MySpace

Steering towards the Unknown...

Wednesday, September 19, 2007 22:08

Category: Life
What Terrorists?
by Philip Martin

Being deployed, I don't get to keep up to date on the news issues of the day very well. I can catch a few minutes of random cable news shows at the chow hall or word of mouth news about the Presidential campaigns but unfortunately, this is never enough. I did find in this week's Stars and Stripes newspaper (the Sept. 9th issue) an interesting news article though. Gleaned from the Washington Post the article is regarding a federal judge who ruled against the nation of Iran and awarded $2.6 billion to the families of the Marines killed in the 1983 Beirut barracks bombing. In the decision, Judge Lamberth ruled that Iran was "legally responsible" for the 1983 Hizbollah attack in Lebanon. Iran apparently didn't contest the charges.

From nearly the first day of boot camp I was taught that this attack was a terrorist act. Perhaps it was, but since it was directed against a military target the distinction is a little less clear cut. As a Marine I am considered a lawful combatant under the Geneva Conventions. This fact is stated on the back of my military ID card. As well were all the Marines who were killed in the tragic attack. The family members were compensated by the Marine's servicemember's life insurance policies but I can understand why the families want more. The commanders on the ground in Beirut did not equip the Marines with the necessary rules of engagement to properly defend themselves. However, the timing of the claim and the defendant is still worth a closer look. Iran is definitely not the only state sponsor of Hizbollah, not to mention that nearly twenty-four years after the attack makes the timing quite suspicious. Perhaps this is an innocent reaction from families still grieving or possibly another indictment to pile on Iran to justify a future war.

It's no secret that support for the global war on terror is slipping among the American people. It's always been difficult for the administration to show progress, but what they have done a good job at is to find new targets and enemies to fight. Many politicians, on both sides of the aisle, have misused the term "terrorist" to describe the individuals (or groups) that attack the US armed forces. But the fact is that when someone shoots at me (a legal combatant) or tries to use a roadside bomb (IED) against me while I'm on patrol they are not a terrorist. They become enemy combatants the moment they target other legal combatants. You can call them insurgents, anti-Iraqi forces, anti-occupation forces, freedom fighters, or Ali Baba (our most easily translated term for bad guys) but "terrorist" is not the correct term.

There is probably more than one reason why these people refer to enemy combatants as terrorists. It could be simply because they don't know better and don't understand that the word means something quite specific. Perhaps it's because it is accepted vernacular now and since we're waging a "war on terror" that would make "terrorist" the logical moniker for the enemy. Or maybe there is a more sinister reason. Could it be that the politicians and mainstream media (and occasionally military officials) knowingly misrepresent the enemy in Iraq to achieve a political aim? If I were attacked by a terrorist while in Iraq, then that must mean that terrorists are in Iraq, which means it was a perfectly wise and logical decision to invade Iraq, right? Now more than ever the neo-cons need to justify their actions and agenda to the American public. A clever bit of language manipulation, most likely not caught onto by the majority of unconcerned Americans, to achieve a political end. Don't forget that since the Sept. 11th attacks there is nothing an American hates more than a terrorist.

I won't say that I know why the term terrorist is so easily affixed to so many legal combatants but maybe we should be more careful in how we use the term. Words still mean things.

September 19, 2007

Philip Martin [send him mail] is an infantry Marine serving his second combat tour in the al Anbar Province of Iraq.


Copyright © 2007 LewRockwell.com

link: http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/martin-p2.html
Currently listening:
Kala
By M.I.A.
Release date: 21 August, 2007
Heather hates Hubris

 
WOW, this is extraordinary. How did this ever make it outside Iraq I wonder, now that all communications by troops are supposed to be tempered or censored by superior officers before being made available to the public? Is it possible that his superiors really supported this? Let's hope so...

I hope that all that have read this will join us in passing this onto as many people as we can - this message may be one of the most significant at this time. Also, I would like to encourage everybody to join me in thanking this marine working in the al Anbar province for writing this, by following the link Beau has provided and clicking on the email address for him at the bottom.

Thank you Beau for posting this - I'm truly grateful.
 
Posted by Heather hates Hubris on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 00:12
[Reply to this
Beau

 
I'm thinking that he used a non-military network to email this to Lew Rockwell or someone who would get it to him. I also recently watched a video on SOTT of these guys who were deployed but are back in the US. They were recounting their stories of storming people's homes in Iraq and killing innocent civilians. A lot of them were having trouble keeping back their tears.

There are more soldiers than most are aware who are willing to speak out about the truth about what is happening in Iraq. And let's face it, we're not going to get that from anywhere else!
 
Posted by Beau on Thursday, September 20, 2007 - 01:21
[Reply to this
barbara

 
Beau,

My background is a study of medieval European religious history. I did not focus upon the conflict between Islam and Christianity, but I have some familiarity. I read about the Crusades with amused superiority. I could not imagine the kind of mind that would go out to conquer the Holy Lands.

Now, I have alot more questions. I can feel the cultural energy that seems to be recreating this conflict.

This same energy was present in the early Greek/ Middle Eastern conflicts.

Is this an old, old battle into which we are automatically being sucked? If so the way to understand this goes way beyond the observation of how the media is being manipulated.
I'm not claiming that I know the way. I'm not claiming that I understand what should be done.

Gurdjieff wrote in a time of conflict which was insane. Historians write about it to make it seem so clean and organized. But it a filmmaker were to propose a movie about a man who wanted to establish the super race, or a battle between the Red and White armies in Russia based upon some economic theories, it would be discarded as a bad plot.

I think that the thing to do is to learn to observe this with compassion for the people caught up in this tide. Perhaps it would make sense to learn from the stories of people who lived through that time and actually added to the evolution of the time rather than its insanity.

Have you read 'Undiscovered County' by Katherine Hulme?

Barbara
 
Posted by barbara on Sunday, November 11, 2007 - 17:42
[Reply to this
Beau



Last Updated: 11/21/2009

Send Message
Instant Message
Email to a Friend
Subscribe

Gender: Male
Status: Single
Age: 29
Sign: Pisces

State: British Columbia
Country: CA
Signup Date: 2/24/2005

Who Gives Kudos: