Battle for Haditha

perseus

perseus

Active member
I have just seen the award winning Film Battle for Haditha last night depicting the Iraq civilian massacre. The improvised dialogue but following allegedly real events made it compelling viewing.

This makes me wonder if this is the tip of the iceberg and such incidents are more commonplace with little being learned since the My Lai incident. On the other hand perhaps its impossible to stop this 'occasional' sort of incident with hardened combatants?

2008 is the intended release date of Battle for Haditha, a film that portrays the Haditha massacre, directed by UK film-maker Nick Broomfield and starring Elliot Ruiz as Cpl. Ramirez, a good Marine who loses his composure after watching a friend die. The film also features Jase Willette as Pfc. Cuthbert, the young Marine whose death sets off the chain of events that become the Haditha Massacre. Yasmine Hanani stars as Hiba, a young Iraqi woman stuck in the middle of the chaos, Eric Mehalacopoulos as the no non-sense Sgt. Ross, Falah Flayla as a former Iraqi Army Officer turned insurgent, and Thomas Hennessy as a Navy Corpsman assigned to Kilo company. Haditha assembles a cast that includes former U.S. Marines and Iraqi refugees.
In it, an angry but honorable Iraqi man is driven to revenge and joins an insurgency against an occupying army. Frightened villagers let him plant a bomb targeting a passing military convoy. An exemplary Marine, infuriated by the death of a cherished comrade, opens fire on the villagers, killing innocents.
The film was shot in an unconventional way whereas instead of a detailed script, there was only an outline of each scene and where the story was going. Actors would then improvise much of the dialogue based on Broomfield's instructions. The film has been picked up for international sales by Dreamachine and aired on Channel 4 in the UK on March 17, 2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haditha_killings
 
Last edited:
Great. More crap that'll be taken out of context by an audience that can't even understand why boot camp is run the way it is.
 
Yes, it was on here in South Australia as well last night. Knowing just a little of the military mindset, I am always dubious of these "Documentaries".

As for the findings of the Military justice system I have little faith. It's a can of worms, and the justice department has an expectation upon them from too many groups.

I'm just glad it's not up to me to judge these people, there are too many possibilities.
 
Theortically war is fought between two sides on a zone, offered the name "war zone." This only applies to convetional warfare, meaning that both sides are two or more different armies (that means they have uniforms, etc etc) fighting each other.
This type of warfare will contribute many civillian casualties because of, say, urban combat, risky bombing (bombing very very close to civillians), artillery, and other reasons.

However, since the Iraqi army was dessimated by the USA very quickly, it's no longer standing. Some former Iraqi soldiers and civillians from Iraq or across the arab world travel to Iraq to fight as insurgents. This war is a guerilla war. It's no longer a conventional conflict, since it's not an army (ie no uniforms meaning no geniva convention for them!) it's a guerilla force.
In Iraq, those cowardly insurgents are massacering Iraqi civillians by the dozens each time, which leads to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead. These guerilla fighters use something called 'hugging'. This means that they stick very close to civillians to try to blend in with them and use them as shields. This racks in a lot of civillian casualties. This also means that the coalitions forces have a hard time finding out who is who.
In both there is going to be civillian casualties, no escaping it. However you can lower it though.
 
Cdt Matteo said:
In Iraq, those cowardly insurgents are massacering Iraqi civillians by the dozens each time, which leads to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead. These guerilla fighters use something called 'hugging'. This means that they stick very close to civillians to try to blend in with them and use them as shields. This racks in a lot of civillian casualties. This also means that the coalitions forces have a hard time finding out who is who.
In both there is going to be civillian casualties, no escaping it. However you can lower it though.
Click to expand...

This is well known, and nothing new as the Viet Cong used exactly the same tactics with the knowledge that the media coverage would undermine the American campaign.

However as in My Lai incident, this film and link suggests the Civilians including small children were not collateral damage caused by shrapnel or long range gunfire, but were deliberately killed out of rage owing to the continued gun shot wounds from short range.

On May 9, Sergeant Sanick Dela Cruz, who received immunity in return for testimony, testified that he watched Staff Sergeant Frank Wuterich shoot five Iraqis who were attempting to surrender. Cruz further testified that both he and Wuterich fired into the bodies of the five after they were dead, and that he had urinated on one of the dead Iraqis

Looking at this the other way around, what happens if this was your family would you not be asking some questions? If there is any truth to it then it seems that this sort of behaviour simply recruits insurgents.
 
Cdt Matteo said:
Theortically war is fought between two sides on a zone, offered the name "war zone." This only applies to convetional warfare, meaning that both sides are two or more different armies (that means they have uniforms, etc etc) fighting each other.
This type of warfare will contribute many civillian casualties because of, say, urban combat, risky bombing (bombing very very close to civillians), artillery, and other reasons.

However, since the Iraqi army was dessimated by the USA very quickly, it's no longer standing. Some former Iraqi soldiers and civillians from Iraq or across the arab world travel to Iraq to fight as insurgents. This war is a guerilla war. It's no longer a conventional conflict, since it's not an army (ie no uniforms meaning no geniva convention for them!) it's a guerilla force.
In Iraq, those cowardly insurgents are massacering Iraqi civillians by the dozens each time, which leads to the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead. These guerilla fighters use something called 'hugging'. This means that they stick very close to civillians to try to blend in with them and use them as shields. This racks in a lot of civillian casualties. This also means that the coalitions forces have a hard time finding out who is who.
In both there is going to be civillian casualties, no escaping it. However you can lower it though.
Click to expand...
agreed, also 13th, my thoughts exactly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top