Falluja + shooting the wounded

#1
Channel 5 showed some footage tonight of a marine deliberately shooting a wounded insurgent. We could not see the wounded man, or tell if he was still armed and dangerous, but footage like this can't be helping.
I can't find a link at the moment, but it should be showing throughout the night.
 
#4
The clip has been shown on all channels throughout the day. But to put it in perspective, they had been coming under fire from this gunman it would appear for some time. They hit him (pos grenade) and he was in an area between two buildings about 2 foot gap. They would have had great difficulty getting to him. What it shows is the different commentary by different channels. Most just said, wounded gunman shot, but one (sky) put it another way, he had not surrendered and they did not know if he had hidden explosives or a bomb trigger. Lets play safe, as experience has shown that suicide by the enemy is a common tactic to take some with them.

It is how you want to see it and not as simple as some would like.
 
#10
I would shoot the fecker if there was just one ounce of doubt that his surrender would cause me or others injury.

But then again, I´m not there and it is easy to talk shop..... Wish I was there and wish I wasn´t!

Does that make sense?
 
#11
Corporal said:
It sounded like Speedy was accusing Marines of shooting wounded prisoners. If I took it wrong, sorry.
Corp, I would be also be surprised if these fine, brave and disciplined troops were to be guilty of such behaviour. But I expect you are also aware of the alleged "mercy-killing" case elsewhere in Iraq after a platoon opened fire on a refuse truck crew. I wouldnt be so quick to accuse Speedy after he reported what he saw on the TV, this gave the opportunity for someone else to clarify and hopefully reassure.
 
#12
hackle said:
Corporal said:
It sounded like Speedy was accusing Marines of shooting wounded prisoners. If I took it wrong, sorry.
Corp, I would be also be surprised if these fine, brave and disciplined troops were to be guilty of such behaviour. But I expect you are also aware of the alleged "mercy-killing" case elsewhere in Iraq after a platoon opened fire on a refuse truck crew. I wouldnt be so quick to accuse Speedy after he reported what he saw on the TV, this gave the opportunity for someone else to clarify and hopefully reassure.

Like I said, I took it the wrong way, and for that I apologize. I apologize to Speedy, Mrs. Speedy and all the little Speedies running around. I also apologize to Ma and Pa Speedy, Sister and Brother Speedy, Aunt and Uncle Speedy, Grandma and Grandpa Speedy , not to mention all the Cousin Speedies out there. I will sacrifice a lamb in honor of all Speedies everywhere tonight. I will also have Mrs. Corporal give me 50 lashes tonight as punishment.


Am I forgiven now? :wink:
 
#13
Corporal said:
hackle said:
Corporal said:
It sounded like Speedy was accusing Marines of shooting wounded prisoners. If I took it wrong, sorry.
Corp, I would be also be surprised if these fine, brave and disciplined troops were to be guilty of such behaviour. But I expect you are also aware of the alleged "mercy-killing" case elsewhere in Iraq after a platoon opened fire on a refuse truck crew. I wouldnt be so quick to accuse Speedy after he reported what he saw on the TV, this gave the opportunity for someone else to clarify and hopefully reassure.

Like I said, I took it the wrong way, and for that I apologize. I apologize to Speedy, Mrs. Speedy and all the little Speedies running around. I also apologize to Ma and Pa Speedy, Sister and Brother Speedy, Aunt and Uncle Speedy, Grandma and Grandpa Speedy , not to mention all the Cousin Speedies out there. I will sacrifice a lamb in honor of all Speedies everywhere tonight. I will also have Mrs. Corporal give me 50 lashes tonight as punishment.


Am I forgiven now? :wink:
NO!!!!
 
#15
There were accounts of terrorists displaying the white flag and when Marines moved closer they took fire from multiple sides. Frankly these terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Conventions. They do not follow the rules of war. I wouldnt bother taking prisoners if it meant jeapordizing the welfare of my troops.
 
#17
tomahawk6 said:
There were accounts of terrorists displaying the white flag and when Marines moved closer they took fire from multiple sides. Frankly these terrorists are not covered under the Geneva Conventions. They do not follow the rules of war. I wouldnt bother taking prisoners if it meant jeapordizing the welfare of my troops.
tomy - Sorry, I thought it was clarified that the shooting of the wounded man was justified. Your compatriot Corporal got uptight, understandably, when he thought US troops were being accused of shooting wounded prisoners. Are you in disagreement with Corp's position?
 
#18
This sort of shite really p*sses me off. Media trying to second guess what soldiers are doing under fire. Why don't we see the same focus given to the behaviour of the enemy, perhaps as an explanation to the complex, highly dangerous and confusing environment soldiers find themselves in. There is no understanding by the media (and others) as to the difference between 'clean' fighting in the desert, devoid of civilians and the mess that is street fighting.

A visual grab taken out of context probably makes for dramatic news but it is an injustice to the men involved.

By the way. Well done the spams. You get nowhere by being Mr Nice with the enemy and the US full on approach is more likely to wrap up the battle faster than p*ssing about worrying about the media, who have it in for them anyway.
 
#19
Corporal said:
hackle said:
Corporal said:
It sounded like Speedy was accusing Marines of shooting wounded prisoners. If I took it wrong, sorry.
Corp, I would be also be surprised if these fine, brave and disciplined troops were to be guilty of such behaviour. But I expect you are also aware of the alleged "mercy-killing" case elsewhere in Iraq after a platoon opened fire on a refuse truck crew. I wouldnt be so quick to accuse Speedy after he reported what he saw on the TV, this gave the opportunity for someone else to clarify and hopefully reassure.

Like I said, I took it the wrong way, and for that I apologize. I apologize to Speedy, Mrs. Speedy and all the little Speedies running around. I also apologize to Ma and Pa Speedy, Sister and Brother Speedy, Aunt and Uncle Speedy, Grandma and Grandpa Speedy , not to mention all the Cousin Speedies out there. I will sacrifice a lamb in honor of all Speedies everywhere tonight. I will also have Mrs. Corporal give me 50 lashes tonight as punishment.


Am I forgiven now? :wink:
PUNISHMENT???

Sounds like nightly fun to me..... :twisted:

Anyway, for my two peneth worth, It was a tactical decision made in the context of what the blokes on the ground had been fighting through. Coupled with the total disregard that the "insurgents" seem to have to ANY form of previous convention, they have made their own convention apply. They have made it absolutely crystal clear that they have no regard for international law, so they can only expect not to be searched at close quarters, except when there is no doubt that they have no longer got the capability of triggering an explosive device.

Secondly....they release videos of peoples heads being removed.....and they want a fair treatment????????????

Get in there, get the job finished, and get out safely. Rant over.
 
#20
Birdie_Numnums said:
This sort of shite really p*sses me off. Media trying to second guess what soldiers are doing under fire. Why don't we see the same focus given to the behaviour of the enemy, perhaps as an explanation to the complex, highly dangerous and confusing environment soldiers find themselves in. There is no understanding by the media (and others) as to the difference between 'clean' fighting in the desert, devoid of civilians and the mess that is street fighting.

A visual grab taken out of context probably makes for dramatic news but it is an injustice to the men involved.

By the way. Well done the spams. You get nowhere by being Mr Nice with the enemy and the US full on approach is more likely to wrap up the battle faster than p*ssing about worrying about the media, who have it in for them anyway.
Well said that man. No-one except that guy who actualy fired the shot could possibly understand what he was going through at the time.
Personaly I would have put more than 1 round in him to make make sure. The fekker was quite happy when he was sniping the USMC - live by the sword, expect to die by the fekker.
 

Latest Threads