NationStates Jolt Archive

CAMP PENDLETON, California
Thursday May 10, 2007

A US marine told a court yesterday that he had "pissed" on the head of one of 24 dead Iraqi civilians killed by his unit and watched a superior officer kill five Iraqis as they tried to surrender.

Sergeant Sanick Dela Cruz made the admission at a pre-trial hearing ahead of a series of military trials over the killings and alleged cover-up at Haditha, 120 miles west of Baghdad, in November 2005.
...
Yesterday, at a pre-trial hearing ahead of the trial of one of the accused, Sgt Dela Cruz gave evidence at a courtroom in Camp Pendleton, north of San Diego, California.

He said he watched how his squad leader, Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich, shot five Iraqis who were trying to surrender and then told his men to lie about the killings.

"They were just standing, looking around, had hands up," Sgt Dela Cruz said. "Then I saw one of them drop in the middle. I didn't know what was going on, sir. Looked to my left, saw Staff Sergeant Wuterich shooting."

The Iraqi civilians had been standing by a white car with their hands interlocked behind their heads when they were shot, Sgt Dela Cruz says.

"He [St Sgt Wuterich] told me that if anybody asked, they were running away and the Iraqi army shot them," Sgt Dela Cruz said.

After the five men died, a team of marines led by St Sgt Wuterich allegedly attacked two houses with grenades and gunfire in an effort to find insurgents. The dead included women, children and the elderly.

Yesterday Sgt Dela Cruz was giving evidence ahead of the trial of Captain Randy Stone, a Marine lawyer. Cpt Stone is accused along with three other officers of dereliction of duty for failing to investigate the deaths.
...
Mr Gittins said Capt Stone reported the incident up the chain of command and said he had been told not to investigate further.

Sources: Yahoo/Reuters/Guardian/OccNews
War is all of that.. and more.

o yeah.. I am going AFK.. here are some links
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6641843.stm
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070510/ts_nm/iraq_haditha_dc_5
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,,2076586,00.html

That'll learn 'em to not be Americans.

That'll learn 'em to not be Americans.

Yeah... the nerve of some people. Having the audacity to be born in Iraq of all places.

But Lord forbid someone (Ozzy!) pisses on the Alamo - then all hell breaks loose.

Have these men gotten their medals yet?

Have these men gotten their medals yet?

The 'Bronze Pot' for outstanding Urination in the face of the enemy is rarely awarded. I think the enemy would have to be standing at the time of the incident.
They'll probably get whatever the guys who shot down that Iranian airliner were given though.

Well, in my opinion these soldiers should be shot. They aren't serving under civil law, they are SOLDIERS. So shoot them.
And PLEASE Liberals, stop with your supposedly witty sarcasm. It's getting quite old. After all, there may be much to critisise in the U.S., but you could acually critisise the real baddie: the terrorists: the people who depend on their enemy to have morals, and take advantage of it by using their own as human shields.
And once again, you think your repeditive sarcasm is witty simply because you have about 80-90% of everyone here to clap-- simply because they agree with you politically.

Well, in my opinion these soldiers should be shot. They aren't serving under civil law, they are SOLDIERS. So shoot them.
And PLEASE Liberals, stop with your supposedly witty sarcasm. It's getting quite old. After all, there may be much to critisise in the U.S., but you could acually critisise the real baddie: the terrorists: the people who depend on their enemy to have morals, and take advantage of it by using their own as human shields.
And once again, you think your repeditive sarcasm is witty simply because you have about 80-90% of everyone here to clap-- simply because they agree with you politically.

Yes yes, we attack the US but meanwhile we all want to go have a drink with our buddy osama.

Noting the failings of one group does not mean we support another. It is uber-nationalistic nonsense to suppose that because we don't end every criticism with "oh, but of course the terrorists are worse" that we don't recognize murderers as murderers.

We do, on occassion, point out that in our war on terror, many fighting in our name have comitted the very same, or substantially similar acts, to those we are fighting. In our great quest to rid the world of "very bad men" (tm) we have, I fear, on occassion, become just like them.

Well, in my opinion these soldiers should be shot. They aren't serving under civil law, they are SOLDIERS. So shoot them.
And PLEASE Liberals, stop with your supposedly witty sarcasm. It's getting quite old. After all, there may be much to critisise in the U.S., but you could acually critisise the real baddie: the terrorists: the people who depend on their enemy to have morals, and take advantage of it by using their own as human shields.
And once again, you think your repeditive sarcasm is witty simply because you have about 80-90% of everyone here to clap-- simply because they agree with you politically.

