Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Stuff happens and we're not responsible (Tillman and Military Crimes)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-06-05 12:01 AM
Original message
Stuff happens and we're not responsible (Tillman and Military Crimes)
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05126/499919.stm

'No official intent to deceive" has become the official mantra of the United States military. It is stamped on every report of alleged military wrongdoing, no matter how egregious.

"No official intent to deceive" may have become as ubiquitous as products emblazoned with "Made in China" stickers at the local Wal-Mart but so what? There is no duplicity in the hearts of those who conduct our wars, either in the field or behind bunkers of bureaucratic insulation at the Pentagon. War may be hell, but only the enemy is ever guilty of lying. If it were otherwise, the U.S. military would've told us so.

<snip>

It was a useful myth even though Pat Tillman didn't die at the hands of Taliban forces. Everyone up the chain of command knew Tillman was killed by fellow soldiers who mistook him for an enemy combatant. Certainly, the soldiers who shot him knew the extravagant tale spun to cover a tragic tale of fratricide was a lie.

Tillman's blood-soaked uniform and body armor were burned before they could be examined by the military's forensics specialists. When Tillman's family asked for an explanation of this break with procedure, the military had to figure out a nice way to say that the blood of that particular patriot was considered a biohazard.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
libodem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-06-05 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
1. I think you are being too kind when you say he was mistaken
for an enemy combatant. I think he was decent and honorable enough, he either questioned the practices or threatened to report, torture and abuse of detainees. I have the most gawd-awful feeling he was taken out on purpose, to keep him quiet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IrateCitizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri May-06-05 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. Doubtful, considering he was a ranger...
Rangers are elite infantry. They are VERY professional, and having been around several during my time in the military, I have a hard time seeing them being involved in torture and abuse of detainees.

More often than not, those abusing and torturing detainees are not "cut from the same cloth" as rangers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC