of the doubt. IF they are guilty, we should AND do punish them. But we certainly should not be leading the radical villagers, torch in hand.

I cannot think of any reason why anybody would defend Murtha in this case. WHY does he jump to the worst conclusions? I would think even if he thought it was true, he would act more in sorrow than anger and he would want to wait for the facts. He would not be so eager. A partisan jumps to conclusions about his enemies. We know who Murtha considered the enemy. That is also a difference between conservatives and liberals.

“We conservatives give US marines and soldiers the benefit of the doubt over terrorists. Your side gives the terrorists the benefit of the doubt”

“We know who Murtha considered the enemy. That is also a difference between conservatives and liberals.”

Really?

Who’s jumping to conclusions now?

Perhaps the difference between hyperbole and bullshit isn’t really that great.

Both Demecraps and Republicraps have both done a PISS POOR job at running this country. We have a blow hard Murtha calling o group of Marines cold blooded Murders and a President who calls our military pussies both need to appolligize to our military forces, also all you A HOLES who defend these two butt heads.

Jack, agreed. In reviewing the comments it is hard to find where the support is. There are plenty of comments for due process, however, open support is not evident above.

What’s so hard about saying “These kids deserve better, and if they made a mistake they’ll be punished.”

It would seem to me that apologizing for these soldiers would fit with the Liberal mantra about the “circumstances” under which these soldiers were placed. Like excusing a criminal for a bad childhood, or a politician that had to surpress their sexual orientation. It would seem to me that the first thing Liberals would do would point ot the circumstances under which these soldiers were placed. Certainly fits with the continued opinion of Bush and the administration. That their failed policy “I’ll say it Kim-Sue” is what put these poor boys into a situation like this.

Where is the outright frustration with blaming the soldier … it is the establishment right? Or is it left?

One of the first things to ask yourself when you are angry:

What have I lost?

It is the loss that causes anger, especially in a person like Murtha. His anger shows me that he is a true Marine. I have no question of his patriotism, care for the military and ethics.

Rocky

We know what Murtha said. Your comparison between his and my hyperbole is exactly correct. I am a partisan. I am against Murtha. I have indeed drawn a conclusion that puts him in a poor light. I am acting against those I oppose. Murtha, behaving in the same way, acted against those he opposes - those young Marines. I understand his behavior and I can do nothing but deplore that he has chosen them as targets in his partisan hyperbole.

We can acknowledge his former service. It is a tragedy how far he has fallen. But Murtha no longer deserves our respect.

I wonder if Eagle and his ilk recognize the irony in declaring Murtha guilty until he proves himself innocent?

Somehow I doubt it.

Jack, what makes you partisan is not that you don’t agree with Murtha or think he is wrong. What make you partisan is the fact that you don’t mention John Kline’s comments. Equally as deplorable as Murtha’s but he is a Repub. Is he not also opposed to the Marines?

Jack, (obviously not Jack Matel)

“I have indeed drawn a conclusion that puts him in a poor light.”

On what evidence?
Murtha may have crossed the line, but he didn’t make this statement merely to make his fellow Marines look bad, or to make the terrorists look good. He saw a flaw. Perhaps he exploited it for some hidden agenda, but I doubt it.
He is a Marine. Once a Marine, always a Marine. Always.

I have no horse in this race, I am not, as you say you are, a partisan, except when it comes to the United States, and how we are wasting the lives of our men and women in America’s military.
If Murtha’s comments in any way help to change the way our military is being abused, I’d say more power to him.
You guys on the right want to play semantics.

Murtha called it as he saw it.

Rocky

It’s just me. Murtha in this case just really makes me mad. I really do not understand his motivation if it is not partisanship. If it is that, I have to deplore how he has chosen to make these young marines pawns in his game.

Think of how you might react if you suspected someone you had respected had done something very bad. Would you immediately express the most extreme conclusion, or would you wait until you were really sure of your facts. Would you not give the benefit of a doubt? That is what I would expect of a man of integrity. It says a lot that he would jump to the attack. It shows his true motivation.

I have criticized Murtha much less than he criticized those Marines. I have expressed the sense of tragedy that a person who was a good man has gone bad. I would expect Murtha to at least extend the same benefit of the doubt to the Marines that I extend to someone who I am trying to criticize.

