Marine Lieut. charged with murder for killing Iraqi's

[ginshun]

Time magazine story

I am sure that some of you have already heard of this. It is the case of Marine 2nd Lieut. Ilario Pantano. As the story goes, he was in a combat situation, when he shot and killed two Iraqi's, who turned out to be unarmed. Now he is being charged with two counts of pre-medidtated murder.

I was just wondering what some people on here thought of this situation, and the way it is being handled.

IMO, this is just plain ridiculous. These guys are in a war zone for gods sake! People are getting killed every day, all around them. Now they have to worry about stuff like this.

Lt. Pantano and several other soldiers that were there say that the two Iraqi's both turned and started toward him, and that he yelled for them to stop in there language. When they didn't, he shot them. Now the Time article that I linked to said that he shot them in the back, so I am not sure how that works. I don't really know what to believe. What I do know is that he says he felt threatened by them and other soldiers confirmed that his actions were the same as theirs would have been. That is enough in my book.

I also know that I wouldn't want to be in the situation of the soldiers that are still over there right now. Now they not only have to worry about whether or not the next person they meet might kill them, but now they have to worry about going to prison too if they misjudge that situation.

 

[kid]

you know what if i was in hostile territory and someone was walking twords me and didn't comply whith a show of being unarmed. It's my responsibility to protect myself and my fellows. He had to act or not act and possibly face worse conditions.

 

[kid]

Something esle happened this is just a cover for whatever really happened. I mean it is absolutly rediculous this guy is being told that he did something wrong, something else happened and this was thrown infront to distract the main problem whatever that may be. Anyone agree? Disagree?

 

[PeachMonkey]

American soldiers have been held to high standards of accountability in combat for a very long time -- and have upheld them in most cases.

 

[kid]

the standards you are talking about are almost the same laws of engagement a police officer has. the big differnce is that a cop ain't at a war. especially one he doesn't belong at.

 

[michaeledward]

An unfortunate tale. Is he being used as a scapegoat? Perhaps.

He had the two in handcuffs. He took the handcuffs off.

I don't know much, but that seems odd.

"The single biggest problem with the Iraq operation is that the military is at war but the nation is not," says an officer. A former Marine colonel who served for 27 years says the Marine Corps "always values its reputation and image. They want to act and be known as the good guys. They are very mindful of how they are perceived both domestically and overseas,

 

[Rynocerous]

the standards you are talking about are almost the same laws of engagement a police officer has. the big differnce is that a cop ain't at a war. especially one he doesn't belong at.

Actually the standards are definately different, and the fact that these soldiers are fighting where they don't belong is a matter of opinion. Yours as a civilian is tainted by the media and propaganda that is ongoing every day. Any police officer would also argue the fact that they aren't at war. They are constantly at "war" with crime, just as the military is at war with terrorism. They have a very dangerous job and I have nothing but respect for any man in uniform.

Cheers,

Rynocerous

 

[Cryozombie]

I dont know all the details of this, as really no one here does.

Putting the pieces together, as I have heard them, readin the article, this is the situation in my head...

The Marine was in a "Hot Spot" and saw a vehicle fleeing the area. It was stopped, and two Civilians were ordered to show they had no weapons in the vehicle. They did so, but then they turned on the marine.

The article says after that: "What happened next cost both Iraqis their lives"

But does not specify what that was.

In this situation, based on the information presented in that article, I'm sorry to say I would have shot them as well.

I mean, In a WAR ZONE, when everyone you see can potentially be an enemy combatant, if someone acts like an enemy, you NEED to act. If you do not, and they are in fact an enemy, you risk not only losing your life, but the lives of your friends and fellow soldiers.

It is ok to hold our soldiers to a standard of conduct. In fact, it is neccessary. His actions afterwords were certainly questioable. But what happens if we start second guessing them, and pressing charges everytime one of them discharges their weapon, is that we create a situation where the Soldier has to think about wether he is going to be courtmartialed if he acts, or if he is going to be killed along with his teammates if he fails to act... and that hesitation WILL lead to our soilders being killed in greater numbers.

