What the americans need to know.

Originally posted by chancremechanic
Ok, lets analyze his background and the excepts from his book: He's a "former" staff seargent who obviously went post traumatic due to exposure to Iraq, therefore, he was probably discharged as medically unfit, psychologically, for service as a Marine. The book was released in France of all places....where else would he have a more anti-American ...[text shortened]... ure your compatriots here at RHP will be labeling me all sorts of names.....bring 'em on.....😉

This is someone who was there (which you weren't) who says the killing at the checkpoints were unnecessary and caused by poor training. Normally you put great weight on the opinion of soldiers, but for some reason not now. Why is that?

Originally posted by no1marauder
He was Honorably Discharged for medical reasons, Del and the book was written well after he gave numerous interviews spelling out his experiences in detail. Let's keep the facts straight. I didn't know you had something against authors. He was also a 12 year veteran of the Corps; do you support our troops only when they don't criticize government policies?

I believe I will let chancremechanic's post speak for me.

Originally posted by Delmer
I believe I will let chancremechanic's post speak for me.

Perhaps both you and chance should read the following interview with Jim Massey in a North Carolina newspaper (where he still lives) before you decide this combat veteran is a "pussy". http://www.smokymountainnews.com/issues/05_04/05_26_04/fr_massey.html

Originally posted by no1marauder
This is someone who was there (which you weren't) who says the killing at the checkpoints were unnecessary and caused by poor training. Normally you put great weight on the opinion of soldiers, but for some reason not now. Why is that?

You weren't there either, Killer of Innocents. Perhaps some of us think that just maybe this fellow is just another self-promoter exploiting the war for a few French francs.

Originally posted by no1marauder
This is someone who was there (which you weren't) who says the killing at the checkpoints were unnecessary and caused by poor training. Normally you put great weight on the opinion of soldiers, but for some reason not now. Why is that?

Because he hasn't the balls to come forward on CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, or any other U.S. media outlet to tell this story. The American press, especially the left-wing, Bush-hating press, would have been all over this story. He has to resort to one of America's worst enemies-France, where, of course, they will eat it all up and probably honor him with the "Croix de guerre". You are right, I am an American fighting man's advocate, but this disgruntled idiot is out to make a buck, or Franc/Euro I should say, at the expense of his fellow Marines. If he had stated this took place while he was in the U.S., I'd give more credibility to the story.

Originally posted by chancremechanic
Because he hasn't the balls to come forward on CNN, FOX News, MSNBC, or any other U.S. media outlet to tell this story. The American press, especially the left-wing, Bush-hating press, would have been all over this story. He has to resort to one of America's worst enemies-France, where, of course, they will eat it all up and probably honor him wi ...[text shortened]... he had stated this took place while he was in the U.S., I'd give more credibility to the story.

Here's an interview he gave to an American newspaper, the Sacramento Bee, in April 2004. http://prorev.com/ROCKWELLSOLDIERINTV.htm

You tell me why all the media outlets didn't pick it up.

EDIT: The other article I cited from the Smoky Mountain news was published May 26, 2004.

Originally posted by Delmer
You weren't there either, Killer of Innocents. Perhaps some of us think that just maybe this fellow is just another self-promoter exploiting the war for a few French francs.

I'm not trading insults with people in the Debates Forum anymore, Del, so you're wasting your time trying to bait me. I'm presenting the information I have; if you want to respond to that fine but I'm not going to respond to personal comments anymore.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Here's an interview he gave to an American newspaper, the Sacramento Bee, in April 2004. http://prorev.com/ROCKWELLSOLDIERINTV.htm

You tell me why all the media outlets didn't pick it up.

I read the first media example that you provided...it sounded like drivel....the Sacramento Bee is just another California left-wing rag probably owned by the students at Berkley. OK, so some Marine's didin't act according to Geneva convention rules; neither do the insurgents, but his story happens in EVERY war, if it's true to begin with...why didn't it make the "Big Boy News"? Could it be because there is lack of tangible evidence?....Naw, that couldn't be it....could it???? Is anyone backing his story?...as far as I'm concerned it's a "He said, They did this" accusation that needs further investigating before he writes a friggin' book!!

Welcome back, by the way.....

Originally posted by no1marauder
I'm not trading insults with people in the Debates Forum anymore, Del, so you're wasting your time trying to bait me. I'm presenting the information I have; if you want to respond to that fine but I'm not going to respond to personal comments anymore.

