Subject of Times profile dies in Iraq

[Barrett808]

Source: LA Times

Subject of Times profile dies in Iraq
Marine Maj. Douglas Zembiec said he 'never felt so alive' as in battle.
By Tony Perry, Times Staff Writer
May 12, 2007

BAGHDAD — Maj. Douglas Zembiec, a Marine Corps officer profiled in the Los Angeles Times magazine in 2004, was killed while leading a raid on insurgents in Baghdad, officials reported Friday.

Details of his death on Thursday were sketchy.

In an age when many prefer military personnel to be diffident and reluctant to engage in violence, Zembiec was proudly a throwback.

"One of the most noble things you can do is kill the enemy," he once said.

Zembiec, 34, received a Bronze Star with a V for valor for leading an infantry company in repeated assaults against insurgents in the Sunni Triangle city of Fallouja in 2004.

Bloodied by shrapnel, Zembiec led his troops in combat so close that the two sides were hurling grenades from 20 feet apart. He later was part of low-profile missions in Afghanistan to thwart the resurging Taliban.

Zembiec seemed to revel in the experience of combat. In the magazine article, he was quoted as calling a firefight in Fallouja "the greatest day of my life."

"I never felt so alive, so exhilarated, so purposeful," he said the day after a battle in which two of his troops were killed and 18 wounded. "There is nothing equal to combat and there is no greater honor than to lead men into combat."

Read more: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-death12may12,0,2944830.story?coll=la-home-center

[LynnTheDem]

1. There is nothing equal to combat"

How very sad.

[Jackpine Radical]

30. I knew a few adrenaline junkies like that in Vietnam.

One old E-7 comes to mind. He was fucken scary; wouldn't want to be around him if he was stateside somewhere & drinking. Really glad he wasn't in command of much in VN either. He was the kind of person who, if he had been a platoon leader, would have gotten people killed. And would have gotten himself fragged as a menace to survival by his own guys.

[saigon68]

59. I think there are more of these Nutcases now

Than there were back then.

As least we had a few draftees pulling pins and getting payback

[Blue_Tires]

2. to be honest, this is probably the death he wished for

no greater glory that to die in battle like the Spartans or Vikings or whatever.....

[alcibiades_mystery]

4. It absolutely is

See my post below.

In older times, his vanquisher (for he was, ultimately, vanquished) would take some trophy. That's the world desired by the Douglas Zembiec's of the world.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[alcibiades_mystery]

3. Live by the 7.62 millimeter round

Die by the 7.62 millimeter round.

I suspect that Major Douglas Zembiec could imagine no better death than getting his chest opened up by heavy weapons and bleeding out on to the sand. A warrior's death, which he no doubt desired.

That all of this is extreme pathology is obvious to anyone but the most deluded purveyor of "honor" and other feudalist notions.

[MADem]

5. Live by the sword, die by the sword. RIP, I guess. He certainly didn't seem to have much peace in

his life, from his own quotes.

[saigon68]

6. "One of the most noble things you can do is kill the enemy,"

Looks like the "Enemy" got to him first.

As we used to say "Payback is a Bitch"

[lazer47]

12. Quote from George Patton

"Compared to war all other forms of human endover shrink to insignifance" he was delusional also.

[Retired AF Dem]

19. "he was delusional also."

He was? You must of learned everything from the movie right? Patton knew what war was and how to conduct it. I wonder how many Americans are alive today due to Patton's directives.

[clixtox]

33. Absolutely...

No one!!!

[Retired AF Dem]

43. No one?

The enemy lost an estimated 1,280,688 captured, 144,500 killed, and 386,200 wounded, adding up to 1,811,388. By comparison, the Third Army suffered 16,596 killed, 96,241 wounded, and 26,809 missing in action for a total of 139,646 casualties. Third Army's losses were only 12.97 percent of the German losses. That is only about 13 American soldiers for every 100 German soldiers.
http://www.pattonhq.com/textfiles/thirdhst.htm

Soldiers in Patton's third army stood a much better chance of returning home than any other Army in the European theater of operations.

[Javaman]

45. My uncle was in pattons third army...

he and about 75% of the other soldiers hated him and thought he was nuts.

what is never repeated is the $25,000 bounty on his head by the U.S. soldiers.

[superconnected]

52. I think he's pointing out the last American WWII vet died recently.

[KansDem]

74. You mean WWI, don't you?

My uncle is a retired Air Force general and served in WWII. I haven't heard of his demise lately, unless my family's keeping it from me...

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[merh]

7. Isn't it said that his comment wasn't

"There is nothing equal to leading your men safely out of combat and back home."

Suicide by battle.


May he finally find peace.

[youngdem]

8. Too bad such a singular warrior could not find a more noble battle

he died for NOTHING.

Too bad. Wish we could have men such as this loose in Afghanistan and Eastern Pakistan hunting Bin Laden.

Fool's dream, I guess.

