Why would soldiers beat a wanted enemy on a stretcher TO DEATH?

[Philosoraptor]

I can only think of one reason, and I'm ready to take flak for it, but, I think he was silenced by order of the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Why would G.I.'s beat a man on a stretcher to death? Anger? It sure isn't standard procedure is it? Were they "stressed"?

Let's face it, this story stinks. Why beat this particular wounded man to death?

[justiceischeap]

1. I could think of plenty of reasons

The first being is if you believe this man was responsible for the deaths of fellow soldiers, payback is an option.

Soldiers are tired of fighting this war and getting killed/maimed etc., so anger is an option.

Of course there was no reason for Abu Ghraib (sp?) but it happened anyway.

Sometimes people don't need reasons for their stupid behavior.

[Philosoraptor]

3. What if they had Osama, captured, and they beat him to death?

It just wouldn't look right.

[Acadia Blue]

42. After seeing enough death and carnage, they lose it.

[BoneDaddy]

44. That is the official story

But I seriously doubt they would go so far as killing him if they knew who he is. They knew their ass would be on the line. This was a contract style killing for the purpose of silencing him

[Little Star]

86. The Sunday Times has this to say

Very good article, must read all six pages.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2220222,00...

The Sunday Times June 11, 2006

>snip
How Iraq's ghost of death was cornered

America clocked up a rare victory in Iraq last week with the killing of al-Zarqawi. Can it maintain the momentum?
Hala Jaber in Baghdad, Sarah Baxter in Washington and Michael Smith

He was still alive and moaning from an injury to his head when American helicopters and Humvees arrived at the scene. It had taken seven Iraqi men to drag him from the rubble minutes after the American air strike on the farmhouse where he was staying in the village of Hibhib.

They did not know then that the man they were trying to save was Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al-Qaeda in Iraq and the country's most wanted terrorist.

Ali Abbas, 25, a labourer, had just got home on Wednesday when, shortly after 6pm, the first of two huge blasts shook his house. He was only 300 yards from where the F-16 aircraft dropped two 500lb laser-guided bombs.

“It was so close I thought my uncle’s house next door had been attacked,” he said.

In the calm that followed, Abbas rushed out to help. He found his uncle unharmed, but as they looked across the fence they saw that the neighbouring house on the edge of a date palm grove was a smouldering wreck.

“We ran to it and started to look around for anything, but it had all been reduced to rubble,” he said. “We saw the bodies of two women that had been flung away from the blast. Both were dead. Another body was totally destroyed and in pieces, and then we heard a moan coming from another part of the house."
<snip

[mistertrickster]

95. Is that link still working?

It doesn't seem to work for me.

Also, until some reputable news source reports this, I don't think we should act like it's true.

And forgive me if it already has been proven true--I haven't heard yet.

All I've heard is that Zarqawi was apparently barely alive for a few minutes after he was found and then died.

[Little Star]

123. Link to great article

Sorry, try this one
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2089-2220224,00.html

or find the article on the front page here
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/global/

It is titled "How Ghost of Death Died"
The article is 6 pages long and really quite informative.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

130. "Can it maintain the momentum?"

superbowl jingoism.

[jazzjunkysue]

134. NBC had a war documentary on today: It's all reality TV, now.

War for ratings.

The trick is to not ruin a good thing by having so many deaths escallate to the point of de-sensitisation. Gotta keep it fresh if ya wanna sell soap.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

136. exactly.

love your screename as well. are you a ween fan at all?

[jazzjunkysue]

137. Thanks. What's ween?

[SlavesandBulldozers]

139. they have a song called "reggaejunkiejew", so i thought maybe

you were borrowing from them for your screename. guess not!

[petgoat]

122. "killing for the purpose of silencing him"

Kind of like the flight 93 shoot-down?

[wtmusic]

85. Was anger an option for al-Z too?

Was he tired of fighting the war, getting killed/maimed? Is payback his option too?

Just wonderin'.

[smoogatz]

99. Of course there was a reason for Abu Ghraib.

The systematic abuse of prisoners there was ordered by Rumsfeld. It's got his greasy fingerprints all over it.

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[indepat]

4. And just maybe, in a climate of aggressive pre-emptive war, they like it

or expected to like it.

[Philosoraptor]

5. He's reported to have moaned something, maybe they beat it out of him.

[cali]

6. Bullshit

What hyperbole. First of all, why assume this is true? Although I don't hold with the official line that 99.9% of the soldiers in Iraq are above reproach, neither do I buy into the notion that they're all dspicable war criminals. They're human. Many of them do the right thing. Others don't. Remarks like yours certainly give lie to the line that the left supports the troops.

[jrd200x]

10. bravo. Needed to be said

I hate the GOP - I don't hate any of the kids that are over in Iraq - they didn't ask for it- and many are too young to even know better.

[blue sky at night]

15. too young to know better.........

oh my god, what planet are your young people on?

[jrd200x]

31. You misunderstood my comment

too young to know the war / poitics are wrong.

[mistertrickster]

98. They're on planet "follow orders or get shot." No way should we

blame troops for any of this shit (and I'm not saying anyone is, don't get me wrong).

It all goes back to one man--the man who sent them in--the Commander-in-Chief.

Worst. President. Ever.

[mistertrickster]

97. Absolutely, yes. They do what they're told to do, what they're trained

to do--maim and kill.

It's the officers and the leaders--Bush Co--who should be held responsible.

[treestar]

105. They are not trained to maim and kill only

I would hope their training is more sophisticated than that, and even under *, it probably is.

It is bullshit that killing is what they do, so it's OK under any circumstance.

Don't try to tell me the troops are just trained to kill, including women and children and non-combat-age men, or that someone deemed this important (as Al Z) is not someone they would be instructed to bring to their superiors.

[mistertrickster]

108. Right, I think we're on the same side here. I don't think the troops

would do anything they haven't been given tacit authorization to do.

If Zarqawi were deliberately killed--and the only evidence is internet speculation--then it's because that's what somebody in command wanted.

If troops are doing things they're not supposed to, then the commanding officiers are responsible FOR THAT TOO. That's their job--to know what's going on.

[blue sky at night]

12. WHY

should we believe anything this government says. you know, i really do hate america: in it's current version.

[cali]

40. Well bully for you and your simplistic hatred

of this country. I loathe the administration, but it is not the country, and judging by polls doesn't represent a majority of its citizens.

There are other sources beside the government. Try looking for them. It's not that hard. I don't know what happened re Zarzqawi. This much I have learned by doing a little research: Yes, Zarqawi was a real person. He was born in a gritty industrial suburb of Amman in 1966 to a not very religiously observant family. His real name was Ahmed Fadeel al-Khalayleh. He became radicalized in his mid-twenties after traveling to post soviet Afghanistan. In the nineties he spent several years in prison.

Did the US build him into an even greater boogyman than he really was? There's quite a bit of evidence to support that they did, but nevertheless he was a butal man who waged war on Iraqi civilians, attempting to bring about a full fledged civil war by fanning sectarian hatred.

It is likely that he's dead. I don't know how much of the story about his death I believe. There are serious discrepancies in the narrative to date. In any case, it's not about believing the government line, or rejecting it out of hand, it's about doing a little digging of one's own.

[justiceischeap]

17. Bullshit it may be ...

I didn't claim it was true I was answering questions posed by the OP. You're right, there are good soldiers and bad soldiers, I would venture to guess if this claim is true then it was done by bad soldiers.

However, you also have a lot of good soldiers who do bad things because of war. It's all about psychology and stress. War is stressful and can make you do things you normally wouldn't go, like, oh I don't know, kill people on a daily basis.

[treestar]

106. It's not the same thing

You kill people on a daily basis, but only certain people in certain circumstances.

Enough excuses. Soldiers are supposed to be honorable in a particular way, most of them are, so since so many military can do what they are supposed to do, the honorable way, why so many excuses for the ones who don't?

No one said they are a majority.

[Captain Hilts]

26. It's just an unfounded rumor. Take it to Drudge. nt

[DoYouEverWonder]

38. Because they were ordered to kill him

They knew damn well who they were after and that he was a 'high-value' target.

However, when you capture anyone, even Satan, on the battlefield and if that person is still alive, the rules of war require that you try to save the guys life. Even in the reports from the DOD, they claim that they did try to administer medical assistance.

If it turns out that instead of medical assistance, they offered the butt of a gun and beat him to death, that is murder.

[Philosoraptor]

41. Exactly. It's a crime to beat a wounded enemy to death.

Many miss this point.

[DoYouEverWonder]

47. Especially, since at that point

they could't possibly be sure it was really him.

[DemonFighterLives]

66. Yes the quaint Geneva Conventions and

all real humans would follow that.
Welcome to the nearly 1000 club.
:applause:

[LisaL]

46. I would think beating a wounded to death is a war crime.

The whole story seems fishy, to say the least. How did the guy escape from a huge bomb that destroyed everything else?

[DoYouEverWonder]

49. I believe that the houses

were bombed after the fact. The initial reports said it was joint operation with the Iraqis using helicopters.

[Smarmie Doofus]

51. But this applies to 'the insurgents' as well; no?

>>>They're human. Many of them do the right thing. Others don't.>>>

If they're not 'human', what are they?

[cali]

62. Yes Zarqawi was human

as are all members of the species. And of course, I didn't say he wasn't. Nor did I say, if the story was true, that he should have been beat to death by soldiers while injured. Clearly such action is wrong. I did say that we DON"T KNOW what happened, and the automatic assumption that Americans did such a thing troubles me. It's no better than believing that everything uttered by the admin is gospel, just the other side of the same coin.

As far as comparing "insurgents" in Iraq to members of the American military goes, I think that's a poor comparison for lots of reasons. There are insurgents who target the American military and then there are those that target Iraqi civilians as a means to forment a civil war. al-Z. exhibited a depraved indifference to life, more than that: he exhibited a zeal for spilling blood in crude and horrific ways.

[cornermouse]

69. In my opinion, it is as simple as right from wrong.

In the end we are no better than the Saddam or any other brutalistic dictator that you care to mention, if we don't do things the right way, which is something the current administration and apparently the Pentagon as well doesn't seem to understand.

This needs to be looked into by an independent third party. Not another of Bush's whitewash jobs. Not by the Pentagon. It needs to be investigated by a third party which is independent of Bush, our political system, and probably even our country. Maybe its time to consider the possibility that an investigation should be done by the Hague. At the same time, I am aware it will never happen. But the fact remains that the disaster of Iraq just keeps getting bigger and worse by the day. We keep losing our nation every day and the reason that no one, other than his core constituency, really trusts Bush is the fact that he lies continually and never stops trying to hide things. That's why people don't believe anything coming out of Washington these days.

[cali]

73. The only thing that's simple

is that this war was wrong from the get go. After that things get complicated. People behave badly in war. Frequently, the lizard brain kicks in and takes over. That's just a fact. It's one of the reasons they try and drum chain of command into soldiers, so that the lizard brain doesn't run rampant. That's not about excusing bad behavior, it's about understanding how it comes about- wherever it comes from.

Comparisons being odious and all, I still don't find much to object to in your statement that it's far to easy to become what we're purportedly fighting against. That's an old saw because it's so patently true.

[wtmusic]

84. al-Z's depraved indifference is nothing like Haditha

because he's them, we're us. :eyes:

[cali]

112. Putting words in other folks mouths

is a poor habit to get into. Because of course I'm saying nothing of the sort. However, must I remind you that we don't know what happened in Haditha yet? It's still murky. Those implicated have yet to be charged. They're denying that they carried out a massacre. Al-Z. very publicly verbalized his deeds. The truth may be that the Marines in Haditha committed a revenge massacre. Very bad indeed if it's true, but the comparison to Al-Z is still imperfect. One can see distinctions without condoning the actions of Marines.

[wtmusic]

124. No comparison--Al Z is more honest

We don't know what happened in Hadith yet? It's been 6 months cali. If nothing had happened they would have declared it over and done with 6 months ago.

A lot happened--that's why a distinguished-vet congressman has gone on record not only to say that a massacre occurred, but a coverup as well. If no one's been charged it's because there trying to figure an angle--like they've been for the last two years with the Abu Ghraib photos, and like that did with that Covarrubias clown who murdered two Iraqis in cold blood (they decided when he admitted to it he was "lying").

Our military is contemptible. They torture, they murder, they say they don't, they cover it up. Now how are we so damn superior to al Qaeda again?

[jazzjunkysue]

135. You don't know what happens, ever, and you never will.

They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie. They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.They lie. They lie.

[sweetheart]

65. Do you honestly believe

That ANY act against the commander of al queda in iraq was
taken without direct command from SecDef? It is not about
the troops, they are merely tools of the command.

[cali]

70. Sure, I believe it's possible

that soldiers can lose it in war. There really is such a thing as bloodlust. Yes, soldiers can defy orders. And the SecDef would not be who they're getting their orders from. Doesn't work that way. But that's not my point. My point is simple: We don't know what happened and this fevered and eager speculation that American troops murdered an injured man is, to me, rather unsavory. I'm not unwilling to state that it could have happened that way, but I'm not about to jump on the bandwagon of those who are always willing to believe the worst about American troops. In fact, that disgusts me as much as those who defend them no matter what. As I've said; same coin, different side, equally repugnant.

[sweetheart]

75. I'm not talking about the troops

I'm talking about the machine and its brainwashed agents.

The command would have been informed instantly over the status
of Zirquawai, and no act taken without authorization from command.
How high up, doesn't matter, as the command reports to a commander.

I do not apologize and excuse the command for murder, and it has
notthing at all to do with the troops... you've inflated a big
straw man here about repugnant hatred for the troops.

But the command ARE war criminals, and pursue a continuing ongoing
policy of war crimes. And i'm talking more about the woman and the
child they murdered when they captured zaqarawi, blown to bits by a
"necessary" act of war crimes you are apologizing for, because the
troops really are regular folks just caught in a pinch.

But it is just apologizing for a war crime, for all the dressed up
nobility, and if war crimes were not committed to start with, we'd
never even have heard of zarquawi. Aggressive war will bring about
an insurgency, and i'm sure the german's hated the french resistance
like the US hated zarquwi.

The troops have a choice. They can put down their guns, right fucking
now, and not move a muscle. Then they will be put in prison for a
while, and its a small price to pay for not cooperating with a war
crime. You apologize for people who are making a choice to partcipate
in war crimes, from the chappie who dropped those 500 pound bombs, to
the persons who started this war... and the whole fish rots from the
head down.

[Name removed]

109. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

113. Perhaps you shouldn't

use the word we and speak for others? Just a thought. As the remark I responded to has been removed, it's difficult for me to point out that my response was appropriate. As for your pathetic use of the tired old freeper canard, might I remind you that such comments are against the rules? Try and be a little more creative with your insults.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Philosoraptor]

9. The bombs didn't kill him, so they did. He was supposed to die.

Just speculating.

[jrd200x]

14. I would assert that he deserved to die

He was vermin - the lowest form of life.

[Philosoraptor]

22. Sub humans don't deserve trials eh? Why didn't they kill Saddam?

I think the law states that enemy generals should be kept alive, not beaten to death before trial.

[jrd200x]

28. Was he a general?

I don't think he was. He was more a scumbag.

Let's stay at least a little focused. He feely admited behading innocents. He gets no sympathy from me.

I don't know how we get so wrapped up in contortions that we end up in a place where we actually are defending this prick.

[Philosoraptor]

33. Where did I defend Zarqawi?

Check our your spell check.

[iamahaingttta]

68. Of course he was a scumbag...

But, high value targets like this are worth MUCH more alive than dead, to get information and for symbolic reasons.

UNLESS - they wanted him dead because they KNEW that he really wasn't worth that much, and that the beans he would spill would harm us more than help us.

Besides, everybody, including the worst scumbag on the planet, should get due process. Otherwise, all this talk of democracy and doing the right thing is pure bullshit. Which it is anyway, coming from the Bush bullshiters...

[oldcoot]

119. Unfortunately, it probably is bullshit

We expect the Iraqi people to cheerfully risk their lives for our principles when many of us are abandon these same principles when it becomes inconvenient. For this reason, I think that I will scream if I hear one more person defend wiretapping as necessary for our safety. Yet I suspect that many of the same people who lecture us about why it is acceptable to give up a few of our civil liberties and tell us that we are unpractical for supporting the American principle that everyone, including scumbags, deserves a fair trial will probably act shocked if the Iraqis end up rejecting "freedom" for Saddam v.2 in the next few years.

[JDPriestly]

76. If he was a common criminal and was caught alive, he should

have been tried. Likewise, if he was a terrorist and he was caught alive, he should have been tried. That is the rule of law.

I have to rant on this.

Freedom is not just the right to make as much money as you want anywhere and anytime you want. Freedom is the right to live under the rule of law. Where is Janet Reno with her constant reminders about allowing "the facts and the law" to decide matters? Why aren't lawyers and the American Bar Association speaking out?

Midnight Express is the name of a 1970s book and a movie about a young American caught up in the arbitrary legal system in Turkey. You need to see it to understand the importance of due process and to see how our national commitment to the basic concept of due process has been eroded since the time that movie was made. We should be outraged by the idea that our government believes it can play God and just go in and target specific people for death. If we condone and practice assassinations -- even of obvious criminals -- without the process of a trial, without the presentation of evidence, without affording the accused the right to a lawyer, the right to confront his accusers and all the other rights that are essential to the rule of law, how can we condemn others for condoning and practicing what we call "terrorism." What is "terrorism" anyway? Don't terrorists usually justify their acts of violence as constituting just punishment for wrongs against them? Don't we define terrorism as violent acts of retribution carried out by individuals or nations without respect for due process and trials?

The rule of law is the basis of our Constitution and our Bill of Rights. How is it possible that the Bush administration has convinced so many people that it (and the U.S. as they define it) is above the rule of law in so many respects? Why aren't people questioning this?

Besides, the assassination of Zarqawi was stupid. Assuming that Zarqawi was evil, that he was the terrorist that the Bush administration claims he was, wouldn't it have been better for the Bush administration and the Iraqi government to have proved that fact for the world to see by showing the evidence and allowing Zarqawi to question it? Because they did not follow the rule of law with regard to Zarqawi, no one will ever really be sure who he was or what he did. Ironically, it is very likely that the actual result of the Bush administration's attack on Zarqawi will be the mythification of Zarqawi. Now, instead of seeing Zarqawi as a a hateful, cruel, vile thug, as a killer of his own people, it is very possible that some impressionable folks will see him as a mythological hero, as the leader of a resistance, who took on the mighty Americans. No one will ever know who he really was or what he really did. The opportunity to determine the facts about him is gone forever, and people on both sides can make up whatever they want. Yet another Bush mistake. Ye another one of his fiascos. Can Bush do nothing right? Why wasn't he impeached long ago?

