It has been more than a couple of weeks since we first shared with you that three Navy SEALs were being charged with assault, brought forth by a wanted terrorist that is suspected of being behind the heinous killing of four Blackwater contractors in Fallujah, Iraq in 2004.
Until now, though, we are far from finding a categorical and definite answer to the first question that probably came to mind when we learned the news: WHY?
We found two interesting and somewhat related views that we would like to share with you.
The first was expressed by a senior Army strategist and Pentagon advisor, featured in a post on OneNewsNow.com. Lt. Col. Bob Maginnis (USA-Ret) had this to say regarding the charges against the Navy SEALs:
“We don’t want our young people to think that when they go out on these very dangerous missions, putting their own lives on the line, that if they don’t treat these scoundrels we’re dealing with kid gloves, then they, in turn, are going to lose their careers, or even worse… A fat lip is not a good reason…to really put a yellow streak up the back of our Special Ops just to accommodate those who [are] politically correct.”
We definitely agree with the fact that the very reason why a lot of people think that these charges are preposterous is that a fat lip and a punch in the gut do not seem reason enough to court martial three young and very skilled men who lay their lives on the line for country.
A letter to the editor on DailyPress.com, sent by Michael Roberts of Hampton, alluded to worse and more gruesome accusations of mistreatment of prisoners. While we may not have categorical evidence on these instances, finding out that the chief complaint of a suspected terrorist is a punch in the stomach certainly is a far-fetched reason for a court-martial. We agree with Roberts when he said: “There must be some other reason.” What could it be?
December 12th, 2009 - 8:28 am
Every American must see this ad: http://www.SupportTheSEALS.com. This disgrace must be stopped NOW.
December 12th, 2009 - 11:24 am
Dan Burton from Indiana has a website http://www.indianadan.com. On it he has a petition supporting the indicted Navy SEALs. You have to click on the petition, which is in a moving screen. It takes a little patience and persistence to get to the petition, but if you support the Navy SEALs, it’s worth signing.
December 12th, 2009 - 9:59 pm
The navy released sheets with the charges for the accused. Good job misrepresenting the charges though; most of them relate to the fact that two of the three SEALs seem to have lied about the circumstances of the assault. Doesn’t the military care about honor anymore?
Also, as for the court martial, you’d be best off asking the soldiers. They’re the ones who asked for it.
December 13th, 2009 - 9:28 am
To Whom it May Concern,
I do not wish to break faith with my little brothers accused of punching, either in the mid-section, or mouth, an individual by the name of Ahmed Hashim Abed, but the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) sets forth the criteria by which POWs, or those captured, or in the care of our US military personnel, should be treated under the Geneva Convention, whether the captured or incarcerated is, or is not from a country that has, or has not signed the aforementioned document.
Therefore it is with support of the system by which all military personnel are governed, that I must say that I do support the process by which these individuals will be found either guilty, or not guilty.
As a former US serviceman, active duty 68-72, PAANG 76-81, RVN 69-79, I am quite familiar with the UCMJ, and its processes.
Although I feel that this trial is a waste of the taxpayer’s money, and detracts from the mission of finding and bringing to justice those who would create further chaos in the world, transparency is a key aspect of showing the world that we are responsible for our actions as a serviceman, and as a nation.
Kudos to the Judge Advocate Generals Office for “doing their job.”
Respectfully,
Robert M. Stewart
“B” Co, 3/187th Infantry, 101st Abn Div
Apr 69 – Mar 70
December 13th, 2009 - 7:56 pm
PROMOTE the Navy SEALS, NOT prosecute them! And facilitate a meeting between the murdering MUslim terrorist vermin and Allah.
But the “politically eunuchs” in DoD are afraid for their own carreers…….their names rhyme with “woosey”!
December 14th, 2009 - 10:04 am
This is a disgrace for the current government to even consider a Captain’s Mast, let alone a court martial. The JAG should be hung by his nails.
I have heard and read in a couple of places that part of the reason the current government is going forward with the court martial is in retaliation for the SEALs shoting of those “poor pirates” holding the ships captain prisoner. It seems the government was still waffling about shoting or not! And the on-site commander had a big pair and gave the go ahead… hence dead pirates and a live skipper!
December 14th, 2009 - 1:16 pm
Scott:
they are sailors, not soldiers, as far as im concerned the rest of your opinion is negated by the fact that you dont know the difference, what are marines?, the color guard
December 14th, 2009 - 5:15 pm
After reading Mstewarts comments I must post this. This is America and we all have the right to be presumed innocent. In this country we have the right to a fair trial which these three requested to clear their names. Yes, I agree that these trials are a waste of the taxpayers’ money but for different reasons than you stated.
It is well known that a captured terrorist is trained to self-inflict injury and/or lie about an assault. These three Navy SEALs are the best of the best, all three were just promoted. They know their rights and have exercised them. Kudos to the three sEALs! It is ridiculous that these trials are proceeding but if that’s what it takes to prove their innocence, let them have their day!
December 16th, 2009 - 3:01 pm
Where can we see authoritative information about the circumstances of the Court Martial being brought? If, in fact, the three SEALS requested this action, then a lot of the furor over this situation is misplaced. If they did not, then the outrage (in my opinion) is justified.
Darrell A. Martin
former SGT, USARV – Jan70-Apr71
January 14th, 2010 - 11:54 am
I’m a Navy veteran. A former 2nd class petty officer. What did the prisoner do to deserve the punch in the mouth? I suspect he did something. All he got was a fat lip, the sailors didn’t cut his head of as do the Arabs with their prisoners.
What has our country come to when an enemy is given better treatment than our fighting men. I wonder how many Nazis and Japs were punched in the mouth while prisoners of war and what they did to our prisoners. Heck I can recall being attacked by a prisoner I took while performing my duties while on shore patrol. I can assure you he got much more than a bloody lip.