Rocky, let’s me perfectly open. I do cannot think of any scenario that would allow Murtha to be both a thoughtful man worthy to be in public office AND a patriot. Either he spoke out without thought for the consequences. We could forgive him if he appologized. OR he spoke out in partisan calculation, making the Marines collateral damage. Either way, it is not good.

Jack-
His motivation is easy to understand if you leave out the partisanship. He’s sick of the way this war is being run, and the effect it’s having on the soldiers.

If you can’t understand that, it’s only because this whole thing has been sold on the notion that protecting the troops means covering up for their mistakes so the world doesn’t think less of them. But is that protection for them? not really. It’s protection for the policies and the failure of leadership that gives them lethal force, but little guidance or help in its proper employment.

Benedict Arnold committed actual treason, helped the British in the Revolutionary war. Only by the convoluted logic of Republican’s imaged-based notion of policy, does Murtha qualify. The logic basically has to be that any pessimism about the war is a betrayal of the troops. Never mind that this pessimism is so broadly defined as to include realistic, or disappointed commentary on progress in the war.

In short, this is the way betrayal is defined in an age of military affairs where the dominant party on the matter defined the politics of war based on the power of positive thinking. But positive thinking that doesn’t have certain checks and balances can lead to unrealistic choices which further positive thinking-based attempts to win things only makes worse. You cannot take a positive spin out of every bad war situation. Sometimes a loss of faith in one course of action a war leaves you open to another alternative.

Trouble is, being open to alternatives has been defined as an ideological weakness by the Republicans, especially when the alternatives resemble Democratic, or worse, Clintonian policy.

This war has not been lost by heedless pessimism. It’s been lost by a narrow-minded approach that mistakes willpower for strategic momentum.

Stephen

So he is sick of the war. So he makes young Marines the victims. This doesn’t make it better. His anger is displaced. Being angry is easy. Being angry at the right person, to the right extent and for the right reason is hard. Murtha fails. He should either know better or be better or both. He is an experienced man acting in a situation that allows thought and reflection. He is not a young Marine in a confused and life threatening situation who has to make a quick decision. There is no excuse for his behavior. This is not about his anger or about the war; it is about his tragic flaws.

So, stop with this partisan bullsh*t and come out and defend these soldier’s presumption of innocence and demand that Murtha be forced to apologize or resign!!!

“Ahhh… rahdigly solely determining which rhetoric and analysis is “partisan bullsh*t”

Sounds like you are taking the side of Murtha; rather than the troop’s “presumption of innocence”. Suprising, seeing as how you are a big fan of the ACLU.*****

“Does that they include those National Guard troops that have seen their tours extended again and again?”

Yes, it does. Sucks when some of you oppose the troops, doesn’t it?!

I wonder if Eagle and his ilk recognize the irony in declaring Murtha guilty until he proves himself innocent?

Ahh, yes. There is that “ilk” comment that triggered a blast from the past. So, does Murtha qualify as “bad as the enemy” with his comments, huh, Rock?!!!!!

Two things rahdigly,

1) I don’t see how a draft makes a difference. Our government is putting out boys through hell, does it matter if they were drafted or they volunteered? Not a bit.

2) I have talked with my nephew about how things are there. He got to see one of his comrades electrocuted by a boobytrapped cow carcass in the middle of the road. He has said that he doesn’t want to come home to visit because if he did, he probably couldn’t make himself go back. He said that he loves letter and e-mails, but doesn’t want pictures because they hurt too much. I don’t know who you’ve talked to who’s been to Iraq and say it’s not that bad, but they sure as hell don’t serve with my nephew.

L

Leather, once again, as I have stated before, some on this blog need to take off the partisan blinders and stop making this about Bush. This is not about Bush. This is about how Murtha said: “Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood…These were wanton killings done in cold blood” without them even having a trial or investigation. It is absurd and every American should urge Murtha to either apologize or resign.

As far as your nephew is concerned, I am sorry to hear about that; the enemy are a bunch of sick psycho paths that will boobytrap anything and even burn children. I will say this, you can tell him to converse with others in his battalion; they will certainly take him under their wing and show him the ropes. I’m sure many of them know what the real situation is like and, let me tell ya, it’s not like the MSM reports it. The two clients I had, one Marine and one Army Ranger; they both agreed that the mission is not finished and they want to complete it. The friends I referred to said that the enemy attacks convoys so the death toll rises and the media will report it; winning the propraganda war to sway the American public here at home. That is their words; not mine.