[The Stranger]

104. It is called the rule of law.

No one is above the law. No matter how wonderful they are or how much you approve of them.

And no one is below the law. No matter how much of a "scumbag" or a "prick" you think they are.

[KoKo]

36. In our system you have a right to be brought to trial. Random killings

could lead to lawlessness and could be justified here at home. Remember the Mafia "hit men?" Gangland killings?

Wouldn't it be better to capture and seek information rather than just "take out" targets? Bushies love the phrase "Take Out" as if they are the very terrorists they are supposedly trying to win over to the idea of how a Democracy works. :shrug:

[JDPriestly]

48. If we captured him alive, he should have been given a trial and

due process. Could he have died of wounds inflicted in the bombing after he was found? Was Zarqawi this man's birth name or a name he adopted later?

What was the link between this man, the man the media called "Zarqawi" and Al Qaeda? I didn't follow the story closely enough to learn these basic facts? Is the man they caught actually the same man as the man on the videos? Did more than one man represent Zarqawi on the various videos?

[KoKo]

78. Good questions.....and now we will never know the answers...

unless some investigation is done...which is not likely, at this time, anyway.

[Little Star]

94. Even if it's a war crime to kill him like that? n/t

[The Stranger]

103. Fortunately, it is not for you to decide who on this planet lives.

There are laws in place that must be obeyed. Must be obeyed by the accused as well as by the accuser.

[rosesaylavee]

56. It's a crime we will never know. And I mean that both ways. n/t

[jrd200x]

8. Gee, maybe it was because he beheaded and blew up so many people

including fellow soldiers. Seems obvious to be that they were really angry - and probably scared - and it manifested itself in this type of behavior. Not that it was right . . .

We have to be careful to keep the battlefield perspective in mind when we are critical of OUR soldiers, and to seperate what we dislike about the GOP from the soldiers who didn't ask to be there.

I'm not defending anyone, nor do I condone any illegal activites - but sitting here in the US in our safe homes and offices doesn't give us the complete picture.

[Philosoraptor]

11. Well let's not rely on THEM to give us the complete picture.

[jrd200x]

13. Yes, that is true.

but your snapy comment only repeates the obvious. Of course we should look at many sources.

[Philosoraptor]

19. Can you offer an answer to my question?

IF it's true, why would OUR soldiers beat the most wanted man in the world besides Osama to death before a trial? Will these soldier be punished for beating a prisoner to death?

Or did they follow orders?

[jrd200x]

25. How would we know?

It's not possible to know the answer. We'll never know.

But I'll go on record saying that I'm glad he's gone. He was a disgusting piece of garbage that freely admited his crimes.

[DemonFighterLives]

67. Are you going by the made for tv videos

Some of those are suspect in my world.

He may be a scumbag, but I would be first to state that there are many scumbags on our side.
:dem:

[blue sky at night]

20. so explain how we are......

any different from them? who are the terrorists?

[guruoo]

115. Here's the differance

[acmejack]

58. One breath you rationalize criminal behavior

and in the next you deny doing so! Way to whack us whackos! You actually sound like a prime candidate to be in uniform and over in Iraq. You could put all of your expertise to real world use and personally straighten out this little problem we are having over there.

The rest of us would be oh so grateful...

[JDPriestly]

80. Have you ever heard of the Nuremburg trials?

They played an essential role in educating and pacifying the German people after WWII. We should hold trials in Iraq. What in the world is happening with Saddam's trial? One thing about Iraq that just about all of us agree on is the fact that Saddam was a cruel tyrant. Why is it taking so long to prove that fact? Why didn't the U.S. government or members of the "coalition governments" conduct Saddam's trial? Is it all that difficult to find witnesses and evidence against Saddam and obtain a verdict of guilty or not guilty? What is happening there?

[Minnesota Libra]

16. It's anything but wise to say anything at DU supportive of...........

.....the Military but I think there's much more to this story than meets the eye. I don't think they beat the guy to death at all unless of course his own countrymen got a few licks in before the US Military got there.

[Captain Hilts]

29. It's better PR for us and great shame for Zarqawi to be captured alive. nt

[Minnesota Libra]

45. Could be - it would certainly avoid that martyr issue. nt

[rosesaylavee]

59. That's where I would put my money ... I think our soldiers

were duped into seeing what they were needed to see and provide a witness to. But I have no basis for that other than my own personal speculation and a very serious doubt that the one body needed to be verified for identification was the only one found intact at the scene.

[helderheid]

18. wait, wha... whaaa??? I took 1 day off from DU - where did you hear this??

[Philosoraptor]

21. It's all over the web, google it up.

Witnesses say they saw U.S. troops beat Zarqi to death while he was on the stretcher.

[helderheid]

24. just did - cannot find one report. Can you help me out?