Terrorists are less likely to take note of criticism than the US.

And PLEASE Liberals, stop with your supposedly witty sarcasm.

Please stop labeling people "Liberals".

I hate to keep bringing this up, but I feel I must once again remind you all that none of this would have happened if all wars were fought with pies and pranks. *nod*

The dual tragedies of alienation and fear...alas.

All those who revel in this as some sort of political vindication have something wrong with them, all those who think the Marines should have carried out this action are sick.

Well, in my opinion these soldiers should be shot.

Well in my opinion they won't be. They'll shake hands with some high ranking flunky, get a few days behind bars, if at all, and be back in Iraq shooting more civilians and prisoners.

Like so.

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/vietnam-execution.jpg

I hate to keep bringing this up, but I feel I must once again remind you all that none of this would have happened if all wars were fought with pies and pranks. *nod*

That depends on the severity of the pranks. For example, tricking someone into believing they were getting a shower while pissing on their head would be hilarious.

Well in my opinion they won't be. They'll shake hands with some high ranking flunky, get a few days behind bars, if at all, and be back in Iraq shooting more civilians and prisoners.

Like so.

http://bagnewsnotes.typepad.com/bagnews/images/vietnam-execution.jpg

Indeed. In fact, when was the last time European or American armies executed one of their soldiers. Vietnam? World War Two?

I know Britain abolished capital punishment in the military in 1998.

That depends on the severity of the pranks. For example, tricking someone into believing they were getting a shower while pissing on their head would be hilarious.

Well, I'd think so. Some might disagree. But I'm certain that all would agree that it's considerably funnier than shooting someone and pissing on the corpse's head. As dark comedy goes, that's just too heavy on the dark and too light on the comedy.

Unless they're wearing an evening gown. A marine in an evening gown pissing on a dead man's head would be dark AND funny. *nod*

I hate to keep bringing this up, but I feel I must once again remind you all that none of this would have happened if all wars were fought with pies and pranks. *nod*

He probably would have gotten a medal if wars were fought as such.

Unless they're wearing an evening gown. A marine in an evening gown pissing on a dead man's head would be dark AND funny. *nod*

You've got it the wrong way round. A dead man pissing on a marine in an evening gown.

You've got it the wrong way round. A dead man pissing on a marine in an evening gown.

That's the 'Jerry gets it' moment.

See, in Tom and Jerry cartoons, Tom does something mean to Jerry to piss him off and Jerry spends the rest of the movie destroying Tom. But he goes waay overboard so every once in a while, near the end of the cartoon, Jerry Gets It. And Karma is restored. *nod*

That's the 'Jerry gets it' moment.

See, in Tom and Jerry cartoons, Tom does something mean to Jerry to piss him off and Jerry spends the rest of the movie destroying Tom. But he goes waay overboard so every once in a while, near the end of the cartoon, Jerry Gets It. And Karma is restored. *nod*

Major karmic imbalance at the moment though.

Although the detection of a giant 50km wide pie on a collision course with earth may change that.

Major karmic imbalance at the moment though.

Although the detection of a giant 50km wide pie on a collision course with earth may change that.

You wouldn't happen to know where ground zero is, would you? I feel I need to be there.

You wouldn't happen to know where ground zero is, would you? I feel I need to be there.

Well, I'm a prankster at heart. And you're a clown. I think we can do business.

On a side note, do you like blueberry?

Yes yes, we attack the US but meanwhile we all want to go have a drink with our buddy osama.

Noting the failings of one group does not mean we support another. It is uber-nationalistic nonsense to suppose that because we don't end every criticism with "oh, but of course the terrorists are worse" that we don't recognize murderers as murderers.

We do, on occassion, point out that in our war on terror, many fighting in our name have comitted the very same, or substantially similar acts, to those we are fighting. In our great quest to rid the world of "very bad men" (tm) we have, I fear, on occassion, become just like them.

Admit it, you are FAR, FAR, FAR more likely to defend terrorists actions then American actions.

Admit it, you are FAR, FAR, FAR more likely to defend terrorists actions then American actions.

um....wtf?

No, not at all. Not in the slightest. Terrorism is the deliberate act of propogating violence in order to instill fear in a populace. It is a reprehensible act.

I, however, am not quite willing to paint with the gigantic brush of today's neocons, and lable anyone who disagrees with american policy a terrorist.

I do not, in any circumstances, condone terrorism. I, however, use the proper definition of terrorism, and do not consider terrorist to be synonomous with "dissenter"

um....wtf?

No, not at all. Not in the slightest. Terrorism is the deliberate act of propogating violence in order to instill fear in a populace. It is a reprehensible act.

I, however, am not quite willing to paint with the gigantic brush of today's neocons, and lable anyone who disagrees with american policy a terrorist.

I do not, in any circumstances, condone terrorism. I, however, use the proper definition of terrorism, and do not consider terrorist to be synonomous with "dissenter"

If you are speaking the truth, then I apologize for stereo-typing you. Y'see most "Liberals" in America are really "Progressives", which are really much different. If you are one of the few TRUE Liberals left, then I commend you sir.

If you are speaking the truth, then I apologize for stereo-typing you. Y'see most "Liberals" in America are really "Progressives", which are really much different. If you are one of the few TRUE Liberals left, then I commend you sir.

Again you see, here's where you fall down. This being an International forum and all.

Y'see most "Liberals" in America are really "Progressives", which are really much different.

you know, I keep hearing stuff like this..but I rarely if ever see anyone actually DO it.

It wasn't the left that set up this false dichodemy. We didn't say "if you're not with us you're with the terrorists." We didn't put forward the idea that not agreeing with american policy was de facto support of terrorism.

WE weren't the ones who said that shit.

you know, I keep hearing stuff like this..but I rarely if ever see anyone actually DO it.

It wasn't the left that set up this false dichodemy. We didn't say "if you're not with us you're with the terrorists." We didn't put forward the idea that not agreeing with american policy was de facto support of terrorism.

WE weren't the ones who said that shit.

It wasn't Conservatives either, it was BUSH! The Republicans running things (especially the Bush-Bots) are NOT Conservative. Nor are they Liberal, they're just idiots. The same goes for he Democrats running things...

It wasn't Conservatives either, it was BUSH! The Republicans running things (especially the Bush-Bots) are NOT Conservative.

And yet, Bush was chosen as the leader of that party, was he not? I do believe he won all those primaries...

It is the height of idiocy for the conservative movement to be attacking bush as "not one of them" when they were the very people that CHOSE HIM to represent them.

And yet, Bush was chosen as the leader of that party, was he not? I do believe he won all those primaries...

It is the height of idiocy for the conservative movement to be attacking bush as "not one of them" when they were the very people that CHOSE HIM to represent them.

Riiiight. I am not a Republican, so how can you say he represents me? He represents Republicans. He doesn't represent all Conservatives any more then the Clintons represent all Liberals.
My official party is Libertarian.

It wasn't Conservatives either, it was BUSH! The Republicans running things (especially the Bush-Bots) are NOT Conservative. Nor are they Liberal, they're just idiots. The same goes for he Democrats running things...You seem to say "We, the people, should not pay for the things the War party does.. or the things the President does."

is that what you are saying?

You seem to say "the US people should not pay for the things the War party does.. or the things the President does."

is that what you are saying?

Er. Are you saying thier should be collective punishment brought on the American people for things that have been perpetrated by arrogant Neo-Cons, albiet in thier name?

You seem to say "we, the people, should not pay for the things the War party does.. or the things the President does."

is that what you are saying?

No... What prisisely do you mean? Be specific and I'll answer.

Well, I'd think so. Some might disagree. But I'm certain that all would agree that it's considerably funnier than shooting someone and pissing on the corpse's head. As dark comedy goes, that's just too heavy on the dark and too light on the comedy.

Unless they're wearing an evening gown. A marine in an evening gown pissing on a dead man's head would be dark AND funny. *nod*

Small changes really would make war much more palatable. Like having paintball wars, but instead of paint, those little balls are filled with mud.

No... What prisisely do you mean? Be specific and I'll answer.well.. I am trying to figure your post.. allow me to re-quote it:
It wasn't Conservatives either, it was BUSH! The Republicans running things (especially the Bush-Bots) are NOT Conservative. Nor are they Liberal, they're just idiots. The same goes for he Democrats running things...

Riiiight. I am not a Republican, so how can you say he represents me?

I didn't. I said he was chosen by his party to represent them. A party that is now saying he is not representative of them.

I didn't. I said he was chosen by his party to represent them. A party that is now saying he is not representative of them.

Well, just because someone is a Republican doesn't mean they chose to nominate him.

