Shooting the wounded

[70-101]

The reality of war is very different from it's portrayal in the media.

Is that a fact? I was wounded twice during my tour of duty in Vietnam with the 2nd of the 502nd Infantry out of Camp Eagle Phu-Bai. Where did you serve in combat XavierBreath?

 

[XavierBreath]

As I said, you cannot expect anyone to volunteer for unwarranted internet abuse. I have no way of verifying your service, you have no way of verifying mine, so you are asking for a useless exercise of chest beating. You have your opinion, I have mine. They differ.
Thank you for your service.
Have a nice day.

 

[BreacherUp!]

Bottom line: The Marine was found to be in the line of duty.

Just look at the facts, these guys were the equivalent of wounded prisoners, and the marine made a mistake by shooting him. It was a bad bad mistake but it happens all the time due to the fog of war, which doesn't make it right.

Fortunately, after a complete investigation (22 interviews, ballistics, etc), the facts did come out. Sorry Cobray, but I think you were wrong on this one.

 

[70-101]

As I said, you cannot expect anyone to volunteer for unwarranted internet abuse. I have no way of verifying your service, you have no way of verifying mine, so you are asking for a useless exercise of chest beating. You have your opinion, I have mine. They differ.
Thank you for your service.
Have a nice day.

Since when is discussing your combat experience with another vet as it pretains to the discussion at hand an excerise in chest beating? Unless you have no experience to discuss. Then why don't you just say so? Its OK to have opinions without knowledge during a discussion.

 

[XavierBreath]

Since when is discussing your combat experience with another vet an excerise in chest beating? Unless you have no experience to discuss. Why don't you just say so? Its OK to have opinions without knowledge

My friend, you are not the only man or woman who has served thier country and been wounded. For having done so, I offer you my gratitude. There are many vets in this country, and quite likely many who suffered greater hardships and more damage to thier minds and bodies than you. If you want to know of my service, you can likely find it by searching my past posts. It's not relevant in this thread, and your chest beating challenges and accusations are not welcome. I have no need to prove anything to you, nor do you have any need to prove anything to me.
I am glad that your son came home in 2004. Mine did not.
Do not bother responding, you are now being ignored.

 

[70-101]

The biggest problem I have with shooting enemy wounded soldiers is that it encourages the enemy to shoot our wounded soldiers. I also believe that shooting a wounded enemy soldier is against Article 3 of the Geneva Convention.

 

[Lawyer Daggit]

In every combat there are those who violate the rules of war- the last post is correct- treat your opponents honourably and hopefully they will treat yours honourably.

Classic example is the war in the Pacific- WW2- Japanese would often fight to the death and try and trick people when surrendering and our troops tended to not be very accomodating regarding Japanese surrenders as a result. I have spoken to many vets over the years who greased a Jap because of concern there may be an armed granade in his pocket that would go off when he was searched.

Other thing, we are in Iraq to save these people not grease them. Like Vietnam it is hard to tell combatant from non combatant and overzealous shootings were one reason we did not win the hearts and minds of Vietnamese.

 

[BreacherUp!]

70, shooting a wounded combatant is not against the Genava conventions. Certainly you would agree, combatants can and do fight while wounded. Shooting a combatant that has surendered or is otherwise unable to defend himself is a crime.

 

[XavierBreath]

Classic example is the war in the Pacific- WW2- Japanese would often fight to the death and try and trick people when surrendering and our troops tended to not be very accomodating regarding Japanese surrenders as a result. I have spoken to many vets over the years who greased a Jap because of concern there may be an armed granade in his pocket that would go off when he was searched.

Agreed. The same thing is happening in Iraq. These wounded men in the mosque were fighting us the day before. They were not innocent civilians caught in the crossfire.

You just cannot win wars by doing to others as you would have them do unto you. These people are cutting off heads, hanging burned corpses from bridges, and using suicide bombers and IEDs. That does not mean that we should do the same, but it does instill a level of distrust of any enemy who is wounded.

Before our troops can win hearts and minds, they must first stay alive. There was a very real risk of an IED in that mosque. The Marine acted appropriately. He has been cleared by investigators in the theater. This incident would have never been the bone of contention it was had it not been on film, and released by a reporter.

It's a tough situation, all around, and I don't have the answers. However, I just cannot see asking any man to go in there to do the job but deny him the right to protect his life if he can.

 

[70-101]

shooting a wounded combatant is not against the Genava conventions. Certainly you would agree, combatants can and do fight while wounded. Shooting a combatant that has surendered or is otherwise unable to defend himself is a crime.

I totally agree. But the men in the mosque were wounded in combat the previous day. Then medically treated and had there weapons removed by the soldiers who wounded them. This makes them medical prisoners who were unable to defend themselves in my opinion, and therefore they should have been protected by article 3.

 

[jefnvk]

From the way I understand the story, they were also supposed to have been removed. And the guy that did the shooting, had just lost some team members due to this trick being played on him a few days before. At least that is the way I understand it.

I am going to change my opinion from before. This was probably the appropriate action. If the guy's team had truly been hit previously by this trick, I don't blame him one bit for pulling the trigger.