I am writing in response to Larry Simoneaux’s column of Nov. 23 headlined “Don’t be quick to judge split-second choices in war.”
He writes that only people who have experienced similar situations should judge the actions of the Marine who shot and killed an unarmed Iraqi prisoner of war. While I have many objections to his column, including his improper usage of the word “terrorist,” his complete disregard for the intrinsic value of all human life and the rule of law appalls me the most.
Simoneaux’s belief that only other soldiers should judge the Marine may appear to some as a socially acceptable “jury of peers.” However, he forgets that a jury of peers is only just when there are legally binding rules that it follows.
In times of war, there are protocols put in place to protect the lives of all humans: those of Americans, civilians and those who fight against us. If an American violates such rules, as the current investigation will determine, he or she should be punished accordingly. To do otherwise would be unjust and would be very unlikely to convince Iraqis that our intentions were good in invading their country. It would also be a blatant example of the pompous, “holier-than-thou” attitude that got us into this war in the first place and explains why the United States is hated by millions across the globe. I can only imagine Simoneaux’s reaction if an insurgent were to have been filmed killing an unarmed American prisoner of war.
Simoneaux says that those of us thousands of miles away may think “with unmerited moral certainty” that we understand the situation. Luckily for me and him, we don’t have to understand the situation; we only have to look to laws that will place a proper judgment on the situation.
Jim Freeburg
Snohomish
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
