PDA

View Full Version : Report: Marines broke international law



LiberalNation
04-14-2007, 09:03 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/ap_on_re_as/afghan_marines_shooting

KABUL, Afghanistan - A U.S. Marine unit broke international humanitarian law by using excessive force during a shooting spree last month that left 12 people dead, an Afghan human rights group said in a report Saturday.

The troops fired indiscriminately at pedestrians, people in cars, public buses and taxis in six different locations along a 10-mile stretch of road in Nangahar province after an explosives-rigged minivan crashed into their convoy on March 4, according to the report by Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission.

Six people were killed near the blast site, while the other six died on the road as the troops sped away, said Ahmad Nader Nadery, the group's spokesman.

The dead included a 1-year-old boy, a 4-year-old girl and three women, the report said. Thirty-five people were wounded in the shootings.

"In failing to distinguish between civilians and legitimate military targets the U.S. Marines Corps Special Forces employed indiscriminate force," the report said. "Their actions thus constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law standards."

The group said its report was based on interviews with victims and their families, witnesses, local community leaders, hospital officials and police.

A U.S. military commander has also determined that the Marines used excessive force and referred the case for possible criminal inquiry, a senior U.S. defense official told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

U.S. military officials said after the incident that the suicide attack was part of an ambush that included militant gunmen shooting at Marines, which may have caused some of the civilian casualties.

The human rights group's report said "there is some evidence at the immediate site of the incident to support this claim, but it is far from conclusive and all witnesses and Afghan government officials interviewed uniformly denied that any attack beyond the initial (suicide car bombing) took place."

The group also alleges that U.S. troops serving with NATO's International Security Assistance Force in southern Afghanistan returned to the area after the bombing for an investigation and a cleanup operation, which involved the removal of all bullet shells and cartridges.

The group said it interviewed a member of Afghanistan's National Police criminal investigations office who said his unit had searched around the site after the incident, but that "ISAF forces had collected all shells, magazines, cartridges from the spot and we could not find any trace or sign of them."

U.S. military officials were not available to comment on that allegation.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly pleaded for Western troops to show more restraint amid concern that civilian deaths shake domestic support for the foreign military involvement that he needs to prop up his government, increasingly under threat from a resurgent Taliban.

The initial U.S. military investigation concluded that the Marines' response was "out of proportion to the threat that was immediately there," the senior U.S. defense official said Wednesday in Washington.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe's results have not been released. The findings have been forwarded to U.S. Central Command, which has responsibility for U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Another official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the initial military investigation concluded that there was a "reasonable suspicion" the Marines violated the rules for the use of deadly force, and that crimes, possibly including homicide, may have been committed in the aftermath of the convoy being struck.

One Marine was wounded in the blast, which also killed the bomber.

Army Maj. Gen. Francis H. Kearney III, head of Special Operations Command Central, opened an investigation into the incident after taking the highly unusual step of ordering the unit of about 120 Marines out of Afghanistan.

"We deeply regret the loss of life and casualties that resulted from the (suicide car bombing) and the actions that followed," Lt. Col. Lou Leto, spokesman at Kearney's command headquarters in Tampa, Fla., said in a statement. "We will work to prevent similar events from occurring in the future."

The Marines are in a special operations unit that deployed from Camp LeJeune, N.C., in January with the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit. After Kearney ordered them out of Afghanistan, they returned to their unit's ships in the Persian Gulf.

The unit is one of four Marine Special Operations Command companies established since the command was created in February 2006. The one ordered out of Afghanistan was the first to deploy abroad.

Gunny
04-14-2007, 09:24 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070414/ap_on_re_as/afghan_marines_shooting

KABUL, Afghanistan - A U.S. Marine unit broke international humanitarian law by using excessive force during a shooting spree last month that left 12 people dead, an Afghan human rights group said in a report Saturday.

The troops fired indiscriminately at pedestrians, people in cars, public buses and taxis in six different locations along a 10-mile stretch of road in Nangahar province after an explosives-rigged minivan crashed into their convoy on March 4, according to the report by Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission.

Six people were killed near the blast site, while the other six died on the road as the troops sped away, said Ahmad Nader Nadery, the group's spokesman.

The dead included a 1-year-old boy, a 4-year-old girl and three women, the report said. Thirty-five people were wounded in the shootings.

"In failing to distinguish between civilians and legitimate military targets the U.S. Marines Corps Special Forces employed indiscriminate force," the report said. "Their actions thus constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law standards."

The group said its report was based on interviews with victims and their families, witnesses, local community leaders, hospital officials and police.

A U.S. military commander has also determined that the Marines used excessive force and referred the case for possible criminal inquiry, a senior U.S. defense official told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

U.S. military officials said after the incident that the suicide attack was part of an ambush that included militant gunmen shooting at Marines, which may have caused some of the civilian casualties.

The human rights group's report said "there is some evidence at the immediate site of the incident to support this claim, but it is far from conclusive and all witnesses and Afghan government officials interviewed uniformly denied that any attack beyond the initial (suicide car bombing) took place."

The group also alleges that U.S. troops serving with NATO's International Security Assistance Force in southern Afghanistan returned to the area after the bombing for an investigation and a cleanup operation, which involved the removal of all bullet shells and cartridges.

The group said it interviewed a member of Afghanistan's National Police criminal investigations office who said his unit had searched around the site after the incident, but that "ISAF forces had collected all shells, magazines, cartridges from the spot and we could not find any trace or sign of them."

U.S. military officials were not available to comment on that allegation.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has repeatedly pleaded for Western troops to show more restraint amid concern that civilian deaths shake domestic support for the foreign military involvement that he needs to prop up his government, increasingly under threat from a resurgent Taliban.

The initial U.S. military investigation concluded that the Marines' response was "out of proportion to the threat that was immediately there," the senior U.S. defense official said Wednesday in Washington.

The official spoke on condition of anonymity because the probe's results have not been released. The findings have been forwarded to U.S. Central Command, which has responsibility for U.S. military operations in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Another official, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the initial military investigation concluded that there was a "reasonable suspicion" the Marines violated the rules for the use of deadly force, and that crimes, possibly including homicide, may have been committed in the aftermath of the convoy being struck.

One Marine was wounded in the blast, which also killed the bomber.

Army Maj. Gen. Francis H. Kearney III, head of Special Operations Command Central, opened an investigation into the incident after taking the highly unusual step of ordering the unit of about 120 Marines out of Afghanistan.

"We deeply regret the loss of life and casualties that resulted from the (suicide car bombing) and the actions that followed," Lt. Col. Lou Leto, spokesman at Kearney's command headquarters in Tampa, Fla., said in a statement. "We will work to prevent similar events from occurring in the future."

The Marines are in a special operations unit that deployed from Camp LeJeune, N.C., in January with the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit. After Kearney ordered them out of Afghanistan, they returned to their unit's ships in the Persian Gulf.

The unit is one of four Marine Special Operations Command companies established since the command was created in February 2006. The one ordered out of Afghanistan was the first to deploy abroad.

LMAO off. US Marine Special Forces? NO SUCH THING.

Let's not blame the bad guys. Let's blame the good guys.:lame2:

Dilloduck
04-14-2007, 09:26 PM
LMAO off. US Marine Special Forces? NO SUCH THING.

Let's not blame the bad guys. Let's blame the good guys.:lame2:

I'm sure she supports our troops tho !!!! :laugh2:

stephanie
04-14-2007, 09:27 PM
LMAO off. US Marine Special Forces? NO SUCH THING.

Let's not blame the bad guys. Let's blame the good guys.:lame2:

I think she post these types of articles to see if she can get a rise out of people..:slap:

LiberalNation
04-14-2007, 10:03 PM
Hey even the US gov said they did wrong and pulled them from the country.

