My response is based on what I have read and listened to in both Western and Middle Eastern media.

Then how can you can you say that there will be a fair trial. These 5 men stalked that girl staked out the territory where she livesd with her parents and attacked her raped her and then killed her and the family. Only her 2 younger brothers escaped because they were in school at that time and have become orphans.

The Anglo-Saxon accusatory system of justice in which a prosecutor has to prove his case to a jury of 12 of the defendent's peers is far superior to an inquisitional system where the defendent is at the mercy of one judge, especially in a country with reactionary lashback and massive corruption.

Initially the blame for the incident was sought to be put on the Insurgents and only when 3 soldiers of the 101 Air Borne were found dead with sighs of mutilation that the other soldiers began to spill the beans.

Blame wasn't "sought to be put on the insurgents". The locals in Mahmoudiya believed the people responsible were Shiite death squads, because that's the kind of thing they do. The only people aware of who was actually responsible were the perpetrators themselves. They went so far as to shoot the victims with an AKM so as to fool anyone who would do an autopsy. There was no American investigation into the rape and murders, because no one--not the Iraqis nor the Americans--believed this was done by anyone other than a Shiite death squad. It wasn't until after some soldiers visited the shrink after the horrible horrible mutilations of PFC Menchaca and PFC Tucker that the anyone found out the people behind the rape and murders in Mahmoudiya were American soldiers.

This nonsense from the Mujahideen Shura Council that their murder and desecration of our boys was revenge for Mahmoudiya is even more unbelievable. They already said immediately after the incident that they undertook the action to avenge the death of Zarqawi. The incident in Mahmoudiya didn't come to light publicly until well after the bodies of PFC Menchaca and PFC Tucker were discovered by the Task Force looking for them.

In any event thisd is a cold blooded war crime and not your everyday murder as some assume.

I'm no scholar on war crimes, but I say it's not a cold blooded war crime when one doesn't act in his capacity as a soldier. If one leaves his base without orders dressed as a civilian and engages in personal crime, how is that a war crime? If an off duty policeman gets in a barroom brawl with an average joe and beats the tar out of him, does the policeman get charged with police brutality?

But I guess in your little mind being charged is enough reason for punishment.

If you so want you can honor those 5 brave marines especially Stg Green with the highest military medal for valor and I am sure my "little mind" will not mind. Those great heroes of the USA can get a ticker tape parade in Washington DC and a banquet at the White House with George II and Laura Bush. I think those heroes deserve the highest military decoration as they only illustrate the deparvity of the US occupation.

There is no guilt. The Empire cannot be guilty of crimes it does not recognize. You have been convicted of thought-crime, and you are hereby sentenced to a thousand years mining coal for our new ethanol plants. What, you didnt' think they needed coal? Oh ho ho ho, we've succeded so well.

Blame wasn't "sought to be put on the insurgents". The locals in Mahmoudiya believed the people responsible were Shiite death squads, because that's the kind of thing they do.

The original version from the US sources was thast the insurgents had done this dark deed. In fact the Resistance has been using car bombs and the like, but ususally do not target women and children. The idea being that once women and children are killed the point of no return is passed.

This nonsense from the Mujahideen Shura Council that their murder and desecration of our boys was revenge for Mahmoudiya is even more unbelievable. They already said immediately after the incident that they undertook the action to avenge the death of Zarqawi. The incident in Mahmoudiya didn't come to light publicly until well after the bodies of PFC Menchaca and PFC Tucker were discovered by the Task Force looking for them

We have not been told the truth about the kiling of the 2 101 Air Borne soldiers. But their killing is not justified as revenge for the Mahamudiya massacre

I'm no scholar on war crimes, but I say it's not a cold blooded war crime when one doesn't act in his capacity as a soldier. If one leaves his base without orders dressed as a civilian and engages in personal crime, how is that a war crime?

War crimes by definitions are crimes committed by abn invading and occupying army. It does not matter the clothes they were wearing or the time of the crime on duty or off duty. The Occupying Army is responsible for the saferty and security of the civilian population and in this the USA has failed and on top the marines are now indulging like the Mongol hordes of the past in rapine murder ans other atrocities. Please do not trivialise the crimes of the US military in Iraq.

#17 by Bahu Virupaksha Fri, July 14, 2006 02:16 AM

And yet again you demonstrate an assumtion of guilt along with your hatred of all things American. Unlike you, I do not assume they are either innocent or guilty. I will await the facts before making up my mind. Only an idiot draws a conclusion without knowing the facts.

The US Department of Defence has charged these marines and if they escape without punishment it will only prove that the US is not serious about the WAr crimes of its troops. It will not prove the innocence of the troops. So that that.

It couldn't mean they are ACTUALLY innocent? That maybe they were put in as scapegoats by other marines to take the blame? Holy Shit Batman, This guy just changed the whole UCMJ justice system by making this horridly stupid comment.

I can't say I don't believe they 'Might' be guilty, but I can't also say I don't believe they 'Might' also be innocent. I, JUST LIKE YOU, AM NOT THE JUDGE/JURY!! You claiming they are guilty, DOES NOT MEAN THEY ARE. Get over your self-rightous pose.

#21 by M-Post Fri, July 14, 2006 9:10 PM

Yer a Liberal, yer not supposed to present a rational argument.

If this is the case then law should not recognise war crimes at all. Why then are the leaders of Liberia, Serbis, and before then the Nuremberg defendentsd tried for war crimes and crimes against humanuity. If guilt is fixed only to the lowly soldiers and not the poltical leadership that sent them tere. This was the plea of Eichmann and it did not work then in Jerusalem and will not work now. The soldiers may be guilty as hell asd you say biut what about the political leaders who took the decision to invade Iraq illegally and impose an American style Identity politics there creating sectarian and civil strife.

I'm afraid this statement confirms your ignorance of history, Bahu, or at minimum your willingness to twist it to fit your bias.

The soldiers in this incident, and any superiors who may have known of crimes and failed to report them, or actively worked to suppress evidence of them, should any such crimes actually have been committed, should be court-martialed and convicted if guilty as charged.

None of them were acting under orders to systematically annihilate millions of innocent civilians based on their race or ethnicity, or even to kill a solitary Iraqi. That you can't (or won't) see the difference between this incident and the Holocaust speaks volumes about you. The more of this melodramatic tripe you post the less I respect you.

Only an idiot draws a conclusion without knowing the facts.

The facts are there inn the open, you are not willing to see them because it offends your self image. The US troops and soldiers are ingulging in war crime in Iraq and the people of Iraq bear wittness to thiose crime

None of them were acting under orders to systematically annihilate millions of innocent civilians based on their race or ethnicity, or even to kill a solitary Iraqi. That you can't (or won't) see the difference between this incident and the Holocaust speaks volumes about you. The more of this melodramatic tripe you post the less I respect you.

When the Nurember trials were held after world war II it established 3 criteria for deterning war crime and crime against humanity and you can check on it from any book on the Holocaust: 1.Whether non combatans especially civilians are being killed in a systematic manner. In the case of Germany intent was easy to establish because the Nazi spoke of anti Semitism as a policy. In the case of the USA it preaches Freedom and Liberty and pratices large scale destruction of the civilian population. Ypu are probaby fed in leberal doses the tripe from the embedded jouranlists who only are at best propagadists for the US occupation. Do you know how many civilians were killed when Fallujah was taken and later Karabala. So do not talk of facts, you are utterly ignorant of what the US military is doing in Iraq and intent to kill civilians can be established on the basis of the shock and awe bombing of the civilian population. 2. Dispropotionate force. The US troops in Irsq are in aaroutine manner using dispropotionate force while dealing with the Iraqis. Noq the racist point that Iraqis are non white anfd the White soldiers are racially motivated in their attack on non white Arabs can very easily be made. The only people being targetted in Iraq by the US soldiers are Arabs and a few Kurds. Is that not a targetting of a particular ethnic group. Unlike the Holocaust it is not essential to demonstrate the USA wants the complete annihilation of the Iraqi people. Idelly the USA could like what it call theatre domination but this is not Germany and the Arabs are fighting back, we call it Resistance. Third: IfS there a direct link between the American Occupation and an unfolding humanitarian cisis in Iraq. Yes there is and the increased mortality of Iraqi civilians under the Sanctions Regiome and now under American occupation is proof enough of the scale of Ameriocan killing, a man made tragedy in the same order of magnitude as other humanitarian crisis.

If you take a limited and highlyn partisan view of what is happwning in Iraq you will end up seeing the US troops only as heroesdoing what their President had described as "mission accomplished" If you are certain that USA is not ingulging in war crimes what prevents the USA from joining the International Court of Crimina Justice. This is done only to prevent the US political,leadership and its military personnel from facing trial before the world fro the crimes in Iraq.

Accusations are not facts in the real world. That's the distinction youo fail to understand. If the facts prove that these men did commit this crime, they should and will be punished.

You don't seem to understand what a war crime is either. Had these men been ordered to do such a thing, that would be a war crime. As they acted on their own it would be a crime.

The US Department of Defence has charged these marines and if they escape without punishment it will only prove that the US is not serious about the WAr crimes of its troops. It will not prove the innocence of the troops. So that that.

And in that statement, you just proved what you are, Bahu....

And would you PLEASE supply us with something that explains why the Iraq war is illegal? Or is it so simply because you and the democrats congressmen that voted for it say so?

If the facts prove that these men did commit this crime, they should and will be punished.

Agreed. But who is to try them. USA or an International Tribunal

And would you PLEASE supply us with something that explains why the Iraq war is illegal? Or is it so simply because you and the democrats congressmen that voted for it say so?

The war against Iraq is illegal because it is not a defensive war,Iraq did not pose a threat to the security and territorial integfrity of theUSA. As far as WMD is concerned, everyone except the American knew that there were no WMD in Iraq and even Bush and Blair knew it. They just used it as a foil to instigate the Congree into war. Nations do have the right of self defense under international law. But the right of self defense cannot be extended to cover presumption of war or what Bush calls preventive war.

Agreed. But who is to try them. USA or an International Tribunal

Once again you fail to understand even the basic differences between a war crime and a criminal act. A man or men acting on their own, not in command or being commanded to act, is a criminal act, not a war crime. Just because a crime is committed during a war does not automatically make it a war crime. You really should study up on your facts instead of relying solely upon emotional rhetoric as it makes you look stupid.

As they are American military members who are accused of committing a crime, they will and should be tried as such. And international tribunal is for actual war crimes. Learn the difference.

WMD is concerned, everyone except the American knew that there were no WMD in Iraq and even Bush and Blair knew it. They just used it as a foil to instigate the Congree into war.

Another example of the willfull ignorance you demonstrate all the time, Bahu.

Senate Committee Report Link

Butler Report (UK) Link

I can predict your response: "Those are untrustworthy sources since they're from America & the UK." Yes, only the all-knowing all-wise Bahu is worthy of our trust to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. Bleh.

willfull ignorance

I reject this accusation altogether. I have read that the 9/11 Comission didf not find any evidence of Saddam's involvement in Terrorism. Sarcasm aside, is it not true that USA is gifting a war in Iraq that is as useless as it is brutal.I have answere your points in a post a few post ahead and I am not blindly anit Bush/America. You may havr read my post on the renet SC judgement on SCOTUS case which is a good and balanced judgement. I wish you do not go overboard in defending the indefensible.