Does it bother anyone else when people try to equivocate on Haditha?

[Liberal Veteran]

With statements like, "How come the press and people don't talk about the insurgents killing innocent women and children, but have a cow when our people do it?"

The fact is, what terrorists or insurgents do is NOT done in our name. The terrorists and insurgents don't where an American uniform and the acts they perform are neither done in the name of the US people nor are those acts under our direct control.

We can try to prevent insurgent attacks and terrorism and condemn them, but we have no direct control over the actions of insurgents or terrorists. They are not in our direct sphere of influence and thus, when someone does commit an atrocity such what seems to have occurred in Haditha or Abu Gharib, naturally, we get just a bit more vocal about it, because it reflects on ALL of us and tarnishes what little reputation we have left as good, peaceful, civilized people.

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. The terrorists do it, so why can't we? Great.

[Liberal Veteran]

3. As if that were the standard we want to live down to.

That's exactly how I see that kind of rationalization. It's boggling, isn't it?

[Avalux]

2. Yes, but it's human nature.

People don't want to believe such an horrific thing happened, so they try to rationalize it to make it seem less horrific.

[90-percent]

5. Insurgents

I hope they get started building their skyscrapers soon.

So that a few of us Americans can fly commercial airplanes into them!

That will teach 'em!

-85% Jimmy

[Igel]

4. My problem isn't with the press equivocating.

If the Marines did what's been alleged at Haditha, those responsible--all those responsible--should be taken out and shot. But there's every reason to investigate it, and not assume since a claim is made that it must be true.

Too many get outraged over what "seems to have occurred in Haditha." I looked at the little footage the BBC made available, and it made me understand things less.

I hope they get a team of forensics experts in there to examine the bodies, whether or not any Iraqi, freeper, or DUer believes the results.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

6. It bothers me that people bring up the Stanford Experiment.

The line of reasoning is "see, everybody does it! Nothing to see here!"

And of course there's the "a few bad apples" line.

They always forget the second half of that sentence.

[Catrina]

7. Yes, it does bother a lot of people because it has no bearing on the

issue whatsoever, and you have to question the motives of people who try to make that connection. THey are basically saying that Americans should accept some moral equivalency with criminals.

The same argument (from RW ditto heads) was made when it was clear that they could no longer deny that Abu Ghraib was a reality. RW talking points included 'why are you not angry about 'insurgents' cutting off people's heads'? As if that was a fact. They have a habit of planting thoughts in people's heads that aren't there hoping to place those who are truly appalled at what this administration has done to this country, in a defensive position. The tactic is meant to divert attention away from the crime, as if that were possible.

It's an old RW tactic and I think by now most people recognize it for what it is. But why would anyone who cares about this country even try to defend such atrocities? Sometimes I think this country has been infiltrated by enemies who want to see its image destroyed around the world. Because of them this country has totally lost its moral authority, imo.

[coalition_unwilling]

8. "We can try to prevent insurgent attacks and terrorism and condemn them"

Please stop calling it 'terrorism' when 'they' do it. They are legitimately resisting an unlawful occupation. Who's the real terrorist?

Here's a quote with some relevance:

"We do not believe in conferences called to ratify terror, so our policy is unchanged."

Guess who said it.

Give up?

Lyndon Baines Johnson, July 24, 1964, responding to Charles DeGaulle's call for a renewal of the Geneva Conference to find a peaceful settlement of the conflict in South Vietnam.

Quoted from Frederik Logevall's "Choosing War: The Lost Chances for Peace and the Escalation of War in Vietnam" (p. 188)

[Liberal Veteran]

10. I specifically mentioned BOTH because I see them differently.

An insurgent attack and terrorist attack are two separate things and they are BOTH brought up in the usual arguments about why we should just turn a blind eye to bad behavior by our side.

I see the point you are trying to make, but I didn't equate terrorism and insurgent attacks.

[Scoody Boo]

22. I call the murder of civilians...

"murder of civilians," no matter who does it. Marines, terrorists or insurgents. Being killed by Marines does not make them "more dead" than if killed by insurgents so I am outraged at it just the same.

[Liberal Veteran]

23. Are insurgents or terrorists wearing the flag of your country?

I agree all loss of life is appalling, but when an atrocity is committed wearing the uniform of our country, it tarnishes our country and pride and is an insult to our values.

We can't control the actions of terrorists or insurgents directly, but what our troops do, we (as a country) do have direct control over.

That's what makes it different for me. Making me an accessory to murder or abuse or torture is unacceptable in my book. That's the point I am trying to make. Not that somehow they are "deader" based on who kills them.

[Scoody Boo]

25. So because you can't control them...

you don't feel any outrage at their atrocities? Their victims are worth of only a shrug and an "Oh well," but the victims of Marines are worth eye rolling, puking, mouth frothing fits?

I am angered by the deaths of all innocent victims murdered by insurgents or Americans.

I have never said anything different, but I have caught flak over it. I guess George Orwell through his story Animal Farm wrote the truth according to some people. "All Animals are equal, but some are more equal than others."

Myself? I don't believe that.

[Liberal Veteran]

26. It's a different flavor of outrage based on what I can and cannot change

I am not in control of what terrorists or insurgents do any more than I would have been in control of Darfur or Auschwitz. Those incidents aren't done wearing the uniform of my country and it reflects on the people and culture responsible for those acts.

Abu Ghrarib and Haditha (assuming that the reports are true) is something done by representatives of our country and our culture and that means it and our response to it does and will reflect on us as a nation.

I cannot bear any responsibility for a terrorist blowing up a car bomb in a marketplace in Israel and I cannot be blamed for terrorists flying planes into buildings.

As a American citizen, our troops are representing our nation and our culture and when they act in an unbecoming manner, I do carry a burden of responsibility because I am part of the nation and culture that committed those acts. How we respond to it will speak volumes about us as a nation. This slap on the wrist shit and trying to equivocate by saying "well, the other side did such and such", doesn't make those acts correct.

We as a people have some say in how our side acts (supposedly) and therefore, it is our burden when our side behaves inhumanely.

[JuniperLea]

9. I'm guessing here...

But the vast majority of insurgents are Iraqi army and citizens... why would they kill their own people? They are fighting "us" because they want us out of their country... and rightfully so.

[uppityperson]

11. War is Hell. Occupations are Hell.

Bad acts happen on all sides because we are occupying Iraq. That is the point, we can leave and the horrific acts will stop.

[Liberal Veteran]

13. I disagree. Leaving won't necessarily make the horrific acts stop.

The only thing we can be assured of by leaving is horrific acts done in our name by our people will stop.

[uppityperson]

17. right, that is what I meant.

sorry, missed that part. thanks.

[BlooInBloo]

12. Of course - that's why, for example...

... good people like Olbermann make people like john gibson the Worst Person In The World, and spend 15 minutes handing bill-o his head.

What makes it more maddening for me though, is the fact that jackasses like those on fox wouldn't PRODUCE such crap unless there were plenty of CONSUMERS of the crap.

It's my opinion that the true solution to the crap PRODUCERS is to get people to stop CONSUMING the crap. If people won't consume it, the producers will disappear naturally.

[Ksec]

14. Youre dealing with a bunch of propagandists

They thrive on disinfo and have become good at it.

You are correct when you write that the enemy does these things , but not under our flag.

[Liberal Veteran]

16. And that's precisely the way we need to answer that line of crap.

"We have no control over what terrorists or insurgents do. It is what our people do in our name we have direct control over and it is on that we will be judged, not by what acts the other side may or may not do."

[kittenpants]

15. I'm glad you said that, liberal vet

I feel the same way--I am not responsible for what the people of other nations do, but I do feel responsible for what our soldiers do in the name of my country.

[stanwyck]

18. When we first invaded Iraq and started the bombing

many of us here at work (yes, I'm supposed to be working) expressed sadness at the innocent loss of life. I'm still shaken by the comments of fundie co-workers, always ready to affirm their deep-rooted faith in God, who proclaimed it "doesn't matter how many of "them" we kill". Or when queried about the indiscriminate wounding and killing of civilians, said "who cares? They're all terrorists."
Now, they're stonewalling on the atrocities in Iraq. Or blithely mentioning "people die in war. What did you expect?"

[Disturbed]

19. "The enemy does these things."

I haven't heard or read that "the enemy" methodicaly shoots children and babies. Even if they had done so it would not excuse US Troops or US Mercs from doing so.

[H2O Man]

20. Well said.

Thank you.

[ComerPerro]

21. Last I knew, people did get very upset when insurgents kill innocents

[Liberal Veteran]

24. Yes, we do and did, but the apologist and the people rationalizing...

...want to pretend it somehow gets less exposure than this.

I guess for me, it's the difference between knowing someone got killed by a drunk driver and knowing that I handed the keys to the person who was driving drunk. I would feel a little bit worse for being so much more closely involved in the latter than the former.

[Zhade]

27. Yes. It's disgusting, and possibly racist.

NT!

[Marr]

28. Wait a minute.

Are terrorists the scum of the earth... or the standard of acceptable behavior?

I wish these idiots could be consistent just once.

[Liberal Veteran]

29. Apparently it depends on the day of the week.

The right acuses the left of moral relativism, but claiming our actions should be the moral line on which we must look at our own actions is an appalling argument.