Good guys tend to try to avoid killing four year olds regardless of the bad guys.

Dilloduck
04-14-2007, 10:18 PM
Hey even the US gov said they did wrong and pulled them from the country.

Good guys tend to try to avoid killing four year olds regardless of the bad guys.

SO your point is ?

LiberalNation
04-14-2007, 10:21 PM
This makes us aka the US look bad. Not like good guys. If people don't see us as good guys these type of limited wars will never work.

Dilloduck
04-14-2007, 10:24 PM
This makes us aka the US look bad. Not like good guys. If people don't see us as good guys these type of limited wars will never work.

Incidents like this do----they look even worse when people like you disseminate them out of contex and without mentioning any atrocities committed by he enemy.

LiberalNation
04-14-2007, 10:26 PM
For one I didn't write the article and I didn't take anything out of context. I'm just as happy to post stories about the terrorists atrocities which normally are much worse then our own when I come across them searching yahoo for my daily dose of news.

Gaffer
04-14-2007, 10:34 PM
I'm trying to figure out where this Marine Special Forces thing comes in too. Force Recon is the closest thing to special forces they would have. All Marines are special forces. Marine Special Forces is redundant.

I suspect the attackers were hiding among the population and the marines fired back. I would bet money they didn't just walk around abitrarily shooting people. And I would want to know just who makes up this human rights commission if they are all afgan. And then how reliable are the supposed witnesses. Shades of flying imam's would muslims lie?

Dilloduck
04-14-2007, 10:40 PM
For one I didn't write the article and I didn't take anything out of context. I'm just as happy to post stories about the terrorists atrocities which normally are much worse then our own when I come across them searching yahoo for my daily dose of news.

What a crock of shit--show me one!

LiberalNation
04-14-2007, 10:47 PM
I remember posting something about Iranian women’s right activist being arrested. Posted article about those brits taken captive here maybe I know on other boards. Actually post more on the terrorists on more liberal boards and more about the US problems on here because they cause more of a stir if you match the stories to go against the boards dominant ideology.

Dilloduck
04-14-2007, 10:53 PM
I remember posting something about Iranian womenís right activist being arrested. Posted article about those brits taken captive here maybe I know on other boards. Actually post more on the terrorists on more liberal boards and more about the US problems on here because they cause more of a stir if you match the stories to go against the boards dominant ideology.

Nice of you to cause a stir---I guess Stephianie was correct--you post for effect.

LiberalNation
04-14-2007, 11:00 PM
Somewhat for effect sure. No use posting articles few people will debate and many will just ignore. I post something bad about terrorists and you get a few lame comments about how awful, ect. Post a story about US troops doing something bad and you get people defending them, questioning the source and having some debate. Which I can then debate back.

Samantha
04-14-2007, 11:04 PM
I am glad the US military investigates and holds people accountable for crimes committed during war. We are still a good country at the core. Now we just have to get rid of the crooks that are running things right now.

Gaffer
04-14-2007, 11:28 PM
I am glad the US military investigates and holds people accountable for crimes committed during war. We are still a good country at the core. Now we just have to get rid of the crooks that are running things right now.

And replace them with crooks that will run away from things. :cool:

Samantha
04-14-2007, 11:38 PM
And replace them with crooks that will run away from things. :cool:
Run away from things like finding Osama Bin Laden and ending the Taleban and Al Qeada? No, hopefully our next President will actually get the fucks that attacked us. This President doesn't really think about that anymore. This President has made such a mess of things that the greatest military in the world is losing two wars at the same time. Only the biggest fuck up in history could arrange for this to happen.

stephanie
04-15-2007, 12:13 AM
It must be sad to live with so much hate, all over politics..

avatar4321
04-15-2007, 06:11 AM
I am glad the US military investigates and holds people accountable for crimes committed during war. We are still a good country at the core. Now we just have to get rid of the crooks that are running things right now.

I agree. Vote the Dems out of Congress.

avatar4321
04-15-2007, 06:12 AM
Run away from things like finding Osama Bin Laden and ending the Taleban and Al Qeada? No, hopefully our next President will actually get the fucks that attacked us. This President doesn't really think about that anymore. This President has made such a mess of things that the greatest military in the world is losing two wars at the same time. Only the biggest fuck up in history could arrange for this to happen.

You do realize that the "f***s who attacked us" committed suicide to attack us don't you?

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 08:49 AM
This makes us aka the US look bad. Not like good guys. If people don't see us as good guys these type of limited wars will never work.

Actually when did any 'limited' war ever result in 'working'?

Gunny
04-15-2007, 02:50 PM
Run away from things like finding Osama Bin Laden and ending the Taleban and Al Qeada? No, hopefully our next President will actually get the fucks that attacked us. This President doesn't really think about that anymore. This President has made such a mess of things that the greatest military in the world is losing two wars at the same time. Only the biggest fuck up in history could arrange for this to happen.

WHO exactly, is going to do all that? Or I should say bring it about, since NONE of those damned politicians do a damned thing themselves.

The President that preceeded this President did his damnedest to ignore radical Islam, and left Iraq for this President to deal with. Yet you would have us believe a like-minded President would somehow go against the loony extremists that drive his political party and actually accomplish something?

And how is the US military losing two wars? It is engaged in actual war only on one front, and I must've missed where we didn't run the Taliban into the hills and a neighboring country. It's never going to get better than that, and it never was.

The only thing being lost in Iraq is the political battle here at home because people are drowned in negative, overly-sensationalized leftis crap through the MSM.

The military phase of invading Iraq was almost textbook flawless, and it's been over since a couple of weeks after it began. The only "war" being waged in Iraq is sectarian, with the US caught in the middle, but definitely not engaged in waging a war. Instead, they're playing beat cop.

Gunny
04-15-2007, 02:51 PM
Actually when did any 'limited' war ever result in 'working'?

Well there was that time .....uuummmm wait ...... no ......ummm.........:dunno:

Gunny
04-15-2007, 02:52 PM
And replace them with crooks that will run away from things. :cool:

:clap:

If THAT ain't the truth.

SassyLady
04-15-2007, 03:00 PM
And replace them with crooks that will run away from things. :cool:

tried to rep you!!

:clap: :clap:

Gunny
04-15-2007, 03:12 PM
tried to rep you!!

:clap: :clap:

He got rep for it.;)

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 04:08 PM
Limited wars, Gulf War and a few other small ones did work.

shattered
04-15-2007, 04:11 PM
Boy, Marines are always breaking something, aren't they?

manu1959
04-15-2007, 04:18 PM
Limited wars, Gulf War and a few other small ones did work.

gulf war II is a result of gulf war I's treaty being broken....

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 04:24 PM
gulf war II is a result of gulf war I's treaty being broken....

Why do they find it so hard to make the connections?

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 04:26 PM
Because that was not the given reason for the invasion by the admin.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 04:27 PM
Why do they find it so hard to make the connections?

lets wait and find out....one of "those people" will be along soon...

*wow they got here before i could even type this, and with one of the standard answers*

manu1959
04-15-2007, 04:29 PM
Because that was not the given reason for the invasion by the admin.

really....there were no speaches on the floor of the un about breaches of 18 un resolutions and all of those resolutions referenced the cease fire treaty...from gulf war I....

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 04:31 PM
There were but in those speeches Bush gave to the nation it was all about self defence. We have to defend our self from Saddam. He has WMD's, He's making nukes, He's gona give them to terrorist, he was connected to 9-11. That is what Bush used to justify the war to this nation not the UN stuff,

Also the US can not enforce UN resolutions anyway without the backing of the UN.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 04:43 PM
There were but in those speeches Bush gave to the nation it was all about self defence. We have to defend our self from Saddam. He has WMD's, He's making nukes, He's gona give them to terrorist, he was connected to 9-11. That is what Bush used to justify the war to this nation not the UN stuff,

Also the US can not enforce UN resolutions anyway without the backing of the UN.

you may want to read the content of the un resolution and the terms of the cease fire .... i belive the only group that has ever claimed saddam was connected to 9-11 is the media and the left ....

afganistan was invaded because of 9-11

iraq was invaded because of a breach of 18 un resolutions.....you do know that under clinton we shot down iraqi jets and bombed iraqi radar installations without un approval becasue of a breach in the cease fire trety from gulf war I

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 04:45 PM
Yes. Clinton lobbed a few missle and them and maybe someone else, don't remember. Wasn't into politics at that time.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 04:49 PM
Yes. Clinton lobbed a few missle and them and maybe someone else, don't remember. Wasn't into politics at that time.

so it would seem that the us govt had set precedence that iraq was a threat prior to 9-11 .... through 8 years of democrat leadership which was acting unilatteraly without un approval or international approval....

seems bush was simply following in bubbas footprints...with respect to iraq

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 04:50 PM
Except he started a war that isn't going well and you tend to face harsher criticism and a higher standard when you do that. Might not be totally intellectually honest but that’s how it is.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 05:00 PM
Except he started a war that isn't going well and you tend to face harsher criticism and a higher standard when you do that. Might not be totally intellectually honest but that’s how it is.

somalia didn't go well...going well is a matter of perspective.....i think well is defined by the press as no one dies .... hell not one big city in the us can claim things are going well....

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 05:02 PM
Didn't Clinton take a lot of heat for somalia. That's the one where a bunch of marines were killed in an explosion and we pulled out isn't it.

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 05:05 PM
Didn't Clinton take a lot of heat for somalia. That's the one where a bunch of marines were killed in an explosion and we pulled out isn't it.

That was Bush I.

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 05:06 PM
So the black hawk down one is Somalia.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 05:07 PM
Didn't Clinton take a lot of heat for somalia. That's the one where a bunch of marines were killed in an explosion and we pulled out isn't it.

lebanon was the explosion under reagan

somalia was a peacekeeping mission where we went in to capture a somali war lord and two of our choppers got shot down and several marines were killed....book and a movie about it ...black hawk down....

don't recall clinton getting much heat....then he bailed on the rawandans and let them kill each other....

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 05:07 PM
Sorry we haven't got there in history. We're just starting on Bush 1 now and I didn't live thru it.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 05:11 PM
Sorry we haven't got there in history. We're just starting on Bush 1 now and I didn't live thru it.

should be interesting for you....

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 05:12 PM
It is pretty nteresting since I actaully don't know this stuff. The older history they teach a lot but not this stuff. This is the first history class I've taken that's made it this far.

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 05:14 PM
Sorry we haven't got there in history. We're just starting on Bush 1 now and I didn't live thru it.

How old are you?

manu1959
04-15-2007, 05:15 PM
It is pretty nteresting since I actaully don't know this stuff. The older history they teach a lot but not this stuff. This is the first history class I've taken that's made it this far.

yes i have noticed that schools are adding "modern" history to teach the difference between the carter clinton school and the nixon reagan bush bush school and which one is better....and why....

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 05:20 PM
yes i have noticed that schools are adding "modern" history to teach the difference between the carter clinton school and the nixon reagan bush bush school and which one is better....and why....

There should be more history in high school. I've noticed our district is going to require 4 years again beginning next year, up from 2. They've been requiring 'Global Studies' and the equivalent of 'American History' + Constitution in previous years. 2 of my kids started in honors and moved to ap in sophomore years. Huge difference, they did take 4 years through electives.

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 05:22 PM
How old are you?

17, I'm a junior.

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 05:23 PM
17, I'm a junior.

So what social science classes have you taken, taking?

manu1959
04-15-2007, 05:25 PM
There should be more history in high school. I've noticed our district is going to require 4 years again beginning next year, up from 2. They've been requiring 'Global Studies' and the equivalent of 'American History' + Constitution in previous years. 2 of my kids started in honors and moved to ap in sophomore years. Huge difference, they did take 4 years through electives.

i was less than good at history....my brother majored in it at UCLA....

LiberalNation
04-15-2007, 05:29 PM
So what social science classes have you taken, taking?

In highschool. First was world history, then civics/economy, and this year US history. That's the standard course everyone has to take at my school in social studies. Wont have a history class next year, because I can't coep and take elective history classes both. Tried to get some electives histories the first three years but never got in.

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 05:29 PM
i was less than good at history....my brother majored in it at UCLA....

I think there has been a long term problem with teaching history for a good many years. The texts suck, seriously suck. Then if the teacher is not a history major, (with some other minors like pol. sci., sociology, psychology, or economics), they probably are not able to bring the passion, not to mention connections necessary for the kids to be able to understand the past and today.

The other day my principal crept up behind me, (not hard to do since I don't hear very well, even with hearing aids), while the 8th grade was discussing WWI and alliances/nationalism etc. The fact that they were bringing up connections with WOT impressed her. She was the social studies teacher before I was hired. ;)

Gunny
04-15-2007, 05:46 PM
Limited wars, Gulf War and a few other small ones did work.

In the sense of the term "war," the 1st Gulf War was not a limited war. It was a total military action with a strategic goal that was accomplished.

avatar4321
04-15-2007, 05:47 PM
There were but in those speeches Bush gave to the nation it was all about self defence. We have to defend our self from Saddam. He has WMD's, He's making nukes, He's gona give them to terrorist, he was connected to 9-11. That is what Bush used to justify the war to this nation not the UN stuff,

Also the US can not enforce UN resolutions anyway without the backing of the UN.

All one has to do is read the state of the Union for 2003 to show this is an absolute mistatement of fact.

Gunny
04-15-2007, 05:47 PM
Because that was not the given reason for the invasion by the admin.

In actuality, it WAS one of the reasons given by the Administration.

Gunny
04-15-2007, 05:49 PM
There were but in those speeches Bush gave to the nation it was all about self defence. We have to defend our self from Saddam. He has WMD's, He's making nukes, He's gona give them to terrorist, he was connected to 9-11. That is what Bush used to justify the war to this nation not the UN stuff,

Also the US can not enforce UN resolutions anyway without the backing of the UN.

You would be incorrect. That's what left-wing propaganda would have you believe. Those reasons were just some of the reasons listed by Bush.

Kathianne
04-15-2007, 05:50 PM
In highschool. First was world history, then civics/economy, and this year US history. That's the standard course everyone has to take at my school in social studies. Wont have a history class next year, because I can't coep and take elective history classes both. Tried to get some electives histories the first three years but never got in.
Well then, I hope you are able to get more in college. Kind of scary to think you are unaware of current events. (Yes, 1990-2007 qualify for 'current events'.)

Gunny
04-15-2007, 05:50 PM
Except he started a war that isn't going well and you tend to face harsher criticism and a higher standard when you do that. Might not be totally intellectually honest but thatís how it is.

How intellectually honest has been calling a post-war occupation and political clusterfuck a "war?"

Gunny
04-15-2007, 05:52 PM
Didn't Clinton take a lot of heat for somalia. That's the one where a bunch of marines were killed in an explosion and we pulled out isn't it.

LOL. Not quite. The Beirut Barracks Bombing was in 1983. Somalia was a decade later, and it was teh army that got ambushed and jacked up.

manu1959
04-15-2007, 05:55 PM
All one has to do is read the state of the Union for 2003 to show this is an absolute mistatement of fact.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/01/28/sotu.transcript/