The fact of the matter is this: if you are a non-combatant and asked to do somthing, you comply. You dont make sudden movents, act like you have a weapon, argue, etc... This is nothing unusual, they say the same thing here about confrontations with law enforcement.

If we toss our soldiers in jail everytime someone does not, and we react, we will, effectivly cripple our military. Feel how you do about the conflict, but IMO, if we do that, we may as well all hand our belongings over and chop our own heads off, because there will be NO ONE to protect us when they come for us, as everyone in the military will be in jail and/or dead.

 

[Cryozombie]

He had the two in handcuffs. He took the handcuffs off.

I don't know much, but that seems odd.

No, not really. Think about it for a second.

Two suspected insurgants, and a possibly booby trapped car.

Are YOU gonna lift the seat cusions, or back off and make THEM?

I know which *I* would choose.

 

[PeachMonkey]

But what happens if we start second guessing them, and pressing charges everytime one of them discharges their weapon...

Thankfully, however, we're not pressing charges everytime soldiers discharge weapons. This is one charge (or set of charges?) against one Marine Lieutenant.

 

[Cryozombie]

Thankfully, however, we're not pressing charges everytime soldiers discharge weapons. This is one charge (or set of charges?) against one Marine Lieutenant.

Uh huh.

Just one this time.

And what happens the next time this occurs? Do we ignore it? There is a REASON the legal system has somthing called "Precedent"...

It might be more realistic to call this not "one charge" but perhaps "The FIRST Charge"

But we will have to wait and see, wont we?

 

[PeachMonkey]

And what happens the next time this occurs? Do we ignore it? There is a REASON the legal system has somthing called "Precedent"...

You're right; and if the charges are shown to lack merit, the precedent will be set accordingly. If the Lieutenant was shown to have committed murder, then charges will likely continue to be filed when American servicemen commit murder. As they should be.

You may remember that Americans *have* committed murder in war, and been charged and tried for it. This has not resulted in charges being filed every time an American soldier discharges his or her weapon.

 

[kid]

Actually the standards are definately different, and the fact that these soldiers are fighting where they don't belong is a matter of opinion. Yours as a civilian is tainted by the media and propaganda that is ongoing every day. Any police officer would also argue the fact that they aren't at war. They are constantly at "war" with crime, just as the military is at war with terrorism. They have a very dangerous job and I have nothing but respect for any man in uniform.

Cheers,

Rynocerous

I dont know what to say. Besides do you aggree with the war? Me personaly i like peace. Now that doesn't seem very likely, but war is definately a step in the opposite direction.

Also you and i are only allowed to read what they want us to read. That does not mean its the truth. If you beleive that an American soldier shot and killed two civilians. What the hell were they doing infront of the gun anyways. Its common sense to anyone to avoid potentially dangerous situations. Its plain stupidity not to realize this in a war zone.

Its differnt to be in a war and to fight crime. A cop goes home to a family, a comfortabe place, after his/her shift. Is that what a soldier gets to do? I comend all law enforcement but they are not at war.



Kid

 

[Cryozombie]

You may remember that Americans *have* committed murder in war, and been charged and tried for it. This has not resulted in charges being filed every time an American soldier discharges his or her weapon.

I agree with this. However, from the information presented in that article, (and yes, I did say that the FACT is that none of us know what really happened) from what was presented, the Marine acted in a manner consistant with the actions REQUIRED in a combat situation. As an infantry soldier, THIS is what *I* was trained to do... I spoke to a friend of mine who fought in Iraq with the Army Rangers the first time around, he said that is exactly what he would have done... Now granted the word of 1 serviceman "onsite" claimed that the Marine acted in the wrong, but 2 others say he did not... so who knows.

My fear is that this trial, regardless of the outcome, will set a precident that "if you fire, you may be charged" and it will cause our servicemen to hesitate, or even Fear to protect themselves, and cost many more lives than this already has... as I stated before, if a person, innocent or not, acts like a hostile in a combat zone, the NEED to be treated as one, without fear of reprisal if they are innocent.

Imagine YOUR horror if I walked up to you, swung my fist but stopped short of your face, and your "martial training" kicked in and you popped me in the face and I sued you for assault... because I didnt ACTUALLY do anything, I was "innocent"...

Same Same, in my mind. I think this action is dangerous. If this soldier out and out walked up to any old Iraqi and said "Hey You" and then blew him away, Then yes, the soldier deserves to be locked away, or whatever punishment they see fit for him, but AS THE EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRESENTED TO US, that does not, on the surface, appear to be the case... And if it doesn't to us, that most likely means it also does not to the average Gi Joe over there... ask yourself whats going thru his/her head after hearing about this?

 

[michaeledward]

Or,

playing devil's advocate ...

I had the suspected insurgents in custody, detained and restrained. I removed the restraints and shot them. I can argue, that they turned on me aggressively, and had to shoot in self-defense.

Now, I agree, that I don't know that I would want to poking around the stopped vehilce if there might be explosives inside. But, I would think the United States military might have, somewhere, the proper tool for searching vehicles for explosives.

In this situation, the best tool for looking for explosives is a detained Iraqi? Our military budget really is way too high, if this is true.

 

[Tgace]

I would think the United States military might have, somewhere, the proper tool for searching vehicles for explosives.

Yeah..they're called Marines. There aren't enough EOD guys in the known universe to check every suspicious vehicle, package etc over there.....

 

[michaeledward]

But, I would think the United States military might have, somewhere, the proper tool for searching vehicles for explosives.

Yeah..they're called Marines.

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought. Which against beg the question, why take the hand restraints off of the detained suspects?

If you pulled me over, hand cuffed me, would you take the handcuffs off and have me open the trunk of my vehicle?

I don't know that I am terribly comfortable with a murder charge in this situation, but from my inexperienced point of view, something doesn't seem right.

 

[Tgace]

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought. Which against beg the question, why take the hand restraints off of the detained suspects?

If you pulled me over, hand cuffed me, would you take the handcuffs off and have me open the trunk of my vehicle?

I don't know that I am terribly comfortable with a murder charge in this situation, but from my inexperienced point of view, something doesn't seem right.

The way the military trains it...you DO have the BG check the vehicle (was trained that way prior to Bosnia deployment) because either a) He hesitates or refuses to open the area that has the bomb. b)He does blow the bomb but at least it isnt in his intended target area c) He decides to fight or flee instead of checking his own vehicle.

If I think that opening the hood could possibly trigger a device, Im going to have YOU open it, not ME.

This is combat...civilian concepts of LEO type procedures do not always apply. The goal isnt to arrest here, I think people are confusing combat and law enforcement these days.

 

[Tgace]

In this technique, you maintain close observation of the subject and deal with his actions according to the rules of engagement. If the guy made a sudden move and I thought he was going to trigger a car bomb, blasting me and my men to hell...Id smoke him sure as shootin.

Is this what happened here? I dont know. I would only have had 1 subject released from restraints to check the vehicle. Why they all were? I dont know, I would have to ask. If some of his own men question his actions then maybe there is something going on....guess we'll have to wait for details.

 

[michaeledward]

I think people are confusing combat and law enforcement these days.

I appreciate the differences between combat and civilian law enforcement. And I understand why military procedure may be what it is.

Still.. having the people restrained, and then removing the restraints, for whatever reason, sure looks like I am presenting myself with the opportunity to shoot the SOB's.

You remember the scene from old westerns ... the villian strips the townspeople of weapons, then baits them to run, maybe firing some bullets at their feet. When someone runs, the villian shoots him in the back. Sure, its a caricature, but that image is a pervasive as Wile E. Coyote hanging in the air for two seconds before gravity kicks in.

And I really wish you could stop talking down to me. I am not a police officer, I have never served in the military. But that does not mean I do not understand the responsibilities of those positions are.