[mike_c]

9. there is no honor in committing crimes against humanity....

eom

[silverojo]

24. If he'd had any compassion at all

He would've realized that the thing that makes you feel most alive is helping others. You know, some volunteer work, or working with handicapped kids, things that actually result in LIFE instead of DEATH.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

47. So what "crimes against humanity" has he committed?

I'm curious. You've made the charge, now back it up.

[superconnected]

53. If he picked up a gun and shot people, it's still crimes against humanity

Wearing a soldiers uniform does not execuse anyone from murder.

You could see that clearly at the nuremberg trials and the trials over mislovich and his soldiers.

[Name removed]

66. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Nihil]

67. If only Nuremberg was honoured today.

> Either present evidence that he was involved in crimes against civilians
> or STFU.

How many uniformed soldiers did he shoot so proudly and "valiantly"?

How many people in civilian clothes who were later labelled "terrorists"?

How many youths or old men (or women)?

For someone who is quick to shout "STFU" you are on thin ice.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

70. So you admit that you're just making shit up.

You have NO evidence that he committed ANY crime WHATSOEVER. Unless you're suggesting that simply being a soldier in Iraq makes you a criminal, then I can only assume that you're witholding whatever evidence you've got. :eyes:
I'm on thin ice? At least I'm not making shit up. I asked you before, and I ask you again now - If you have evidence that he is a criminal, show it.

[Nihil]

71. Learn to read before throwing "shit" around.

You didn't ask me anything pal ... :eyes: yourself.

I actually asked *you* a few questions but, surprise, surprise, you
didn't read that either.

You blathered on about "Nuremberg trials did not try ordinary German
soldiers who were just fighting the Allied armies" so *I* asked *you*:

>> How many uniformed soldiers did he shoot so proudly and "valiantly"?

(Just as a reminder, we are talking about a person who proudly claimed
that "One of the most noble things you can do is kill the enemy".)

I am suggesting that someone with his attitude in a situation where
there are no enemy uniforms is a recipe for disaster.
Remember "the only good <epithet> is a dead <epithet>"?
It looks like that mindset is still prevalent in parts of the armed
forces and, moreover, supported by parts of the civilian population.
Do you deny that?

>> How many people in civilian clothes who were later labelled "terrorists"?

This question was semi-rhetorical as I know as well as you that some pleb
on the internet does not have access to that information. On the other
hand, I *am* suggesting that his attitude would match the documented
behaviour of certain soldiers over there. Do you deny that too?

> Unless you're suggesting that simply being a soldier in Iraq makes you
> a criminal ...

I did not suggest that every soldier in Iraq is a criminal so save
your petty strawman for someone else.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

72. Sorry, you're right.

I asked the previous person in this sub-thread, who also refused to answer.


I did not suggest that every soldier in Iraq is a criminal so save
your petty strawman for someone else.

No, just the ones whose attitudes you don't like.

Look, he's dead now, along with about half a million other people because of this stupid fucking bullshit, so you don't have to worry your pretty little head about him any more.

[superconnected]

83. refused to answer?

I left and just came back to the thread for the first time since I posted last.

Your posts are as delusional as your "that person refused to answer" evalutation.

Apparently you are the one who "makes stuff up".

Don't worry your little mind about that.

[flyarm]

10. that persons brain was programmed sick!!..i am sorry he died..

but i wonder what would make someone think the greatest day of their life would be leading others to a death bath..

this quote:

Zembiec seemed to revel in the experience of combat. In the magazine article, he was quoted as calling a firefight in Fallouja "the greatest day of my life."

"I never felt so alive, so exhilarated, so purposeful," he said the day after a battle in which two of his troops were killed and 18 wounded. "There is nothing equal to combat and there is no greater honor than to lead men into combat.


makes me think..this was A VERY MENTALLY DISTURBED PERSON! WHO WAS SERIOUSLY MIS-WIRED FOR HUMANITY.

I am sorry he died before he knew what a tragedy of lies and deciet this war really was, and what a waste of life it was.

fly

[anotherdrew]

20. in part he was hooked on the massive adrenaline rush and such

I'm fairly sure there isn't any other way than combat to get the same rush. he had no choice but to adapt to it and love it, probably the only other psychological choice he had was to get sent home with massive PTSD, an outcome he would have considered failure and letting his fellow soldiers down. so he adapted and became a 'true warrior' and I'm not going to say that's all bad or disturbed, it's just such a shame that his sacrifice was made in this damn war, rather than in some action that could have accomplished something good; but... good war or bad war, he did his duty to the end.

[silverojo]

27. It's mental illness, all right

<<makes me think..this was A VERY MENTALLY DISTURBED PERSON! WHO WAS SERIOUSLY MIS-WIRED FOR HUMANITY.>>

Even Cho Seong-Hui didn't claim to get a rush from killing. His motivation was that he felt others were persecuting him, to the point where he couldn't take it anymore.

