One of the dirty little secrets about recent claims of massacres is that all too often, they really are not massacres. The latest case of this now appears to be Haditha, with testimony now emerging that shows that at least eight of the 24 "victims" were armed terrorists. If so, Haditha would have more in common with the 2002 battle of Jenin (also claimed to be a massacre) than it does with My Lai.
Our enemy likes to fight behind civilians so that we will either hold fire giving the enemy a chance to shoot and live; or we shoot and the enemy gets a propaganda victory with dead civilians on TV. Never mind that those who fight behind the civilians are accountable for the civilian deaths and not our troops who are fighting the enemy.
I noted earlier (based on another Strategypage report) that evidence might be emerging that casts doubt on the massacre charge.
It is early yet so I won't assume anything. I would never assert that our troops are incapable of having troops among them capable of committing a crime. But when found, we prosecute them.
And it is certainly possible that the truth lies between a battle and a massacre. Perhaps the enemy fought amonst civilians and our troops failed to exercise good judgment in reacting. Perhaps somebody did something wrong and others kept quiet about it contrary to regulations.
And I'd like to note the revolting eagerness of those Americans who so often profess to "support the troops" to believe the charges of war crimes.