Okay, fair enough, but I believe Killer of Innocents was a term you used at one time in referring to yourself. Let's say he did all the things he says he did. Okay. But what does it say about a man who then blames the killing of 30 "innocent" people on his training. And who then writes and promotes a book about it. As I recall from my long ago military experience even a direct order to kill innocent people was not to be obeyed.

Originally posted by Delmer
Okay, fair enough, but I believe Killer of Innocents was a term you used at one time in referring to yourself. Let's say he did all the things he says he did. Okay. But what does it say about a man who then blames the killing of 30 "innocent" people on his training. And who then writes and promotes a book about it. As I recall from my long ago military experience even a direct order to kill innocent people was not to be obeyed.

I think you are misunderstanding what he is criticizing; he is NOT saying that he and his troops were knowingly killing innocent civilians. What he is saying is that the rules of engagement were such that the chances of killing innocent civilians was unnecessarily high. He is also criticizing the type of intelligence info the ground soldiers were given which made them believe virtually every Iraqi was a likely terrorist. His interviews are quite clear that he is NOT being critical of individual troops. I think both you and Chance need to actually read the interviews with an open mind rather than assuming that the guy is a pussy, left-winger out to destroy the US Marine Corps.

Originally posted by chancremechanic
I read the first media example that you provided...it sounded like drivel....the Sacramento Bee is just another California left-wing rag probably owned by the students at Berkley. OK, so some Marine's didin't act according to Geneva convention rules; neither do the insurgents, but his story happens in EVERY war, if it's true to begin with...why d ...[text shortened]... needs further investigating before he writes a friggin' book!!

Welcome back, by the way.....

If I had to guess, I would say that his story didn't make the major media news outlets last year because both major political parties were running candidates who were very much in support of the war and such a story wouldn't be popular. Also people at first glance might consider it a slam at the troops which it is not. I don't think anybody has seriously argued that many civilians weren't killed in the invasion and occupation; the question is whether these deaths were necessary at all. Massey says that in many cases they were not and further these unnecessary killings help to fuel the insurgency against the US. I think his views are worthy of an intelligent discussion rather than slamming a combat veteran as a "pussy" because you don't like his conclusions. Is your personal attack on the man any different from spitting on Vietnam War Veterans when they returned to the States (if such a thing ever actually happened)?

Originally posted by no1marauder
I think you are misunderstanding what he is criticizing; he is NOT saying that he and his troops were knowingly killing innocent civilians. What he is saying is that the rules of engagement were such that the chances of killing innocent civilians was unnecessarily high. He is also criticizing the type of intelligence info the ground soldiers were given w ...[text shortened]... nd rather than assuming that the guy is a pussy, left-winger out to destroy the US Marine Corps.

I'll buy and read the book when the English edition comes out.

Originally posted by no1marauder
If I had to guess, I would say that his story didn't make the major media news outlets last year because both major political parties were running candidates who were very much in support of the war and such a story wouldn't be popular. Also people at first glance might consider it a slam at the troops which it is not. I don't think anybody has seriou ...[text shortened]... Vietnam War Veterans when they returned to the States (if such a thing ever actually happened)?

OK, I'll concede that I should not have called him a "pussy". I hereby retract that statement....too late to self-edit...sorry. I agree that his story should be debated on a neutral field, such as The O'Reilly Factor 😉.....And he does seem to slam the gov't more than the troops, but he still owes it to his fellow Marines to report, debate, and medialize his story before he goes off spouting to the French of all peoples. I know lots of civilians were killed in the invasion...what wars were there not any civilain casualties. My mother's best friend was killed by a British/American air raid on Italy in WW2, so I know that innocents die in war. Your analogy is accurate; however, the Vietnam Vets didn't run to Hanoi or Paris and spout off about atrocities that did or did not happen without concrete evidence

Hey, No1, you seem very mellow which is a welcome change....hope you are feeling well....did the Sabbatical from RHP change you? I'm curious..

Originally posted by Delmer
I don't remember calling him a "pussy". Wouldn't make much sense to call a guy who killed 30 "innocent" civilians and then wrote a book entitled "Kill,Kill,Kill" a "pussy". Your definition of the word "pussy" must be different than mine. Anyway, I'll buy and read the book when the English edition comes out.

LOL....I was the one calling the ex-Marine a "pussy"...I tried to edit it but it was too late.....sorry...do I still get a rec?😞

Originally posted by chancremechanic
LOL....I was the one calling the ex-Marine a "pussy"...I tried to edit it but it was too late.....sorry...do I still get a rec?😞

Yes, of course you still get the rec. Did you notice I did edit out my "pussy" post after reading yours.