<<I am sorry he died before he knew what a tragedy of lies and deciet this war really was, and what a waste of life it was.>>

He didn't care. There's ample evidence, that's been floating around for years, that this whole war is a deadly farce. He chose to ignore it, because he preferred that "rush".

It scares me to think of how many people feel that "rush", whether they're in the armed forces, in street gangs, or just acting alone....

[moodforaday]

35. These people

now work for Blackwater. That's the really scary part of privatization of the military.

[flyarm]

31. i remember my dad telling me ..when i asked him about WWII the worst day of his life

were the days he had to kill another human being..and he had nightmares about it.

even the last 48 hours of his life..his hallucinations were not a white light..they were making us all get down on the floor by his hospital bed to hide from the enemy...and the fear on his face i will never forget..because he was reliving the war in technocolor!..and it was as real as if he was there all over again...

and experiencing death in the worst way..they way he told me it was the worst day of his life to kill another human being.

I believe this war, with the extensions and the long duty and the sending the soldiers back and back again..is desensitizing the humility and humanity of our soldiers.

sad..truely sad.

fly

[Mz Pip]

11. I guess he died

doing what he loved most. WE should all be so lucky. :sarcasm:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[orleans]

13. sounds like he would have been one spooky guy to have back home

on the streets of the u.s.

[lazer47]

14. Or maybe a Police Chief or Sheriff somewhere in your hometown

[orleans]

21. yeah--no thanks. we already had a police chief that gave orders

to his force to gun down (in cold blood! in the back!) some poor guy who was having mental problems. who the fuck needs someone like that around again?

[IndianaGreen]

56. Ahhh, another Frank Rizzo....

They would have been spiritual mates!

[Straight Shooter]

15. Maybe this is finally the soldier that bush will show up at his funeral for a photo-op. n/t

[babydollhead]

17. it creeps me out...

Like, wouldn't it be so Rove to conjure up a guy, have a profile done in Time Magazine, while he is fresh in the minds of Time readers, have this fictional guy die in battle, make it the story of the day. Scapegoat a country, propegate war.

[MsKandice01]

18. You forgot the sarcasm smiley...

Or at least I hope you did.

[babylonsister]

28. Tillman comes to mind indirectly; they used his life and death as tools

for their war campaign, even though we were all lied to about facts surrounding his death.

[Art_from_Ark]

63. A modern version of the Lieutenant Kije story?

I wouldn't put anything past the Potemkin Preziduncy

[go west young man]

22. Those quotes don't sound brave or intelligent.

They sound foolish and suicidal.

[TexasLawyer]

23. "we cannot dispute our need for warriors."

So let's stop killing our warriors off in a senseless war and save them for when they might actually be needed.


"We can dispute the politics of any war — Iraq, Afghanistan or any others," said Bing West, author of two books about combat Marines in Iraq, "but we cannot dispute our need for warriors. Doug was our guardian."

[lakercub]

25. He was a Major

This means that a man who was leading others liked nothing more than battle. That's fine for him (I suppose), but I'm not entirely sure the men following him would always have been so thrilled. A leader who revels in the shooting and loves nothing more than the stench of war should fight by himself. If he wants to go down in a blaze of glory, more power to him. But why should he take others with him?

A true leader in a time of war knows that one must fight only when one must, not because one wants to.

[BreweryYardRat]

36. Bingo. That last line in your post, that's the attitude people should have.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[tabasco]

29. I felt a lot of guilt as a result of being in combat.

Anyone who enjoys killing has lost his humanity.

[Bigmack]

34. "Guilt" is too simple a term for me...

Maybe I could call it "compound guilt".

Guilt for surviving, guilt for being glad it was them and not me, guilt for doing things I shouldn't have done, guilt for mistakes, guilt for letting it color other relationships in my life....... and on and on.

I joke that I had my guilt shot off in the war... but it ain't so.

I suppose there had to be a warrior class, but it bothers me that we celebrate them so.

[llmart]

32. Please read the book............

"A Deserter's Story" by Joshua Key. It'll make you feel better to know that some soldiers in Iraq actually learned a very hard life lesson about this war of Bush/Cheney's.

[Chovexani]

37. This sociopath was not a true warrior by any means

Maybe it's just my martial arts background, but all I can do is feel pity for this fool who thought being destructive was something to be proud of. True warriors are people of peace and sound mind who do what needs to be done when the circumstances demand it (protecting yourself or those you love or are sworn to defend), but never take pleasure in harming others. It's these cowboy Spartan wannabes who call themselves "warriors" who are about as far from the word as you can get.

I hope Major Zembiec learned from this mess and will be smarter in the next life. And I pray for those who suffered at his hands.

[sanskritwarrior]

38. This man that so many of you are railing against

was beloved by many marines........I never met the man but I've heard him before as he has been mentioned on military blogs. He was a leader, a field grade officer willing to go into the shit with the rest of us. That means something to combat soldiers. As for his comments about combat, they do ring true, it is exciting, terrifying, amazing, terrible and life altering all at the same time. Some of the happiest moments of my life were when we had killed someone trying to kill us. We did not do the touchdown dance or anything silly, but the sheer joy at knowing that you will survive and that person that was trying to end your existence now lay dead was really soul stirring. It basically boiled down to terror at the thought of dying being replaced by euphoria at the snuffing out of the enemy. And politics don't fucking matter when someone is shooting at you, lies about a war don't matter, bad intel doesn't matter. When someone is trying to kill you you try to kill them first, if you fail there is only black oblivion, if you succeed then there is joy and laughter. If you find that sick that's your problem, I'm quite well adjusted to the job I do, doesn't mean I enjoy it or get off on it, it means I know what I am supposed to do and will not hesitate to do it.

This major was one year older than me and seems like a awesome warrior, I wish I had gotten to know him, he was a warrior in a time of paper warriors......

As for what his men thought of him here are a few quotes from Marines that knew him.

There is no one better to go to war with - Sergeant Major William S. Skiles (Echo Company First Sergeant in 2004)

The love of his Marines and the Corps far surpasses anyone else I know. I don't think there are enough words to describe him as an individual. - Captain Darryl Ayers

He's everything you want in a leader: He'll listen to you, take care of you and back you up, but when you need it, he'll put a boot your... - Sergeant Casey Olson

He's not like some of these other officers: He leads from the front, not the rear. - Lance Corporal Jacob Atkinson

Doug is the prototypical modern infantry officer. He's also not that much different than the officers who led the Spartans into combat... - LtCol Joseph Clearfield

Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/iraq/complete/la-tm-marine34aug22,1,7615175.story

This man apparently was valorous and brave on the battlefield and I hope if I ever die in Iraq that I die with half as much courage as this guy.

Again I'll say it. Moderators I'm sorry I hope this angers no one, but the attacks on this mans "mental state" AGAIN show me that we as democrats don't know how to appeal to a lot of soldiers. A lot of soldiers and marines would applaud this man and believe he died a warrior. A quick glance at posts like this would make them question if they had anything in common with Democrats if SOME democrats would call this man, a man they lionize, sick in the head.

Call me whatever names you want, but the majority of responses in this thread are pathetic.

[fshrink]

39. One striking aspect of your post,

and of this officer's speeches, is the complete absence of any reflection about the "enemy". Who is the enemy? Who is not the enemy? Who says who the enemy is? Is the enemy really the enemy? By not reflecting about this, after all, very central question, one enters into a closed reasoning where what you do and why is unimportant and how you do it becomes all. What is the difference between a soldier of democracy and a soldier of some dictatorship? Courage? Discipline? Being a human being? No. What is it? Or is there no difference?

[sanskritwarrior]

40. If you are shooting at my men

you are the enemy, if you are threatening my men you are the enemy, if you are acting in a way that might endnager my men you are the enemy. If you are a friendly and you have done any of the above, you had better have a good explanation of yourself or you are going to jail.

Bottom line: In Iraq any Iraqi that attacks, threatens, and or acts in a manner that might be construed as hostile becomes the enemy........

Edit: The ROE determine what we do and how we do it.

As for the political distinction, when you are under fire it doesn't matter if your govt. is Communist, Democratic or Fascist, what matters is killing the enemy and surviving. Those things do matter, but not when 7.62 is flying by your head.

[fshrink]

41. This is not about political distinction

it's about moral. What is the difference between you and any soldier? Pick the most atrocious war, the most disgusting armed group within that war and pick one individual within this particular group. Is there any difference between you and this individual?

[sanskritwarrior]

42. Yes

I am an American, they are not........it's that simple.

Morally my men and I fight for America, therefore we are right.

I know that sounds terribly simplistic but in our minds that is what matters.

Every soldier of every nation feels the same.......

[Tempest]

44. "Every soldier of every nation feels the same"

And that's why he's now dead.

[The Stranger]

48. No.

It is not that simple. You are not right.

And every soldier of every nation does not feel the same.

[superconnected]

57. Horribly sad outlook.

You don't follow a country because it's your country, but because you believe in it's values.

If your country starts killing all mexicans because they are mexican, do you go along with it becuase it's your country?

I do not believe the US needs soldiers that cannot think and do not know right from wrong.

What we get is abu graib, when that happens. It's a national embarassment. It reflects on the mentality of all the soldiers in the US army, and that was the worst of it - to drag them all down to that level.

I don't think you should be a soldier if what you said is true. I think those are exactly the soldiers we need to get out of the army.

[jollyreaper2112]

75. And that's a problem

There's no room for philosophy on the battlefield. Too much thinking will just get your men dead. When someone is coming at you with a gun, saying "I fell your pain" isn't going to keep you alive.

That's why the time for debate is before the war ever starts. I don't blame the individual soldier for the shitty situation, I blame this country's leadership. Of course combat is kill or be killed. And of course the army is supposed to follow legal orders and rely upon the civilian political process to set this nation's strategic and military goals; that's the way it's written in the constitution. If the military is forced to start countermanding civilian orders because they are illegal, we've entered a whole new phase of constitutional crisis.

The motherfucking GOP and the quislings amongst the Dems betrayed this country and the military men and women who pledged their lives to service. This is treason.

A politician should be no more "pro-war" than a doctor should be "pro-amputation." Both are horrible choices with horrible consequences and should be resorted to when all other solutions are exhausted, when the only way things could be worse is if nothing were done. You amputate a limb to save the patient, you go to war to save the country, and you don't do either for shits and giggles.

[noamnety]

79. That's not morality or ethics

It's self-preservation.

While I understand the need for it in a battle situation - it's a necessary survival skill to be able to think that way - in terms of moral development, it's very low on the scale. It's nothing to do with higher ethics, or an ability to determine right from wrong, or empathy.

What you've said can be flipped to apply to the Iraqis as well, which I am sure you are aware of. If you were born there, you'd be fighting on their side, because you are motivated by nationalism - a fancy way of saying luck of the draw for where you are born. Luck of the draw and randomness is a funny thing to lay down your life for.

Every soldier of every nation does NOT feel the same. That's where you are mistaken. Some have the ability to recognize that if they were on the other side, they'd be fighting against the Americans, and they have the capacity to reflect on that, and understand what that means.

Those soldiers still do what they need to in order to survive, but they don't lose their humanity in the process.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

46. One striking aspect of *your* post...

...is your almost total disregard for the job they are put there to do. Soldiers, and their conduct in battle, are governed by laws just the same as the rest of us. I have the utmost respect for the men and women who have gone to Iraq. I have zero respect for the civilian leadership. One of my best friends in the world carries a rifle in Anbar province these days. I've got a huge deal of respect for him and the job he does, and absolutely zero respect for the retards who put him there.

Who is the enemy?

The enemy is the person who is shooting at you.

Who is not the enemy?

The enemy is the person who is not shooting at or threatening you.

Who says who the enemy is?

The civilian leadership of the military, and the fundamental facts of warfare, as noted above, that the person shooting at you is probably the enemy.

By not reflecting about this, after all, very central question, one enters into a closed reasoning where what you do and why is unimportant and how you do it becomes all.

And when, during combat, should such reflection take place?

You, and a great many other people in this thread, are confusing your frustration and distrust of the civilian leadership of the army (Bush, etc.) with distrust of the soldiers themselves. If the Vietnam War taught the left anything about dealing with the military, it should have taught us that insulting, demeaning, or questioning the sanity of the average soldier is wrong. I despise Bush, and I despise this stupid fucking war. But anyone who questions the honorable intentions of my friend stuck in al Anbar can, quite frankly, go to hell.

[fshrink]

49. So it logically follows

that no soldier can ever be wrong. Which includes *all* soldiers having *ever* fought *any* war. I am asking again: is there a difference between a soldier of democracy and a soldier of some dictatorship (pick the worst in your book)? Following the logic above, the answer is always "No". If you're satisfied with it, fine. I'm not.
By the same token, this logic justifies anything from the minute a leader makes war happen and onwards. It does not matter what war, for what reasons, real or fabricated, or to what purpose. The minute war is there it needs to be supported, because the soldiers who fight it need to be supported. Which is exactly Bush's clique's strategy since the very beginning (i.e. "support our troops".
How do you suggest we get out of this conundrum? Or are you happy with it?

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

50. No it doesn't.

I'm glad you think you're capable of being judge, jury, and executioner of every soldier of every regime. I don't feel comfortable putting myself in that position. I don't feel comfortable comparing the relative morality of a volunteer in our own army to a conscript in Saddam's, a conscript in our Vietnam-era army, or a volunteer in Saddam's. Maybe you do, but that's your problem.

As for the nonexistent "conondrum" you suggest, no, I see no ambiguity in respecting the troops who are put there to do a job, while despising the policy that put them there in the first place.

[dailykoff]

77. If your friend had any "honorable intentions" he wouldn't be in Anbar.

He'd either not have volunteered or he'd be a conscientious objector.

Instead he's making a buck protecting oil profiteers and a Neocon land grab, so spare us your Hollywood sermons.

[coskibum]

51. A Shepherd for our times

The vast majority of the comments to this article about Doug
Zembiec are personal attacks on a quiet, unassuming man, who
led his troops from the front, deflected attention from
himself, and did his job with zeal.   What you know about him,
you've read in the post which started this.  Doug is not even
buried yet, so have some respect for one who believed that he
was protecting your freedom.  Bleat on about how Bush lied,
and people died, but leave this fine human alone.  

There are three types of people in the world: wolves,
shepherds, and sheep.  Doug was the finest example of a
shepherd trying to keep the wolves from harming you sheep.  So
keep sitting around talking about such stupid stuff as
"who is the enemy," while the likes of Doug Zembiec
fight and die to preserve your freedom.  You don't deserve
him.  I agree, you are pathetic.  

Doug was one of those troops you claim to support.  Only
problem is that Doug also happened to believe in what he was
doing.  So, which troops do you support; only those that hate
Bush and are in Iraq reluctantly?  Sorry, you support the
troops or you don't.  Sounds like you don't.

Doug leaves behind a wife, a one year old daughter, mom, dad,
and a brother. He was a dedicated father, husband, son, and
brother.  He also happened to believe in the US mission in
Iraq.  He believed he was there preserving freedom, which
makes you hate him.  But he was none of the vile things you
painted him without the slightest hint of knowing him.  Find
the news on Wednesday when he is buried and see the more than
thousand people who show up from around the world to say
good-bye.  And feel embarrassed at having said such vile
things as have been posted here in the last few days.  I can't
think of anything more fitting to say than, "You should
be ashamed of yourselves."

[superconnected]

54. Yeah, all we know are his own words, which are kill kill kill

and glory glory glory.

I feel sorry for this pathetic socio path like I do the VA tech shooter. Both were extremely fucked up kids.

[coskibum]

60. Yes, glory

Spend five minutes trying to find out about Doug. It's all over the Internet. Why is that too much to ask before you and your ilk trash him. He didn't walk into a classroom and kill innocent students. He was ambushed by the enemy.

Save your sympathy and give a little respect. He was neither pathetic nor a sociopath. I suppose you got that from his words also. It was soooo obvious.

Or keep doing what you're doing: bleating while others protect you. Keep up that troop support. They all feel it. They know you are right there behind them. That's why they worry.

[The Stranger]

62. No one is protecting anyone. No army or government can give liberty,

only take it away.

Wake up.

Wake up.

[proud2BlibKansan]

78. All I need to know is that he was glad to kill.

I don't care who you are - that is sick.

[noamnety]

81. He walked into a country

and killed innocent civilians. Some were likely innocent students.

They were under orders. But some people struggle with the moral implications of that for the rest of their lives. Others take glee in it.

He appeared to fall on the side of glee.

[superconnected]

82. The iraqis are not a threat to me.

My you are delusional arent you.

Are our troops there *protecting* us?

[IndianaGreen]

58. General Tojo also believed in what he was doing!

He also happened to believe in the US mission in Iraq. He believed he was there preserving freedom.

The same argument could be made, and was made, by all the military leaders we fought during both world wars. I am also certain that the Knights Templar felt the same way about the mission they were carrying out.

British General Reginald Dyer also believed in his mission, so in 1919, at a place known as Amritsar, he did his duty as he saw fit:

General Dyer is infamous for the orders which he gave on April 13, 1919 in Amritsar. It was under his command that 90 troops, comprising of 25 Gurkhas of 1st/9th Gurkha Rifles, 25 Pathans and Baluch of 54th Sikhs and 59th Sindh Rifles, all armed with .303 Lee-Enfield rifles and the Gurkhas additionally armed with khukris opened fire on a gathering of unarmed civilians, including women and children gathered at the Jallianwalla Bagh in what came to be later known as the Jallianwalla Bagh Massacre.

The civilians had assembled at Jallianwala Bagh to participate in the annual Baisakhi celebrations which are both a religious as well as a cultural festival of the Punjabis. The Bagh-space comprised 6–7 acres and was walled on all sides except for five entrances, four of them being very narrow and admitting only a few people at a time. The fifth entrance was blocked by the armed soldiers and by two armoured cars armed with machine guns, although these vehicles were unable to pass through the entrance. Upon entering the park, the General immediately ordered troops to fire directly upon the assembled gathering; firing continued till his troops' ammunition of 1650 rounds was fully exhausted. The firing continued unabated for about 10 minutes. From time to time, Dyer "checked his fire and directed it upon places where the crowd was thickest"; he did this not because the crowd was slow to disperse, but because he (the General) "had made up his mind to punish them for having assembled there." Some of the soldiers initially fired in the air, at which General Dyer shouted: "Fire low. What you have been brought here for?." Later, Dyer's own testimony revealed that the crowd was not given any warning to disperse and he felt no remorse for having ordered his troops to fire.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reginald_Dyer

[coskibum]

61. Tojo

Nice turn of a phrase. I was trying to keep from having a big fight about the merits of the hostilities in Iraq. The only point was that he deserves your respect even though he believes in the US mission. Or do you only support the troops that want out of Iraq? If so, why don't you say that? We support our troops that want out.

Yes, there is evil in the world. Problem is you are focused on the small fish. If you want to see some real evil, look at the number of their country men that your heroes Uncle Joe Stalin and Chairman Mao dispatched. And yes, all generals thought they were right. That didn't make them right, as you point out. I'm betting that history will be kinder to Doug than the "insurgents."

[IndianaGreen]

64. I only support a complete and unconditional US withdrawal from Iraq

which is the same thing we demanded from Iraq after it invaded Kuwait. If you think I am putting Saddam and Bush on the same moral plane of wars of aggression, you are right, I am.

[Nihil]

68. Maybe not ...

> The only point was that he deserves your respect even though he believes
> in the US mission.

He lost that respect when he opened his mouth to praise the killing of
an anonymous "enemy" in such terms.

The comments about being viewed as a "leader who was at the front, not
the back" are indeed worthy of respect but given the Major's views,
even that aspect can be questioned (e.g, did he do it because he didn't want
to ask anything of his men that he wouldn't do himself - admirable - or did
he do it because of his admitted enjoyment of such action? - despicable)

(PS: Save the "your heroes Uncle Joe Stalin and Chairman Mao" shit for
your other sites.)

[maxrandb]

69. Quite a large leap

from discussing whether or not "there is no greater thing than combat", (the Major's own words), to somehow supporting Stalin and Mao. Of course, since the only exercise you freepers seem to get is "jumping to conclusions" I'm not surprised. Can't back up your argument with facts? Throw out the "communism" Red Herring.

You've got quite a bit of time to glorify war with your computer keyboard, I'm surprised you haven't joined the Marines and volunteered to go to Iraq so you can get some of that "glory". But, remember what the Roman conquerors always used to say; "All glory is fleeting".

It seems that maybe the Major was trying to make the Times story more appealing. "The greatest thing that ever happened to me was combat"? Really??? What about the birth of the daughter he's left behind? What about the day he found his wife (the love of his life)? What about the day you finally began a personal relationship with your God? Wouldn't any of those things be the "greatest thing that ever happened to me", instead of "combat".

That's what I think is making most people here "cringe". I expect our soldiers to be well trained, to be well equipped, to kill the enemy before they get killed, to come to each other's defense when the shit hits the fan. That is what you expect of your country's armed forces. Most soldiers don't give a rats-ass about whether it's a Republican, or a Democrat, or a despot, or their God that sent them to war. Most soldiers just want to survive, kill the enemy before they get killed themselves, and make it home in one piece (mentally and physically) to their families and loved ones. I do not expect them to see killing someone as some kind of Nirvanna. That's the issue being discussed here. Not whether or not the Major was a good warrior, not whether or not this war is a waste, not whether or not we want our soldiers to kill the enemy before they get killed. I take issue, and I think alot of the people here take issue with the "glorification" of war.

I blame Hollywood for the glorification of war. Those in it know that there is no glory in it. Civilized societies see it as a "necessary evil", only to be unleashed when the objectives are clear, the threat is real, the mission obtainable...and here's the most important part...when everyone in that civilized society is expected to make a sacrifice.

There is no glory in war. This country could use an hell of a lot more Omar Bradley, and a lot less Patton.

When you boil it all down to the bone, I'm sure that Osama would say "watching those towers crumble was the greatest day of my life". We expect more than that from American soldiers.

[coskibum]

73. Evils of War

Fine post. If all the posts on this topic were about how terrible war is or the glorification of war, I would not have an issue. If any others had been as articulate, civil, and thoughtful, you never would have been irritated by me. It's taking a human being who died days ago, and who is still to be buried and showing him disrespect based solely on an article. Talk about these seamier parts of the war all you want, and use Doug's words as an example of what you don't like, but leave judgments about him out of it. You don't know him.

As far as how much time I have, I'm not the one with 1000+ posts to all blogs let alone to one. And you don't know anything about me to know whether this is coming from Iraq.

Point of clarification, which doesn't matter much in the overall scheme of things. The interview was in 2004. He was married in 2005, daughter was born in 2006. Sort of hard for those things to be the best days of his life before they happened. I know what you mean and think it relevant.

As far as bringing up Mao and Stalin, I was responding to someone who uses a picture of Karl Marx to represent himself talking about how bad a Brit was for killing innocents. Other than that there were few arguments or facts, just name-calling (nut case, sociopath, I'm glad he died, I'm glad he's not my police chief, etc.). Which facts should I use to respond to those well made arguments?

Finally, I take your point that war should not be glorified, but add that war is not the worst thing on earth and the glorification of war is not either. Death is preferable to life under totalitarian rule. If you don't believe that, you are living in the wrong place.

Visiting this site is like "entering the Twilight Zone" or "flying over
the cuckoo's nest". So......I'm leaving....going back through the looking
glass.....and into the light.
"Nurse Ratchit, double their meds, stat" !!!!

coskibum

[IndianaGreen]

55. Another pointless and wasteful death that did nothing for America's security

All that energy wasted on a war of choice!

