[ExI] Manning and Assange
Jeff Davis
jrd1415 at gmail.com
Sat Aug 25 20:27:38 UTC 2012
Some context re the Collateral Murder incident.
There have been disputes over whether the targeted men were armed, and
whether that justified the attack, some saying they had cameras, not
weapons, and others saying they had weapons. This dispute is easily
cleared up. The video clearly shows one compact AK and one loaded RPG
launcher. It seems clear that the US Forces had a criteria -- rules
of engagement -- that held that armed men on the street could be
engaged. So on that basis there appears to be "technical"
justification for the attack.
But that lacks context. The incident occurred in the fiercest moment
of the Sunni/Shia "civil war" for control of Baghdad. The Golden Dome
mosque bombing by al Quaeda in Iraq had set it off, and Sunnis and
Shia were being dragged off the street, tortured (ie harshly
interrogated), killed, and their bodies dumped, the dead numbering in
the hundreds per day. Consequently, if one went out on the street, it
was essential to be armed for defensive purposes, as these men were.
To complete the context, it is clear from the video that the men were
lounging about and not at that moment involved in any sort of hostile
action. The nearest hostilities involving US forces was several miles
away.
Also note that the targeting video had a range display which shows us
that the attack helicopters were over a mile away, well out of range
of the targeted men. Note in that regard the delay between the firing
of the 30mm cannon -- you can hear it on the audio -- and the impact
of the rounds, 3-4 seconds later.
Finally, fog of war and all that, it's hard to see the subsequent
targeting of the man with the van who stops to help one of the
wounded, and is killed, as anything but criminal. (Leaving out
entirely the issue of the unseen kids in the van.)
Regarding the legality of the invasion of Iraq: I am of the opinion
that Bush/Cheney intended to remove Saddam even before 911 gave them
the pretext, and that a close inspection of the laws appertaining --
Sovereignty clause and UN Charter -- show the entire business to have
been unlawful. I would add that, in my view, the same legal basis for
the assessing the criminal nature of the invasion itself also indicts
every member of Congress who voted in favor of the AUMF and follow-on
war funding, and for every member of the US Military who participated
in the war (they take an oath to defend the Constitution, ie act
lawfully).
Finally, at long last, after Vietnam and now, years later Iraq,
Afghanistan, and the GWOT, I am an old man (inner child
notwithstanding). I have come to the conclusion that the law is
overwhelmed by war and swept away. Replaced by a frightening
lawlessness that whispers the true nature of... leadership.
Can we please begin to design a system of governance that serves the
peace-desiring needs of regular people rather than the power-mad
sociopathic impulses of the "leadership"?
Best, Jeff Davis
...tell him that those of us who are
heartbroken from never-ending grief
caused by never-ending death caused
by never-ending war are sick of his
never-ending lies.
Missy Comely Beattie
More information about the extropy-chat
mailing list