November 20, 2004

TRAGEDY

This Slate article (via Hud) shows some good perspective on the Fallujah shooting, but the title irks me: What the Marine Did: The shooting of an unarmed Iraqi was a tragedy. But was it a war crime? Am I the only one who fails to see the "tragedy"? This is the enemy. The same group of people who have been collecting heads since May. The people who attack from mosques and use women and children as shields. Whether or not this man held a weapon in his hand at the moment the Marine killed him does not make the difference between a terrorist and a friendly neighborhood Iraqi. I firmly believe that, had he had a weapon, he would've tried to kill the Marine first. He was the enemy; I fail to see the tragedy of his death.

Posted by: Sarah at 02:08 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 140 words, total size 1 kb.

1 It seemed to me the title was slapped on there by the editor, because the article was balanced. I agree that the media is really being disgusting about this story.

Posted by: James Hudnall at November 20, 2004 04:34 AM (FV8Tp)

2 The only tragedy is that the video was released to be used as propaganda film by the enemy.

Posted by: Glenmore at November 20, 2004 10:49 AM (p59BM)

3 I think what the authors (both of whom served, by the way) is that the taking of any human life is a tragedy, but in the case of the insurgent it was one that was acceptable.

Posted by: Josh at December 04, 2004 02:21 PM (Sj33j)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
41kb generated in CPU 0.0132, elapsed 0.151 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.145 seconds, 167 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.