[Philosoraptor]

27. Here's a page full.

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ned=us&q=zarqawi+beaten+to+death

[helderheid]

30. thanks - I was messing up the name. Big fat DUH on my head. thanks!

[Poppyseedman]

60. I went to the link you posted. All have disclaimers

Baghdad. Iraqi citizen Mohamed Ahmed, who says he witnessed the death of Al Qaeda leader Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, stated that the militant was beaten to death by the US soldiers that arrived at the site of the terrorist’s hideout that was bombed shortly before that, AP reports.
According to Ahmed he and his neighbors had put al-Zarqawi in the ambulance car. However, a few minutes after that the US soldiers arrived, took him out of the car and started hitting him on the head.
At the moment there is no second independent source that would verify the words of the supposed witness.

My BS meter just went off the scale.

The witness put and his neighbors Zarqawi in the ambulance ?

[Name removed]

61. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Poppyseedman]

63. Your link has a LA Times story that seems to have the best account

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-fg-zarqawi11jun11,1,2014736.story?coll=la-news-a_section&ctrack=1&cset=true

An Iraqi police lieutenant who said he was among the first people at the scene told The Times on Saturday that after Iraqi police had carried Zarqawi to the ambulance on the stretcher, U.S. troops took him off the stretcher and placed him on the ground. One of the Americans tried to question Zarqawi and repeatedly stepped on his chest, causing blood to flow from his mouth and nose, said the lieutenant, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

A man identified only as Mohammed, who said he lived near the Zarqawi hide-out, told Associated Press Television News that he had witnessed Americans beating Zarqawi. "They stomped on his stomach and his chest until he died and blood came out of his nose," he said.

A U.S. military spokesman said by e-mail Saturday that there was no evidence to support allegations that coalition forces had beaten the insurgent leader.

"Although Zarqawi was mortally wounded, a coalition medic treated him while he lapsed in and out of consciousness," the spokesman said.

[mistertrickster]

101. Okay, dude, I agree that it's entirely possible. But that doesn't mean

it happened.

We should really wait until we have solid evidence that it happened before we speculate about WHY it happened.

I further agree that one should not assume anything the Bush team says is true about anything. They're a proven pack of liars.

But just because they've lied a million times before is not proof that they're lying now about how Zarqawi died.

[DainBramaged]

23. Why capture the Saddam boys too? Just kill 'em all

nothing to see here move along.

[oneinok]

37. War is Hell

Folks, I was in Nam. Yes I saw things there I will not talk about today. When you see buddies killed and you have a high ranking enemy in your control...war is hell.

[DemonFighterLives]

71. Welcome to DU!

Thanks for coming here to share your take on things.
:hi:

[Poppyseedman]

32. How do you know the Iraq forces didn't beat the POS to death.

They were on site first.

[Philosoraptor]

34. I don't know. Several reports claim witnesses witnessed it.

The witnesses say it was G.I.'s. But we werent' there.

[NoodleyAppendage]

35. Why would soldiers MURDER infants and toddlers at Haditha?

War brings out the worst in people, particularly when the leadership tacitly supports the dehumanization of the enemy or native population.

J

[Philosoraptor]

39. But I thought beating an injured enemy to death was a war crime--

--Oh, I forgot we abolished the Geneva convention.

[NoodleyAppendage]

64. Exactly. He wasn't wearing a "uniform"; therefore, he's not human. n/t

J

[ChairmanAgnostic]

92. no, the Genevas are a quaint anachronism. Worthless in a modern world

and remember who will deal with the justice questions. Alberto.

[DemonFighterLives]

43. I was wondering yesterday what really happened

As usual the stories are all over the map. First he was found by his spiritual advisor or whatever and then it was his cell phone then he was shot on the stretcher then he was beat up. Of course 2 - 500# bombs fell on his head first.
Will we learn the truth. Amazing that the whole cast of clowns (Blair, dubby, rummy, 3 Generals showing the glorious bombs)was out there and the whole flock of right wing talking heads rejoicing in more death.

The pRes. didn't gloat though and now we are turning the corner but many more will die and many more attacks as the last throes play out. :sarcasm:

:dem:

If Z-man was alive, they should have taken him in to tell his story to the world. Never seems to happen with dubco, who never want a fair and balanced take on things.

[DoYouEverWonder]

50. The only story that is all over the map

is the official story.

The story on the ground has been consistent and the official story continues to admit to bits and pieces of it.

[DemonFighterLives]

72. I know,

it is starting to sound like Tillman or the young gal(name?) who held off 20 insurgents and expended all ammo before she took the knife out of her teeth and continued piling them up and then was raped in prison.
Why do all these stories need so much embellishment?

If he's dead, he is dead. One less alleged terrorist #2 man.

If his crimes were committed in the fog of war would they not compare to our crimes?

