My uncle sends me a lot of these patriotic conservative spams, some of which are schmaltzy, some jingoistic, and some really good. This one, a response to criticisms of Marine tactics in Fallujah, specifically, the practice of "double-tapping" wounded enemies (shooting them twice in the head), is a good read. This has been around the pro military sites for a while, but I’ve just seen it. I could not find the supposed news article that this is responding to.
Regarding the news blurb about the Marine who put two rounds ("double tap") in a wounded insurgent’s head in Fallujah, here’s a response from a Marine:
"It’s a safety issue, pure and simple. After assaulting through a target, we put a security round in everybody’s head. Sorry al-Reuters, there’s no paddy wagon rolling around Fallujah picking up "prisoners" and offering them a hot cup o’ Joe, falafel, and a blanket.
There’s no time to dick around on the target. You clear the space, dump the chumps, and move on. Are Corpsmen expected to treat wounded terrorists? Negative.
Hey Libs, worried about the defense budget? Well, it would be waste, fraud, and abuse for a Corpsman to expend one man-minute or a battle dressing on a terrorist. It’s much cheaper to just spend the $.02 on a 5.56mm FMJ.
By the way, in our view, terrorists who chop off civilian’s heads are not prisoners, they are carcasses. Chopping off a civilian’s head is another reason why these idiots are known as "unlawful combatants." It seems that most of the world’s journalists have forgotten that fact.
Let me be very clear about this issue. I have looked around the web, and many people get this concept, but there are some stragglers. Here is your typical Marine sitrep (situation report): You just took fire from unlawful combatants (no uniform – breaking every Geneva Convention rule there is) shooting from a religious building, att empting to use the sanctuary status of their position as protection. But you’re in Fallujah now, and the Marine Corps has decided that they’re not playing that game this time. That was Najaf. So you set the mosque on fire and you hose down the terrorists with small arms, launch some AT-4s (Rockets), some 40MM grenades into the building and things quiet down.
So you run over there, and find some tangos (bad guys) wounded and pretending to be dead. You are aware that suicide martyrdom is like really popular with these idiots, and they think taking some Marines with them would be really cool. So you can risk your life and your fire team’s lives by having them cover you while you bend down and search a guy that you think is pretending to be dead for some reason. Most of the time these are the guys with the grenade or a vest made of explosives. Also, you don’t know who or what is in the next room. You’re already speaking English to the rest of your fire team or squad, which lets the terrorist know you are there and you are his enemy. You are speaking loud because your hearing is poor from shooting people for several days. So you know that there are many other rooms to enter, a and that if anyone is still alive in those rooms, they know that Americans are in the mosque. Meanwhile (3 seconds later), youstill have this terrorist (that was just shooting at you from a mosque) playing possum. What do you do? You double tap his head, and you go to the next room, that’s what!
What about the Geneva Convention and all that ‘Law of Land Warfare’ stuff? What about it? Without even addressing the issues at hand, your first thought should be, "I’d rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6."
Bear in mind that this tactic of double tapping a fallen terrorist is a perpetual mindset that is reinforced by experience on a minute by minute basis. Secondly, you are fighting an unlawful combatant in a Sanctuary, which is a double No-No on his part. Third, tactically you are in no position to take "prisoners" because there are more rooms to search and clear, and the behavior of said terrorist indicates that he is up to no good. No good in Fallujah is a very large place and the low end of no good and the high end of no good are fundamentally the same … Marines end up getting hurt or die.
So there is no compelling reason for you to do anything but double tap this idiot and get on with the mission. If you are a veteran, then eve rything I have just written is self evident. If you are not a veteran, at least try to put yourself in the situation. Remember, in Fallujah there is no yesterday, there is no tomorrow, there is only now, Right NOW. Have you ever lived in NOW for a week? It is really, really not easy. If you have never lived in NOW for longer than it takes to finish the big roller coaster at Six Flags, then shut your mouth about putting Marines in jail for "War Crimes."
Semper fi.
Hi Seeker:
The thing is, I doubt that Anericans would say the same thing if the enemy double tapped our guys–I expect we’d mostly say that their murder of prisoners shows how evil they are. War brings out the hypocrisy in us, the same as most sins do.
your Friend
Keith
I agree, to some extent. War sucks.
Hi Seeker:
It sure seems to. But there is something more to be said. Jesus commanded us to love our enemies. Now while I think engaging in warfare is contrary to the Gospel of Christ, there are plenty of good Christians who disagree with me about that, who see war as sometimes a tragic necessity. But the attitude expressed in the post you quoted from, understandable as it might be, is most definitely NOT an example of loving our enemies. If waging war precludes enemy-love that’s evidence for MY position–we Christians have to be obedient to God’s command and let God take care of the rest. But if a Christian CAN love his enemy while engaging in war against that enemy, then the attitude your article defends is anti-Christian. or so it seems to me.
your Friend
keith
Love also means protecting the weak from the evil strong, even if by lethal force when necessary. But I agree, this does not justify a cold attitude towards our enemies. I believe that you can do justice with love, even when justice is execution.
That may not make sense to us right away, but when we consider that love and justice work together, we can regretfully do our duty when it is right, and there are times when such work is right, because some people are so given over to evil that they have in a sense already chosen their fate of being in the wrong side of justice.
While such determinations can not be made lightly or without self-critical thinking, it must be done.
Hi Seeker:
Your first paragraph is a perfect example of what I was saying about good Christians who disagree with me about war. I agree that love requires us to protect the weak as well as love our enemies, and just how one does both is the challenge.
your friend
Keith
Hi Seeker:
One thing about war: it necessarily involves killing innocent people. But we try to minimize the harm caused to civilians, the argument goes, we try to limit our killing to enemy combatants. But why are combatants less innocent than civilians? Typically, the enemy are nothing more than people who honestly believe they are fighting to defend those who cannot defend themselves just like our guys are. It is very rare–genocides like in Rwanda or Darfur–when the combatants are just thugs. The “defending the weak” argument for war rarely if ever applies; both sides make the argument but its main purpose is to convince their soldiers that their cause is just.
your Friend
Keith
Keith –
I was never a Marine, so I can’t speak of having personal experience with this. But I am retired Air Force, and was in the Middle East on 9/11. I’m glad you are a loving Christian, and I wish more had your philosophy. But I can tell you that over there, in the hand of terrorists (insurgents, whatever you want to call them), you would only be one thing … DEAD.
The enemy would not bother to “double tap” you. You will be found (if you are found at all) with your head separated from your body, and you will be DEAD. Plain and simple. Their view is VERY simple: KILL EVERYONE DIFFERENT FROM THEMSELVES. That even includes Muslims from different sects, and that DEFINITELY includes Christians, with Americans topping the list.
Do the world a favor … go to church, pray for peace, and leave the war fighting to those who have taken the oath to serve in the armed forces. Until you are willing to put on the uniform and walk in their shoes, this subject has no business on this religious forum.
James
James,
Thanks for posting, and thank you for your service. While I agree with your assessment of the reality of our enemies, I do think that a biblical world view addresses all of life, including the idea of justice, and just warfare, and how to deal with evil. Discussions of how to conduct war DO belong in a Christian, "religious" forum.
This is what I am trying to articulate here – I believe that you can be a Christian AND serve humanity in law enforcement and the military – because God is not just a God of love, but of justice – as I said, real love requires truth and justice. You can't claim to love if you avert justice.
This is further why I argue that pacifism is not biblical nor Christian – not that we should be quick to war, nor that we can in any way spread faith through arms, but that we must be willing to empower our civil government and military with the means to enforce justice, which, in the light of the reality of evil, must include lethal force.
This is why the bible contains lists of capitol crimes right after the commandment to "not kill." Because there is an unjust type of killing (murder), but there is also a just kind as well.
"Love your enemies" is not a complete philosophy in itself – it must be balanced with "protect the weak" and "do justice."
Hi James:
I do want to join Seeker in thanking for your service. Military service involves great sacrifice and there are not enough people in the world willing to sacrifice to help others.
You wrote: I was never a Marine, so I can’t speak of having personal experience with this. But I am retired Air Force, and was in the Middle East on 9/11. I’m glad you are a loving Christian, and I wish more had your philosophy. But I can tell you that over there, in the hand of terrorists (insurgents, whatever you want to call them), you would only be one thing … DEAD.
That may well be true; I don’t expect practicing pacifism is a good strategy for survival in a war zone. But for a Christian, dying at the hands of another cannot be the most important consideration. Jesus taught that those who would cling to their life and security will lose what’s meaningful about life, but that those who would give up their life for the sake of Christ will find their life. The question is simply whether or not the Christian will obey the commands of Christ; we have to leave the final results to God.
he enemy would not bother to “double tap” you. You will be found (if you are found at all) with your head separated from your body, and you will be DEAD. Plain and simple. Their view is VERY simple: KILL EVERYONE DIFFERENT FROM THEMSELVES. That even includes Muslims from different sects, and that DEFINITELY includes Christians, with Americans topping the list.
Do the world a favor … go to church, pray for peace, and leave the war fighting to those who have taken the oath to serve in the armed forces. Until you are willing to put on the uniform and walk in their shoes, this subject has no business on this religious forum.
I cannot disagree with you more about your last comment. I think the subject has every business on this religious forum. That’s because I think Christ’s command to love your neighbor including your enemy is essential to the Gospel. I did not intend my comments to disparage those who serve in war. I think participation in war is contrary to the will of God, but I know for sure that a lot of Christians disagree with me, so do a lot of non-Christians.
Seeker:
You wrote: “Love your enemies” is not a complete philosophy in itself – it must be balanced with “protect the weak” and “do justice.”
You seem to see a tension between these two commandments of God; sometimes (you seem to say) you have to disobey one to obey the other. Given the choice between the two (you seem to say) you choose “doing justice”. I would argue that God wouldn’t give us conflicting commands. It must be possible for us to do justice without failing to love our enemies. I am not at all sure that killing the other side in a war is consistent with enemy loving–it sure doesn’t seem consistent to me–so I have to have faith that I can do justice without killing someone in war. Protect the weak? Why think it’s not the enemy in war that <>i>is the weak? In the main our warfare kills the fott soldiers–the leaders who choose to send their citizens to war frequently get off scott free. In church we pray every week that our soldiers are safe, that their families will get to see them again, safe and whole. But enemy soldiers have families too.
your friend
Keith