Civilians in cross-hairs: What to do? [Archive] - Marine Corps

thedrifter

05-25-06, 07:59 AM

Sent to me by hubby...thefontman

Ellie

In cold blood - Jack Murtha condemns Marines
May 25, 2006
by W. Thomas Smith, Jr.

Retired Marine Colonel and serving Congressman Jack Murtha (D-PA) has
sold his soul: Not to the devil, but to his constituency. And as a
former Marine, I urge him now to do the
only honorable thing: relinquish his sword and his Eagle, Globe, and
Anchor. At the very least, he should apologize to the Marine Corps and
the American people for making an
utterly outlandish statement in an attempt to keep the fire hot in the
cut-and-run camp, of which he is a primary stoker.

At a press conference earlier this month, Murtha stated, "they [a squad
of U.S. Marines from Kilo Company, 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines operating
in Iraq] killed innocent civilians in
cold blood. And that's what the report is going to tell." He was
referring of course to the November 2005 action at Haditha, a remote farming
community in Iraq's Al Anbar Province,
where Marines allegedly killed a number of innocent Iraqi civilians -
including women and children - following an ambush launched against the
Americans.

Keep in mind, "in cold blood" means "deliberately or cruelly;
ruthlessly, showing no concern or passion, a complete lack of emotion." In other
words, killing without heart or mercy.
How Murtha, who was not present with the Marines at the time of the
action, purports to know how the men involved felt or what they actually
did is beyond me.

Here's what we know for a fact:

On the morning of November 19, a Marine Humvee was struck by a roadside
bomb, killing Lance Corporal Miguel Terrazas. Then, insurgents are said
to have opened fire on the
Marines from several directions. The Marines counterattacked. Several
enemy combatants were killed, and apparently innocent civilians were, as
well.

Within hours, I received an e-mailed press release from Multi-National
Force West at Camp Fallujah, Iraq, stating: "A Marine assigned to
Regimental Combat Team 2, 2nd Marine
Division, II Marine Expeditionary Force (Forward), was killed in action
when his vehicle was attacked with an improvised explosive device
attack while conducting combat
operations against the enemy in the vicinity of Haditha."

The following day, I received a second release from the 2nd Marine
Division at Camp Blue Diamond in Ramadi, a portion of which reads: "A U.S.
Marine and 15 Iraqi civilians
were killed yesterday from the blast of a roadside bomb in Haditha.
Immediately following the bombing, gunmen attacked the convoy with small
arms fire. Iraqi Army soldiers and
Marines returned fire killing eight insurgents and wounding another."

Just how the civilians were actually killed has been the subject of a
series of investigations. Some published reports indicate there were
more than 15 civilians killed, including a
three-year-old girl, and that they were killed as a result of raids on
at least three houses believed to be harboring insurgents. A
preliminary investigation was completed in March,
and three Marine officers have since been relieved of command.

What we do not know are the particulars of what actually happened and
why: and we won't know until a more thorough investigation is completed
in the coming weeks, followed by
possible courts martial of those involved.

A recent editorial in National Review Online pegged the Murtha
condemnation accurately: "The military's investigation of those claims isn't
finished yet, but Murtha apparently can't
wait for all the facts to emerge before damning the accused." And an
editorial in The Washington Times says the accusation is "not only
irresponsible, but an egregious violation
of ethical conduct by a sitting congressman."

Indeed, but how could he? How could a retired Marine officer possibly
forget, not only from whence he came, but that all Americans - including
his fellow Marines who are
performing the most dangerous missions on the ends of the earth - are
innocent until proven guilty.

Now, this is not easy for me to write. After all, Murtha spent 37 years
in the Corps, starting out as an enlisted rifleman, becoming a drill
instructor, later an officer. He served in
Vietnam, was highly decorated, and ultimately retired as a Reserve
colonel.

Murtha's service to our country should be respected. But unless he
retracts his statement and issues a public apology to the Corps, perhaps
his title (Marine) should be stripped,
even if the Marines involved are ultimately found guilty.

This has nothing to do with blind obedience to a cause on either side
of the political fence, or lemming-like fealty to either party. It has
everything to do with being "always faithful" to
the Corps, respecting our Marines in the field, and above all
acknowledging the fact that the Marines involved are accorded the presumption of
innocence until the Uniform Code of
Military Justice deems otherwise.

I'm not making excuses for those who may have done something
incomprehensibly dark in the heat of battle. I pray they did not. If anyone is
found to be guilty of committing war
crimes, they should be punished; and if found guilty I am confident
they will be.

But that is not the case as of this writing. It was not the case when
Murtha accused unconvicted Marines of killing "in cold blood."

When I was a young Marine-recruit, I was taught there is no such thing
as an ex-Marine: Marines are either active, reserve, retired, former,
or dead; thus the adage, "Once a Marine,
always a Marine."

The only ex-Marines were those whom did not make it through boot camp;
or as we liked to say those not packing the gear to serve in the Corps.
The only other way for a Marine
to become an ex-Marine would be to shame or denigrate the Corps in such
a way that he would essentially be excommunicated, which - it pains me
to say - is what Colonel Murtha
should be.

--- W. Thomas Smith, Jr. is a Townhall.com columnist who has written
four books and penned over a thousand pieces for a variety of
publications including USA TODAY, George,
and U.S. News & World Report.

Semper Fidelis,
Mark