Kerry was more correct than he knew

[ginnyinWI]

when he used the word "terrorizing" to describe the behavior of our troops v.s. Iraqi citizens. Get a load of this:

...Khalaf, a 33-year-old security officer guarding oil pipelines, saw a US helicopter land near his home. American soldiers stormed out of the Chinook and advanced on a house owned by Khalaf's brother Fayez, firing as they went.

Khalaf ran from his own house and hid in a nearby grove of trees. He saw the soldiers enter his brother's home and then heard the sound of women and children screaming.

"Then there was a lot of machinegun fire," he said last week. After that there was the most frightening sound of all - silence, followed by explosions as the soldiers left the house.

Once the troops were gone, Khalaf and his fellow villagers began a frantic search through the ruins of his brother's home. Abu Sifa was about to join a lengthening list of Iraqi communities claiming to have suffered from American atrocities...

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/032706K.shtml

Notice that the original article appeared in a UK newspaper. :(

[TayTay]

1. Ahm, I would tread lightly on this one

Those details don't add up. I suspect propaganda on the other side on this story. This is a terrible, terrible story and I want to see the back-up on it before I take it as truth.

It might be true, but it also might not. The US has done a lot wrong in IRaq to be sure. But willful forays into a house to kill women and children on purpose is a very, very serious charge. I want some other verification on this.

[karynnj]

6. I agree - also this was totally NOT what Kerry was speaking of

He explained the feelings of terror that exist when foreign troops invade homes in the middle of the night - even if all they do is hunt for weapons (tearing up the house in the process) and look for specific wanted people. This undeniably happened - and the soldiers were doing their job and Kerry wasn't critising them.

That there were charges of taking all men in some communities prisoner or in any way restraining people is worse. The charges of actual atrocities go well beyond what Kerry was speaking of here. We should not conflate these charges with the procedures that caused fear that were part of the job that Kerry was talking about.

The Kerry answer relative to this was an answer to a question of atrocities asked at Georgetown - Kerry very carefully spoke of the fact that most soldiers didn't do these things and training to avoid it before saying if they occured they were wrong. (When he said he wouldn't have used the same language (in 2004) that he used in 1971 - this was likely what he was talking about. He now explicitly makes the point that most soldiers are not quilty of atrocities. In 1971, he was blaming the policies and the leadership, but he didn't qualify every sentence - so the lazy or dishonest were able to misinterrept him.)

[babylonsister]

2. If this shakes out as truth, what are we creating over there?

This is just awful. :cry:

[TayTay]

3. It is a war crime. I believe this is something that can be brought

before the International Tribunal at the Hague. Entering a home and wontonly and randomly killing women, children and innocents without provocation is a very, very serious crime. (And a staggering indictment of the country accused.)

This is beyond horrible, it is the kind of thing that the old, moral, thinking US used to condemn as 'war crimes.'

[Luftmensch067]

4. and yet, if there is truth in it...

...the testimony at the Winter Soldier Convention immediately springs to mind. This is what happens when you have a lack of moral leadership at the top.

[ginnyinWI]

5. it came to mind for me, too.

Soldiers under extreme stress. Lack of moral leadership--heck, any decent civilian leadership. The thing's FUBAR.