[Skittles]

65. he sounded like a certified nutcase

:puke:

[noamnety]

80. I'm going to disagree with that.

People here are characterizing him as a sociopath, as if it's an individual pathology, and that's not exactly the case - in fact, I think it's a way to minimize the reality of the situation and whitewash the government's role (and even the media's role) in training people to be like that.

[Jed Dilligan]

84. Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori

not.

It sounds like he was a lousy officer.

[coskibum]

85. The Washington Post Reports on the Funeral of Doug Zembiec

Although I signed off from this zoo a couple of days ago, this was written about Doug in the Washington Post by Dan Morse. Seems only fitting that it would come after one more of you experts said how bad Doug was, this time as an officer. As measured by the generals and privates at Doug's funeral, I'd say he was among the best officers.

So long losers.....

The turnout seemed entirely fitting for a Marine who was described -- with
little apparent hyperbole -- as the toughest guy in the house. More than
1,000 mourners, from generals to civilians, packed the Naval Academy
Chapel in Annapolis yesterday to honor Maj. Douglas A. Zembiec, who was
killed last week outside Baghdad.

Five hours later, after the sound of taps had faded over his coffin at
Arlington National Cemetery, came what Zembiec, 34, might have considered
the finest tribute of all.

About 40 enlisted men gathered under a tree, telling stories about their
former commander. Some had flown in from as far away as California,
prompting one officer to observe: Your men have to follow your orders;
they don't have to go to your funeral.

The men knew firsthand how Zembiec, who lived outside Annapolis, had come
to be known as the Lion of Fallujah.

The story is one of their favorites. It was 2004, in the Jolan district of
Fallujah, and Zembiec was a captain. They were on a rooftop, taking fire
from AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades. They tried to radio an Abrams
tank below to open fire in the direction of the enemy. No good.

Zembiec raced down the stairs and out to the street and climbed onto the
tank. Gunnery Sgt. Pedro Marrufo, 29, who watched from the rooftop,
remembers Zembiec getting a Marine inside the tank to open the hatch.
Insurgents shot at Zembiec as he instructed the men in the tank where to
fire.

Cpl. Chad Borgmann, 28, who went to Zembiec's funeral from Camp Pendleton,
Calif., said yesterday that boarding tanks during firefights and similar
actions is typically the work of enlisted men. If a lance corporal falls,
there are 40 to take his place. But there are fewer captains, Borgmann
said, and fewer still who always seemed to be out in front.

"He let us know it was his privilege to lead us," Borgmann said, walking
back to a car through the graves of Arlington before heading out to meet
up with his Marine buddies at the Clarendon Grill.

Zembiec, born in Hawaii, the son of an FBI agent, was a two-time
all-American wrestler at the Naval Academy before graduating in 1995. His
most recent U.S. posting was in Arlington.

For years, Zembiec had drawn the attention of Marines and journalists
alike. He served in Kosovo and was on his fourth tour in Iraq, said Col.
John Ripley, a retired Marine and close friend. His numerous military
honors included a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.

Mourners heard a sampling of Zembiec's sentiments yesterday. "Never forget
those that were killed," he once wrote. "And never let rest those that
killed them."

As many as 15 generals filed into the pews of the historic chapel, with
its cavernous ceiling and towering windows exposing blue skies. Other men,
in suits, with the bearing of retired military officers, stood straight
with clutched fists at their sides while quietly singing the Marines'
Hymn. Many others appeared to be Zembiec's peers, 30-something couples,
men with the close-cropped hair of Marines, and some of the women
pregnant.

Mourners heard about Zembiec's family life. His wife of two years, Pamela,
and their 1-year-old daughter, Fallyn, sat up front.

"Become the greatest husband and father ever," Zembiec had written in a
note to himself.

The Marine had compiled such axioms and exhortations in notebooks,
excerpts of which were read aloud by a close friend, Eric L. Kapitulik,
who also recounted this story:

While Zembiec was stationed at Camp Pendleton after the Fallujah campaign,
his parents visited. Zembiec and his father, Don, drove onto the base to
shoot skeet and were stopped at the gate by a young Marine. Are you
Captain Zembiec's father? the Marine asked. Yes, his father said.

"I was with your son in Fallujah," the Marine said. "He was my company
commander. If we had to go back in there, I would follow him with a
spoon."

Kapitulik read heavily from Zembiec's notebooks. One of the quotes was
particularly long, amounting to what Kapitulik said was a summary of
Zembiec himself.

"Be a man of principle. Fight for what you believe in. Keep your word.
Live with integrity. Be brave. Believe in something bigger than yourself.
Serve your country.

"Teach. Mentor. Give something back to society. Lead from the front.
Conquer your fears. Be a good friend. Be humble and be self-confident.

"Appreciate your friends and family. Be a leader and not a follower. Be
valorous on the field of battle. And take responsibility for your
actions."

Kapitulik said the creed came from the man who knew Zembiec the longest,
as indicated by the major's written description: "Principles my father
taught me."