It is the height of idiocy for the conservative movement (NOTE: NOT REPUBLICAN, CONSERVATIVE, BIG DIFFERENCE) to be attacking bush as "not one of them" when they were the very people that CHOSE HIM to represent them.
You attacked Conservatives here, not Republicans.

Riiiight. I am not a Republican, so how can you say he represents me? He represents Republicans. He doesn't represent all Conservatives any more then the Clintons represent all Liberals.


Wrong. In his capacity as POTUS, he is supposed to represent the American people, not just Republicans - not just his own voter base. This is yet another example of just how badly Bush has failed as a leader.

My official party is Libertarian.

Oh, please.

Er. Are you saying...I am not making any statement so far..
I am just asking a question.. to him.. and to all Generalites.

What is your position on this?

Oh, please.
Please what?!?!?!

Small changes really would make war much more palatable. Like having paintball wars, but instead of paint, those little balls are filled with mud.

I like the way you think. :)

Well, I'm a prankster at heart. And you're a clown. I think we can do business.

On a side note, do you like blueberry?

One of the absolute best throwing pies. Blueberry leaves such wonderful stains on skin and clothing. :)

I am not making any statement so far..
I am just asking a question.. to him.. and to all Generalites.

What is your position on this?

My position on the soldiers that where the original point of this thread, the Iraq war, or President Bush in general? Or all three?

I like the way you think. :)

The idea is semi-stolen. I saw a few minutes of some movie which involed shooting people with paintballs full of liquid nitrogen. I didn't watch any more than that, so I don't know why they'd do such a thing. Would be pretty amusing though, though somewhat dangerous.

My position on the soldiers that where the original point of this thread, the Iraq war, or President Bush in general? Or all three?on this one:
You seem to say "We, the people, should not pay for the things the War party does.. or the things the President does."

is that what you are saying?

The idea is semi-stolen. I saw a few minutes of some movie which involed shooting people with paintballs full of liquid nitrogen. I didn't watch any more than that, so I don't know why they'd do such a thing. Would be pretty amusing though, though somewhat dangerous.

I alwys wanted to get a hold of some of those pepper balls. I figure mixing in one pepper ball to every 20 regular paintballs would make for a much more exciting game. :)

on this one:

Well I don't believe in collective punishment, Germany or Lebanon style, no.

It is entirely the fault of the executives of our governments, who theoretically are accountable to us through democratic institutions, and hence theoretically it is our fault for the executives decisions i.e Iraq etc.

However, liberal democracy as we know it today is largely an elected dictatorship. We do not have referendum's on each and every issue, the executives make all of those decisions themselves unless it concerns something monumentally important i.e dissolution of the nation, secession etc.

When we vote for political parties, we vote for entire packages of policies. We have to choose what happens to be the closest possible package parallel to our views, but rarely do you find a party that exemplifies perfectly your own views.

Voting systems such as first past the post in Britain create an overwhelming majority in parliament in order to create an undivided government, at the expense of proportional representation of the populace.

Hence, our executives that are elected are never truly representative of the populations wishes. Only about 36% of Britons actually voted for Labour, yet they occupy the vast majority of parliament.

As far as accountability is concerned, the most you can do is write to your MP or Congressman or protest, but representatives have three loyalties. To their constituents, to their party and to themselves. They are more likely to be met with repercussions from thier party than thier constituents, and so vote along party lines largely, allowing the executive to get away with anything it pleases.

On the eve of war in Iraq, millions of people from around the world, in Britain, America, Europe, Asia, the Middle East protested against it. This was before we all learned the war was a farce from the outset.

In conclusion, the institutions of liberal democracy dilute the populations overall opinions, and are forced to "elect" an oligarchy that reigns supreme, and is next to completely unnaccountable.


So no. The people should not suffer punishment. The oligarchs should.

Well I don't believe in collective punishment, Germany or Lebanon style, no.Er. Are you saying thier should be collective punishment brought on the American people for things that have been perpetrated by arrogant Neo-Cons, albiet in thier name?I am against collective punishment.

I dont think foreign Armies should one day bomb US and/or invade US.. (bringing collective punishement) for the crimes being committed under BUSH.

I hate to keep bringing this up, but I feel I must once again remind you all that none of this would have happened if all wars were fought with pies and pranks. *nod*

If only Marx were alive today...

The 276th Day;12636261']Cheeco, Zeppo, Harpo or Groucho?

Hey, aren't you October3?

One of the absolute best throwing pies. Blueberry leaves such wonderful stains on skin and clothing. :)

Well, a visit to the Vatican on April 12th in two years time might be profitable. Make sure to wear white clothes.

Please what?!?!?!

Please just shut up.

And people wonder why mindless slogans like "Support Our Troops" annoy the shit out of me.

You attacked Conservatives here, not Republicans.

Whats that somebody said - "So What?"?

Wtf we need to get the hell out of that country already. God damn rednecks are going to start another war. BRING THEM BACK HOME SO THEY CAN SLEEP WITH THEIR SISTERS!

Please just shut up.

I can't believe you're entertaining his irrelevance.

Anyhoo, US soldiers egregious human rights violators and war criminals? Get outta town!

I hate to keep bringing this up, but I feel I must once again remind you all that none of this would have happened if all wars were fought with pies and pranks. *nod*

build a giant Iraq-shaped Apple Pie...

And people wonder why mindless slogans like "Support Our Troops" annoy the shit out of me.

I'd find it more annoying that the slogan equals supporting the war. I would love to say that I support the troops staying alive for I do. Unfortunately the bumper sticker I see too frequently doesn't mean just that.

This disgusting event is something that is not anywhere near frequent. Demonizing all the soldiers doesn't help anything when a few assholes decide to do something like this.

Not all soldiers are perfect. In other news, scientists have discovered that birds can fly!

Please what?!?!?!

Dobbs is just being a douche, ie himself

Dobbs is just being a douche, ie himself

If you've got a problem with my post, go whine about it Moderation.

War is all of that.. and more.

Lousy bastards.

Have these men gotten their medals yet?

No, they haven't. In fact they are being tried for murder and will probably spend the rest of their lives in prison - in fact some may be executed.

No, they haven't. In fact they are being tried for murder and will probably spend the rest of their lives in prison - in fact some may be executed.

And the prison they go to will be a little harsher than the prison regular civilians would go to.


This is a disgraceful story of hateful atrocities, but lets not pretend its a representation of the United States Armed forces.

Unless,of course,we want to start discussing war attrocities commited by other countrie's military and label them all the same.

No, they haven't. In fact they are being tried for murder and will probably spend the rest of their lives in prison - in fact some may be executed.

Well...

In April, the Marine Corps dropped all charges against Sgt Dela Cruz and granted him immunity in exchange for his testimony.

If found guilty, the three marines charged with second-degree murder could face life imprisonment.

I don't think execution will happen...

Please stop labeling people "Liberals".

I agree, Howard (centre-right, leader of the federal Liberal Party) might think more people support him

Well...



I don't think execution will happen...

Whatever. They're not getting medals. the implication in that statement was that this kind of behavior is celebrated in our military and it clearly is not.

If only Marx were alive today...

It would be intersting though the some of the local marxists may become rather annoying.

Zombie Marx...'When Hell is effectively collectivised, the dead will walk the earth'

Whatever. They're not getting medals. the implication in that statement was that this kind of behavior is celebrated in our military and it clearly is not.

You're right about that.

Problem really is that the military was so reluctant to follow up on the claims that this had actually happened. The breakdown of the chain of command and the dehumanising of the civilians that was going on in the military is what should be looked at. Hopefully, they're in the process of doing just that.

Well this desecration of bodies is despicable, do any of you think that it's possible that Sgt. Cruz is just trying to save his own skin? That he's lying his ass off?

Not likely, but possible, yes.

You're right about that.

Problem really is that the military was so reluctant to follow up on the claims that this had actually happened. The breakdown of the chain of command and the dehumanising of the civilians that was going on in the military is what should be looked at. Hopefully, they're in the process of doing just that.

So big surprise. Then there was that wonderful news story that a good portion of the armed forces in Iraq wouldn't tell anyone if they witnessed fellow soldiers commit atrocities. Disturbing. Hopefully they will find that their moral compass works though should they actually witness something criminal.

Zombie Marx...'When Hell is effectively collectivised, the dead will walk the earth'

Zombies aren't cool.

Now liches on the other hand...

So big surprise. Then there was that wonderful news story that a good portion of the armed forces in Iraq wouldn't tell anyone if they witnessed fellow soldiers commit atrocities. Disturbing. Hopefully they will find that their moral compass works though should they actually witness something criminal.

I saw that one... Big number said they were ready to do something unethical (not to mention illegal) themselves too...

I saw that one... Big number said they were ready to do something unethical (not to mention illegal) themselves too...well.. Ive seen on TV a report saying 1/3 US soldiers (in Iraq) agree or are likely to commit torture.

is that what you are referring to?