[democrank]

52. IF....IF....IF.... this report is true

we shouldn`t be looking for excuses, we should be demanding answers.

I have no idea how many soldiers are in the "good" category or how many are in the "bad" category. I do know that in the arena of public debate on this invasion of Iraq, there are plenty of bloodthirsty Americans who seem to say we can do what we want, when we want, just because we can. No rules. No Geneva Conventions. How did our oil get under their sand? Torture is A-OK. Nuke the Ragheads.

Contrary to some opinions here at DU, one can still strongly support the troops yet expect some adherence to a code of ethical conduct. I had not one ounce of pride when I saw those Abu Gharib photos or when I read about White Phosphorus in Fallujah.

I`ve spent decades supporting veteran`s issues since many of my friends died in or were wounded in the Vietnam War. A lot of what I see in Iraq sickens me. I truly wonder what we`ve become.

[woo me with science]

53. I don't know if they did or they didn't,

but I am sitting here really, really hoping that outrage over the beating of Zarqawi does not become the Democratic cause celebre of the month.

Referring sympathetically to the monster--who beheaded captives while they were alive and screaming--as "this wounded man" and "a man on a stretcher" and trying to make our troops into the monsters is not going to play well to the public at large, and, frankly, we have bigger issues in front of us.

He was a monster, and it is good that he is gone. Don't do this. They want Dems to do this. They want a perception that Dems are angry at the troops and supportive of those in Al Qaeda.

Don't do this.

[Philosoraptor]

55. Don't scold me.

I don't tell you what to do or not to do.

[woo me with science]

57. Oh, you're entitled to your opinion.

I'm entitled to express my feelings about it.

[DoYouEverWonder]

77. The DOD now admits that they captured him alive

they also admit that they were trying to administer medical care.

If what they are now saying is true, then Zarqawi was an unidentified prisoner of war at that point. If it turns out to be true that instead of trying to save his life, which is what DOD is claiming, they administered the butt of a gun and killed him instead, then US Troops committed a war crime.

BTW: This is probably why they only released pictures of his head and they have admitted that the images were photoshopped.

[JDPriestly]

82. The outrage is not over the death of Zarqawi.

The outrage is over the lost opportunity to apply the rule of law. Yes, it is understandable that soldiers get carried away by their passions in the heat of war. But, we are either fighting for the ideal of freedom and the rule of law or we should just stop now and go home. Dropping a bomb on Zarqawi was a stupid mistake. He should have been surrounded, arrested, tried and then made to answer for his crimes. If he performed despicable acts, we should have proved it to the world. We would have gained credibility and trust internationally, and the Zarqawis and Bin Ladens of the world would have lost their mystique and attraction to the many frustrated potential terrorists out there who are looking for heroes. Remember Che Guevara. He became a cult figure. Let's hope that a cult doesn't form around Zarqawi. There are no easy solutions to terrorism. The wisest tactic is to respond with patience and the law. Bush has, yet again, missed an opportunity to fight for freedom in the only way it counts -- by respecting freedom and the rule of law. Bush will rue the day he decided to mete out punishment without due process -- and so will we. This kind of lawless revenge killing begets more revenge killings. If you know where a bad guy is, you go in and try to take him alive and try him. Just going in bombs and guns blazing when you know exactly where he is -- even in war -- is assassination, and it is, at the very least, counterproductive.

[oldcoot]

118. It is not a question of sympathy

it is a question of common sense. Personally, I do not believe that this story is true. However, I agree with iamahaingttta, who pointed out in another post, that al-Zarqawi may have been worth more alive than dead for information purposes and symbolic purposes. As a supposedly high ranking al-Qaeda, he might have provided with useful information about al-Qaeda that could possibly saved American lives in the future and could have brought more of these assholes to justice.

I also feel that trying him could have served as great PR for the United States. We could have demonstrated our strong commitment to our principles, including the principle that every one deserves a fair trial even scumbags.

[woo me with science]

127. I don't know if it is true.

And I see your point about principles.

But the rhetoric in the OP was clearly trying to pull for sympathy. Choosing your words to paint this vermin as only a wounded man on a stretcher is a slap in the face to all those he has terrorized and murdered in cold blood. Not to mention incredibly stupid politics.

[Philosoraptor]

128. Again, I am NOT a Zarqawi Sympathizer.

the man was wounded, and he was on a stretcher, what can i say?

[woo me with science]

129. Lots of things.

Glad to finally see the clarification, though.

[Philosoraptor]

54. Why didn't they just shoot him? Cause it had to look like a bombing.

The official report will say he was injured in the bombing, not with rifle butts.

[DoYouEverWonder]

79. That's why they are only showing

photoshopped pictures of his head.

We have not seen his body and once the autopsy is done the evidence will be destroyed.

[alfredo]

74. If they did beat him to death, it was a break down in discipline

Well trained and disciplined soldiers do not commit crimes. If they did, they should be prosecuted along with their superiors.

[Little Star]

88. K&R It was also a war crime if true. n/t

[alfredo]

96. Oh sure. It wouldn't have happened if we'd kept our eye on the

ball and put all our efforts toward the elimination of al Qaeda, and to changing the policies that breed terrorist.

[treestar]

107. Thank you! I get so sick of that sarcastic and pompous

announcement that soldiers are supposed to kill. Only in the conditions they are trained for.

[alfredo]

114. Still they must be "gentlemen" not savages. War is a prime

example of that old saying, "It's not what you do, it's how you do it." You might win the war by going "Old Testament" on a country, but in the end you will be seen as savages, and you may never resurrect your good name. What Germany did last century is never far from our minds. (See today's Non Sequitur) They are our allies, but still there is that nagging doubt.

[Finder]

81. Disinfo alert!!!

If they get us yapping about this, then the truth floats off the front pages.

[Philosoraptor]

87. You could be right.

It may just be to muddy the waters.

[Finder]

89. Not you...

Rovian disinfo...

[wtmusic]

83. Whoever calls al-Zarqawi "vermin", "scum", etc.

has already begun rationalizing his murder, and needs to take a hard look at what makes the people who stomped on his chest until blood came out of his nose any different from him.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

90. You know what a trial costs in Iraq? It was a cost saving move.

I mean, just putting up the concrete blast walls around the judge, sheesh, those are expensive.

[stray cat]

91. I think I'll wait for more information as to what really happened

[leftofthedial]

93. they haven't told us the truth about anything for 5-1/2 years

why would they suddenly start now?

[smoogatz]

100. My theory: he was already dead before the airstrike.

Shot by his own followers, or a rival faction of the insurgency, dumped somewhere, picked up by US soldiers and placed in a building either before or after said building was destroyed by a missile strike--so Bush could have his latest "Mission Accomplished" moment. I think the story about the beating--sourced as it is to a single "witness"--is probably bogus.

[The Stranger]

102. Wake up.

This administration's modus operandi is torture. From the concentration camps in Guantanamo Bay, across the secret archipelago in CIA prisons in Europe, to Abu Ghraib.

Where have you been?

[DesertRat]

110. Just saw an Army General on CNN saying that's not true

He said there are lots of rumors swirling about the death, but that he was not beaten or shot to death. The official story is that he survived the blast, was carried out on a stretcher, then died.

[Gregorian]

111. They needed a Zarqawi.

There is a clue here.

Troops would not pull someone out of an ambulance and beat them to death.

Does anyone else see that this is meaningful? Let's assume that troops just don't do that. I think it's very safe to assume. And then it begs your original question. And that answer would seem to me to be that they were ordered to do it.

Remember, they were ordered to torture. And that was against General Karpinski's best attempts to keep things within the Geneva Convention standards.

I'm making assumptions. But I believe civilian eyewitnesses before I believe "official" storylines most of the time.

So why would they kill that man. Was he Zarqawi? If not, then why? If so, then why? I think the answer is obvious.

They needed a Zarqawi.


Edit- Oh, and one more thing. I don't buy the "He had the same tatoos". I wouldn't put it past our administration to tatoo a dead body.

[DoYouEverWonder]

133. Actually, they are now claiming

that he had the tatoos removed and that they used the scars from the tatoos to ID him.

I bet he grew back that missing leg too.

[smitty]

116. Why do you believe the story of an anonymous witness?

No other witnesses, the dead of night, no proof of anything, just an unsubstanitated AP story yet you want to believe the worst.

[Philosoraptor]

117. I never indicated that I believed it.

And no, I don't set out to believe or imagine the worst.

[Lerkfish]

120. at this point, a random witness has more credibility than the administrati

administration, because the administration has a consistent track record of lying, every time. Some random person MIGHT be lying, but put up against known liars, I'll bet on the random witness, myself. Your own mileage may vary.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

131. lol

great post.

exactly.

[Lerkfish]

121. well, well, well. And so the story changes again.

who'da thunk it?

[Retired AF Dem]

125. One "eye witness" sure can stir up the pot

I wonder if he had ever witnessed CPR before.

[Philosoraptor]

126. "Zarqawi Beaten--That's Baloney"..Gen. George Casey on Fox news

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/10/iraq/main1699100.shtml

"The way I respond to the comments of the alleged Iraqi who saw what went on there is: 'that's baloney,'" Gen. George Casey said.

[Raine]

132. Easy

to keep his big mouth shut on dirty dealings with the USA. Really it's good riddance to bad rubbish but chimp and his gang are always up to something to hide what they are really up to.

[SoCalDem]

138. Lack of "care" kills.. Maybe they just "ignored" him to death

:shrug: