The news from Haditha, Iraq, made me sick in my stomach.
On May 26, 2006, the Los Angeles Times reported:
Marines from Camp Pendleton wantonly killed unarmed Iraqi civilians, including women and children, and then tried to cover up the slayings in the insurgent stronghold of Haditha, military investigations have found.Officials who have seen the findings of the investigations said the filing of criminal charges, including some murder counts, was expected, which would make the Nov. 19 incident the most serious case of alleged U.S. war crimes in Iraq.…
Article comments
176 - Christopher Rose
Dave, too much knowledge is definitely a dangerous thing in your case. You know more than you can process and are currently locked into a false and overly rigid mindset.
Keep dreaming the impossible dream. You really are deluding yourself.
A) I don't have Eurocentric prejudices. Prejudice and excessive nationalism are your gig not mine.
B) Europe's system is bankrupt? Spoken with all the arrogance and ignorance only an accountant could muster.
C) I think living in a walled compound is causig you to have delusions of grandeur. You've clearly lost the ability to think outside your own little box.
177 - Carter
You people you people you people...
You don't get it. You sit here and talk about rules. You talk in terms of technicalities and morality and protocols, as if guarding a convoy is a matter of following the agenda in a meeting.
It isn't. What it is is getting into a Hummvee and hoping that this time - this time - nobody gets killed. And then, somebody gets killed. And others will yell, "That's that! They just do this to us and we're supposed to smile and take it!?!"
It's quaint really.
I didn't compare Marines to Nazis - I contrasted them with Nazis. Both Nazis and Marines exist on a moral scale - the same scale that, at the far enlightened end, holds Buddha and Jesus Christ and so forth. It's a means of measuring.
But no matter what you say, the basic point is your arguments are technicalistic in nature but they simply don't address this fact:
That you want these young Marines to just drive in their convoys to resupply civilian infrastructure in Iraq and die when attacked and do nothing about it.
To this you will regressively argue about how the US shouldn't be in Iraq and all that. As if there weren't a job to do. And to justify the morally inexcusable position of leaving Saddam Hussein in power when we had the chance to remove him. (Why not some other dictator?, you'll ask. Answer: You gotta start somewhere!)
(By the way, if the US weren't in Iraq what do you think Afghanistan would look like now? I venture the guess it would be rife with Saudi and Syrian suicide bombers blowing up Nato convoys at every possible chance. Iraq just happens to be a shorter trip to make.)
178 - Christopher Rose
Bliffle, if you're joining Mr Nalle's US-centric delusion, how about you put some factual bones on your empty and arrogant assertions. That or put your head back where it belongs...
179 - Christopher Rose
And Saddam's violence?
Now let me think, which government was it that armed Saddam with chemical and biological weapons in the first place?
Apparently it's alright to create and support despotic murderers when they are being used as surrogates to attack yet more enemies, in this case Iran.
When they then go on to act independently and use these weapons for their own purposes, something NOBODY in this country's government apparently could foresee, they become tyrants.
It is the inept political decisions of a powerful but naive country that is the direct cause of the current situation. The USA's actions in this region have been even worse than the previous international efforts and it's about time it started to act more in keeping with its stature and not its immaturity.
180 - John Sara
Did somebody mention the word massacre?
Lets not get off track. You don't have to wait for the outcome of the two separate enquiries to not be disgusted by what has happened to woman and children in this instance.
Whilst we're on the topic of Iraq just remember how you were fooled into invading the nation in the first place. WMD comes to mind yet after this lame argument a complete turnaround and suddenly its the liberation of the Iraqis and the removing of power of the despot Saddam.
Good reason for a war?
Who made America the Police of the world?
Stop looking for excuses after the fact in trying to justify this illegal, immoral and unethical war.
PS
There are other despots ruling nations and committing atrocities throughout the world.
More people are suffering in Sudan at present but as they say, "No food, No OIL, No hope."
Pakistan has harbord terrorist, traded in nuclear arms and information and committed genocide but they happen to be an ally. How typically hypocritical.
181 - troll
*Troll, are you seriously asking for a source on Saddam's record of institutionalized murder and genocide? I find it hard to believe you've missed out on it.*
just trying to get a handle on your numbers - about 1/2 million over 40 years of suppressed anti-Bathist rebellions seemed arbitrary (and low)
...which I see it was
thanks for the links
troll
182 - Dave Nalle
Sorry Troll, no one was counting heads when they threw people in the mass graves. Like everyone else I have to go with the estimates from the human rights organizations.
Dave
183 - Dave Nalle
Now let me think, which government was it that armed Saddam with chemical and biological weapons in the first place?
Apparently it's alright to create and support despotic murderers when they are being used as surrogates to attack yet more enemies, in this case Iran.
That's the way the 'great game' is played, Christopher. You're naive if you think otherwise. And trying to blame us for arming Saddam is a perfect example of your eurocentric delusion. Guilt goes to the person who used the arms, not those who made them or sold them. This self-serving denial of individual responsibility is EXACTLY what is wrong with the current European worldview.
When they then go on to act independently and use these weapons for their own purposes, something NOBODY in this country's government apparently could foresee, they become tyrants.
Wrong, and again a perfect example of that degenerate european worldview. They don't need advanced arms to be tyrants. You can be a tyrant with a knife or a club. The weapons don't make the tyrants, the tyrants just choose to use the weapons to execute their tyrrany and they'd use whatever weapons are available.
It is the inept political decisions of a powerful but naive country that is the direct cause of the current situation. The USA's actions in this region have been even worse than the previous international efforts and it's about time it started to act more in keeping with its stature and not its immaturity.
The US has been the only major nation willing to take any responsibility at all for the perilous international situation. A false concept of 'mature' indifference which results in innaction is the hallmark of the European nations and it's disgraceful.
Every comment you post proves how exactly correct my assessment of Europe's status is.
Dave
184 - MCH
"As for the value of things, nothing has value if you have to give up fundamental freedoms to purchase it."
- Dave Nalle
Typed courageously on his keyboard from the safety of his fortified compound...
185 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Strikes me that these actions of American soldiers are only making a mockery of the "Iraqi" regime. They acted as combatants on their own territiory rather than the trustees of a developing government. It also strikes me that the time is approaching when the Iraqi government will be calling for the withdrawal of the Americans - precisely because of these kinds of actions.
I'm not sitting on a high horse here and condemning anything - the nature of the enemy tha Americans face in Iraq is vicious and unrelenting. Q Bit's article does quote the phrase, "the insurgent stronghold of Haditha." But Iraq is not the States and the Americans are there on questionable grounds at best.
186 - Q Bit
#167 by Dave:
Now Saddam is the benchmark?
187 - Richard Brodie
If there are less Iraqis being killed now than under Hussein's reign, then we did the wrong thing. Personally I hope Hussein manages to regain power. He knew how to keep the Sunni minority in charge and was keeping the dangerous Shiites in check. And he was making a positive contribution to humanity by limiting the number of Muslims. The fewer Muslims there are in the world the fewer Islamic terrorists there will be. And Sunnis are content with limiting their killing to other Muslim factions, unlike the obnoxious Shiites who like to make trouble for the non-Muslim world.
And it is baloney to try and justify Bush's globalistic military adventurism by saying that we gave the Iraqis "freedom". Even if we had, they wouldn't know what to do with it, and would soon enough revert to their barbaric ways. But the fact is, all we gave them is the chance to set up a copycat version of the corrupt modern American welfare state system, with all its stupid departments and regulatory agencies, which are the antithesis of real liberty.
188 - Christopher Rose
#183 In which David Nalle exposes the supreme arrogance in the hearts of some Americans. Being pro-weapons generally, whether on the streets of the USA or in the wider world, this extremist can not see the simple fact that people can't use weapons they don't have.
And pointing this out is apparently an "eurocentric delusion". What monumental ignorance and stupidity! You can cling to this psychological safety blanket all you want Dave but it's not going to change a thing; "That's the way the great game is played" indeed. What childish pre-war terminology you choose to support your rampant egomania!
Now the view of 350 million people is simply a "degenerate European worldview". Truly there are none so blind as those that can not see. Frankly, I'd rather trust Jet's currently poor state of vision than the clouded view of an intellectually corrupt fanatic like you.
If we Europeans are now to be dismissed as extreme and degenerate, that pretty much leaves the USA isolated and alone. You don't trust Canada, you have nothing but contempt for the whole of South America, so you're reduced to South Korea and Japan as your supporters? What a deluded pile of political drivel you spout Nalle.
The main perilous world situation that I see is that some over-confident and massively ignorant young country is flexing its muscles and showing offensive contempt even towards its allies.
You want to step out of your little walled compund a liitle more often, mate, you're seeing dangers and enemies where there are none and now mistaking your friends for enemies too.
Truly your country is doomed if this paranoid delusion becomes the majority view. Hopefully the rest of your adopted country will prove to be a little more grounded in reality than the delusional mindset you are clinging to so desperately...
189 - Dave Nalle
#183 In which David Nalle exposes the supreme arrogance in the hearts of some Americans. Being pro-weapons generally, whether on the streets of the USA or in the wider world, this extremist can not see the simple fact that people can't use weapons they don't have.
When you come up with the magic button to make all weapons disappear let me know. Until then prohibition will never keep weapons out of the hands of terrorists and criminals and people will continue to do violence with whatever weapons are at hand.
And pointing this out is apparently an "eurocentric delusion". What monumental ignorance and stupidity!
Indeed, clinging to the European delusion that violence can be controlled by attempting to ban weapons is monumentally ignorant and stupid.
You can cling to this psychological safety blanket all you want Dave but it's not going to change a thing; "That's the way the great game is played" indeed. What childish pre-war terminology you choose to support your rampant egomania!
Pre war? Pre WW1 even.
Now the view of 350 million people is simply a "degenerate European worldview". Truly there are none so blind as those that can not see. Frankly, I'd rather trust Jet's currently poor state of vision than the clouded view of an intellectually corrupt fanatic like you.
You know as well as I do that not every one of the people of Europe subscribe to the corrupt and decadent ideology of the ruling bureaucratic and intellectual classes. This has become very clear as extremist movements sprout up all over the place in reaction against the degeneracy of the established system there. People are really pissed off about the way things are going in the EU. You can choose not to see or acknowledge it, but it's true.
If we Europeans are now to be dismissed as extreme and degenerate, that pretty much leaves the USA isolated and alone. You don't trust Canada, you have nothing but contempt for the whole of South America, so you're reduced to South Korea and Japan as your supporters? What a deluded pile of political drivel you spout Nalle.
I've got no particular love for the South Koreans of the Japanese, actually, I feel much the same way about Canada as I do about Europe, and I haven't ever expressed an opinion on South America. The problem with Europe is not the people - they're a fine bunch of folks for the most part - it's the entrenched bureaucratic class which runs the EU and most of the major nations with little or no accountability.
The main perilous world situation that I see is that some over-confident and massively ignorant young country is flexing its muscles and showing offensive contempt even towards its allies.
What 'young' country would that be? The US has a proven governmental system which has been in place continuously for substantially longer than the governments of France, Italy, Germany and Spain.
You want to step out of your little walled compund a liitle more often, mate, you're seeing dangers and enemies where there are none and now mistaking your friends for enemies too.
Europeans are my friends. Eurosocialism is not.
Truly your country is doomed if this paranoid delusion becomes the majority view. Hopefully the rest of your adopted country will prove to be a little more grounded in reality than the delusional mindset you are clinging to so desperately...
You really are desperately confused. You also display the amazing arrogant parochialism which is uniquely European. With every comment you make you just prove me right.
Dave
190 - Christopher Rose
"You really are desperately confused. You also display the amazing arrogant parochialism which is uniquely [American]. With every comment you make you just prove me right."
Right back at you...
191 - Dave Nalle
Maybe Europe and America are closer than we realize...
Dave
192 - Christopher Rose
Correction: closer than you realize...
;-)
193 - Richard Brodie
Dave, Christopher is blind to claim that Europe is some kind of wonderful socialistic paradise (does he perhaps have a vested interest as one of the EU "intellectual and bureaucratic elite"?), but you are also blind to claim that
the US has a proven governmental system which has been in place continuously for substantially longer than the governments of France, Italy, Germany and Spain.
America has a bloated governmental system, with a nightmarish, ever burgeoning mountain of laws, rules, and regulations varying from useless to downright destructive; a constitutionally illegal Fourth Branch of lobbyists through which industries (like the pharmceutical) are able to coopt and virtually run the very agencies (like the FDA) ostensibly set up to "regulate" them; regulatory agencies, which are part of the executive branch, allowed to essentially legislate by implementing non-democratic "rules" (laws) inspired by lobbyists hired by big corporations, and designed to stiffle competition; an onerous, privacy-invading taxing system that the founding fathers would have abhorred; etc.
We are just as bad, in our own deluded way, as Europe is - and just as stupid, to be swinging the gates wide open to alien invaders who will, in both cases, finish off the self-destruction of our respective civilizations.
194 - Dave Nalle
Richard, I agree that our system is getting more and more encrusted with crap. But the basic structure remains sound and it does continue to work in general as it has for 200 years.
We also handle immigration a great deal better than the Europeans do, but that's a separate issue.
Dave
195 - Richard Brodie
I agree that our system is getting more and more encrusted with crap.
I'm sorry, Dave, but we're not talking here about a little surface "encrustation". The mountain of legislative "crap" is so high and so deep and so massive that nothing short of a second American Revolution would be capable of clearing it all away and giving this country a fresh chance. And of course that ain't gonna happen.
You got it right when you said to Chris:
Maybe Europe and America are closer than we realize...
and I'd say the United States is an even worse variant on the theme of bureaucracy run wild. The only thing that makes us SEEM not quite as bad, YET, is the momentum we are still running on as a result of the incredible amount of wealth that was generated during our first century and a half when we were still economically free of the stiffling requirement to support a huge and obstructive bureaucratic class, and welfare system. But that momentum will eventually come to a dead stop.
the basic structure remains sound and it does continue to work in general as it has for 200 years.
Our system bears hardly any resemblance at at to what it was in the early years of the Republic.
196 - air industry
Since many month I was forgetting my anti-american feeling (no WMD, not the good country to attack - guantanamo - abu grahib) , after all, we - people of the rest of the world- have our own problems.....I'm in europe...
But since I have learn this story of massacre, and now that I read your reactions here,
I have only one thing to say:
american people who justify the massacre/shot in the head children-in-line & all ( Haditha and the last one) : YOU MAKE ME SICK
197 - Dave Nalle
Richard, we do still have the Constitution, and every once in a while we remember to refer back to it. That trend could be expanded on and who knows where it would lead us. The point being that the nucleus of a decent, federal republic still exists under neath all the corruption.
As for becoming like Europe, let's see how we weather their coming assault on our rights through the UN during this coming year when they're going to try to ban guns, make homeschooling illegal and impose a UN tax system on us. If we can stop those things from happening then we're a few steps farther away from becoming Europe.
As for a second American Revolution, I'm on board. I think it needs to be done politically rather than violently for the most part, but I think it could be done. The problem is that some of those engaged in such an effort are likely to be opposed to the current government for all the wrong reasons and would likely want to make things WORSE than they are now.
Dave
198 - Clavos
Dave, I have to admit to some ignorance here--how can these things you mention possibly be imposed on us via the UN?
As for becoming like Europe, let's see how we weather their coming assault on our rights through the UN during this coming year when they're going to try to ban guns, make homeschooling illegal and impose a UN tax system on us.
Wouldn't we the people and our elected officials (such as they are) in the House and Senate have to acquiesce for this to happen?
199 - Q Bit
Dave:
Richard, we do still have the Constitution, and every once in a while we remember to refer back to it. That trend could be expanded on and who knows where it would lead us. The point being that the nucleus of a decent, federal republic still exists under neath all the corruption.
In principle - yes. In practice?
As for a second American Revolution, I'm on board. I think it needs to be done politically rather than violently for the most part, but I think it could be done.
I seriously doubt if a violent revolution is at all possible in the current institutional system. But I am curious what would be the objectives for your revolution (be it political)? What things are you going to do away with?
200 - Dave Nalle
That's the problem, Q Bit - so many of those who are dissatisfied with the way things are now are unhappy because they want things to be worse that I think we're better off sticking with the status quo and trying to make small, incremental improvements.
But, in the fantasy world where I could start it all over, I'd basically go back to the constitution as written, privatize most of the federal government and repeal the 16th amendment.
Government programs would have to be largely self-funded. If they weren't able to raise enough money from voluntary fees to pay for their services then they would go away. Taxes would be done by billing the states based on their consumption of federal services and the states would figure out how to tax their citizens. But most taxes would be replaced by specific usage fees.
Laws which exist purely for purposes of social engineering like the drug laws would be repealed, but we'd preserve the FDA and other oversight agencies which regulate businesses, however they would be funded directly by those businesses. For example the FDA would charge a fee for every drug submitted for approval. We'd also add in the amendment from the bill of rights which was proposed but never approved, to prohibit a standing army.
Congressmen and Senators should be paid by their state legislatures not the federal government, and those state governments should set their rate of pay, have the ability to withhold pay and to impeach their representatives and/or hold a recall election.
Hell, there are lots of other ideas, but basically strip the government down to the bare bones, take its hands out of our pockets and its eyes out of our bedrooms.
Dave
201 - Q Bit
Dave:
Hmm.. you mean less power to the federal government and more power to the states.
That's the problem, Q Bit - so many of those who are dissatisfied with the way things are now are unhappy because they want things to be worse that I think we're better off sticking with the status quo and trying to make small, incremental improvements.
Realistically, every section of the society is unhappy/dissatisfied for their own reasons (reasonable or not) and even in an ideal world, you cannot have everyone happy/satisfied because that goes against the basic human nature.
When you say we are better off sticking with the status quo, I would argue that holds almost in an universal sense; as for trying to make small incremental improvements, I am skeptical because any improvement which is adiabatic barely affects the social dynamics because we, as a part of the jungle are efficient enough to adopt to incremental changes without particularly noticing it. Therefore incremental improvements doesn't really serve the intended purpose of creating a new functionality and appreciation of the visible benefits.
But, in the fantasy world where I could start it all over, I'd basically go back to the constitution as written, privatize most of the federal government and repeal the 16th amendment.
I'm not sure if it's a good idea to go back to the constitution as was. First of all it was written more than 200 years ago and it reflects the right perceptions of governance (and etc) as was appropriate. Fundamentally it's solid, but the society evolves, so does the geo-eco-political contour and the constitution at any given time period should also reflect that.
Government programs would have to be largely self-funded. If they weren't able to raise enough money from voluntary fees to pay for their services then they would go away. Taxes would be done by billing the states based on their consumption of federal services and the states would figure out how to tax their citizens. But most taxes would be replaced by specific usage fees.
Self-funded government programs are not sustainable. Not even the ones which need to be there. What happens to the welfare and social programs? Are you suggesting if they are not sustainable they should be scrapped?
Laws which exist purely for purposes of social engineering like the drug laws would be repealed,
Laws are necessary for social engineering otherwise the wheels won't turn. Let me put it this way: social engineering laws are like the nuts and bolts; you can have all the pieces but they won't fit together and therefore the structure won't function without the nuts and bolts. It's going to be a mess.
but we'd preserve the FDA and other oversight agencies which regulate businesses, however they would be funded directly by those businesses. For example the FDA would charge a fee for every drug submitted for approval.
I am with you here. I would go one step beyond. Government should charge fees for all business/profitable interest approvals and channel some of the resources to social-welfare programs.
We'd also add in the amendment from the bill of rights which was proposed but never approved, to prohibit a standing army.
This is controversial. I would rather have a standing army because I don't see the rest of the world fighting for the Nobel peace prize anytime soon, or in the near future.
but basically strip the government down to the bare bones, take its hands out of our pockets and its eyes out of our bedrooms.
A slim govt. would do for me as opposed to the BIG FAT one.