As for the draft; the point is that, in Vietnam, they had no choice but to fight, today’s military has a choice to enlist or re-enlist in wartime.

rahdigly,

“Yes, it does. Sucks when some of you oppose the troops, doesn’t it?!”

Just who opposes the troops?

Surely, you can do better than that.

“Ahh, yes. There is that “ilk” comment that triggered a blast from the past. So, does Murtha qualify as “bad as the enemy” with his comments, huh, Rock?!!!!!”

Actually my comment was “worse than the enemy”.
If you want to denigrate someone, at least have the courtesy to get the quote right.

And the answer to that is no.
Apparently you are still cherry-picking comments that fit into your agenda, or you would have allready read what I have to say concerning Murtha.

Jack,

“So he makes young Marines the victims.”

He didn’t make the Marines his victims.
He tried to show the Marines as the victims of a system that caused this debacle in the first place.
Had Murtha named these Marines, I might tend to agree with your point, but he didn’t.
Murtha’s point was the system is the problem, and these Marines are as much victims of the system as the Iraqis they have been accused of killing.

If this administration had the stones to enact a draft when it would have useful, we wouldn’t even be having this debate.

So, stop with this partisan bullsh*t and come out and defend these soldiers presumption of innocence and demand that Murtha be forced to apologize or resign!!!

I can do the presumption part. These soldiers should not be punished without a fair trail.

I don’t think Murtha should resign. You guys need a “liberal” scapegoat, and it may as well be him. Go get ‘im!

I put liberal in quotes because Murtha is pretty conservative. He is a pro-life and has an “A” rating from the NRA.

Rocky

I still do not think that flies. If someone says a murderer is a victim of the system, they are still saying he is a murderer. Murtha was just wrong. He is often just wrong. As Woody implies, he is only loved by liberals because he hates Bush. His history is that of a corrupt bully. And Woody is also right that it is easy to find fault with him and attack those who support his outrages. So why don’t you guys just say NO to Murtha. He consistently does the wrong thing. You don’t need guys like him and neither do we.

“If this administration had the stones to enact a draft when it would have useful, we wouldn’t even be having this debate.”

Yeah, instead the debate would be about sending someone’s child to a war that people don’t like. Then, Bush’s “stones” would be busted by the anti-war groups; and that just ain’t gonna happen my friend! The military volunteered and they will complete the mission.

“Actually my comment was “worse than the enemy”. If you want to denigrate someone, at least have the courtesy to get the quote right. And the answer to that is no. “

Same difference, Rock; I see you are still playing the semantics game. You did said that “the comments of Ann Coulter and her ilk are worse than the enemy that blows up women and children and cuts off their heads”. Then, you wouldn’t answer (directly) if what Rosie Odonnell said (about British Hostages) fit into the same category. Now, you have (yet) another chance to answer (directly) whether or not Murtha’s comments are (indeed) “worse than the enemy”! [Jeporady theme]: do,do,do,do, do, do, do….

You see Jack, that is the difference between us.

I believe that, right or wrong, Murtha is entitled to his opinion, just as you are entitled to yours.

The partisan hacks on the right believe anyone that isn’t in lock-step with their black and white beliefs on the way the world is should be pilloried, and made an example of.

Our fearless leaders have asked the American people to accept a “world wide war on terror” with no sacrifice, except to their privacy, and oh, by the way, here’s a few tax cuts, to pave the way.

The brunt of this gambit is being carried by the very few whose lives are on the line every minute of every day, while the morons in chief concentrate on the “gee whizz” idea of creating a democracy out of thin air, instead of actually doing what it takes to win this “war on terror”.

Through all of this blather, I am amazed that incidents like this one aren’t more common.

Murtha knows what these few face every day, and is one of the few that actually do.

rahdigly,

“Now, you have (yet) another chance to answer (directly) whether or not Murtha’s comments are (indeed) “worse than the enemy”! [Jeporady theme]: do,do,do,do, do, do, do….”

In your gleefull attempt to yet again put your thumb in some one’s eye you missed it.

It’s all the Democrats’ fault. If only they’d clapped louder, we wouldn’t be in this mess.

With the democratic lead congress trailing GW by 5 points I think you democrats better get something together here. The crap that Murtha pulled probably isn’t setting right with some people and the Marine that got the charges were dropped, I hope he does all that he could to see that Murtha does not get elected again ever seeing how he is form PA.

KAP,

“The crap that Murtha pulled probably isn’t setting right with some people and the Marine that got the charges were dropped,”

This was one Marine out of how many accused?

KAP

“President who calls our military pussies”

KAP i haven’t seen or heard this comment. where did you see or hear it ? just curious.

ElliottBay

“I wonder if Eagle and his ilk recognize the irony in declaring Murtha guilty until he proves himself innocent?”

he made the statement publicly. what is there to prove ? you either think it’s inappropriate or you don’t.

Rocky

Murtha did not know the facts. He knew he did not know them. That often keeps people from speaking their minds quite so unequivocally. Not Murtha. I understand that a partisan spins and he is a partisan. I have no trouble with that. I disagree with his lack of concern for those Marines he ran over in his rush to attack the president’s policies.

I know you are a reasonable person and I guess we are just seeing this differently.

Jack:
“So he is sick of the war.”

Aren’t we all?
The thing that gets you is that Murtha was 100% behind Bushco in the beginning, but finally reached a breaking point. When he finally realized the moronic way they were going to run this war indefinitely, he had to bail on it. Sickened and disgusted by the shabby treatment of the soldiers, he declared that he knew we wouldn’t, and indeed couldn’t, win the war the way it was being commanded by the president. After hearing about the massacre in Haditha, he made comments about how these Marines had clearly snapped, because of how they were being mistreated and neglected by our military. Obviously the military thought they had snapped too, and were in the wrong — that murder had taken place — or they wouldn’t have paid out all that compensation money after only a month. Murtha reiterated that this is the kind of thing that can be expected with the way that Bush has chosen to run his war.
This is what you can’t take — because he was a hawkish guy and well respected by everyone in the military, and on both sides of the political aisle. He was solidly with the GOP at the beginning, but he turned away from this war in anger and disgust at your leadership’s complete incompetence and neglect. The reason you loyal Bushies hate him is because you are incapable of admitting to your leaders incompetence, and that makes it easy for you to dismiss the neglect of our soldiers as nothing but a political attack.

Thankfully however, you are in a very small minority these days. The vast majority of the American people are on to the incompetence of this leadership. And they don’t approve of the terrible neglect of our soldiers. Not at all.

“So he makes young Marines the victims.”

Murtha and Kline both commented, but only Murtha is attacked. Because he’s a Democrat who criticized the president in no uncertain terms.

Bush is the one who made those young Marines the victims of a situation that caused them to lose it and kill a bunch of civilians, including women, children, and old people. In their homes. Well aimed shots, at point blank range, directly in the heads and chests. Do their lives or the manner of their deaths mean nothing to you people? Why the hell would our military quickly acknowledge their deaths as murder if nothing wrong took place?

No matter how the trials on this come down, you cannot escape this glaring fact: Our military has already acknowledged that it was a massacre of innocents that day in Haditha. Even if not a single one of the Marines who were involved ever serve a day of jail time for what took place, the blood money has already been paid.

Rocky:
“This was one Marine out of how many accused?”

Eight were charged in connection with the incident, three of them with murder.

As Woody implies, he is only loved by liberals because he hates Bush.

Say what?

He is liked by some and disliked by others because he is a highly credible anti-war voice. Guys who “hate Bush” (=want a drastic change in US Iraq policy), as you would put it, are a dime a dozen. The fact that he is a Marine who was praised by Dick Cheney is what it makes him such a prime target.

That’s OK. There are so many people on both sides of the aisle who “hate Bush” now that he is quite dispensible.

Adrienne

Everybody is sick of war from the minute one starts. Nobody is pro-war. We have different interpretations of the alternatives.

Re Murtha & Kline - I told you that I deplore what Kline said (and I understand he appologized). If you and the the others would just as clearly deplore Murtha, we would have had nothing more to write about on this thread.

They both did wrong. One appologized.