‘Kinder and gentler’ warmaking may itself go on trial in the Haditha matter
The last year has seen the emergence of a new phase in the life of the New Media. From its first days in 1988, the New Media were mainly a reaction to the monopoly of the MSM. In large part this has continued until recently — the New Media reacted to an agenda set at the New York Times and the CBS Evening News. Rathergate was a high-water mark of this approach by the New Media.
We have detected a change in the New Media over the last year, from reacting to an agenda to setting an agenda. There has not been a clean transition from the former to the latter; it’s more like an interactive process. Harriet Miers, who suddenly became Sam Alito, was a good exemple of this change. Dubai Ports World is another example of the New Media setting the agenda, even though the New Media’s founder was on the other side of the issue. Indeed, the current conventional wisdom that Islam is beset with deep internal troubles comes from the New Media, in part because of the New Media’s coverage of the Cartoon Riots, the serial beheadings, and the daily outrages all committed specifically in the name of that religion; certainly such coverage has not been part of the MSM, which usually seeks to cover up connections between violence and Islam, nor has it been a staple of the Bush administration, which mostly has been MIA on the ideology of Islamofascism. Finally, the New Media have been highly effective in the immigration debate, exposing the Senate bill for the amnesty it is, and rallying conservative forces behind the House position. On a number of issues, the New Media have been instrumental in defining and enforcing a conservative agenda.
We have seen stirrings for some time that conservatives have been displeased with the war in Iraq — not because they are peaceniks, but because many believe that it should have been waged with far greater ferocity. We discussed a Rasmussen poll on this issue some time ago. Things may have changed decisively for the better with the killing of Zarqawi and the rounding-up of his gangs, but that is not the whole story. There are many conservatives who are outraged at the thought that any GI would be scapegoated in any situation to appease the vampires in Congress, the MSM, or perhaps even the incipient Iraqi government. A recent example is the shackling of the Pendleton 8. These men were kept in leg irons and handcuffs 24/7 at Camp Pendelton, even though they had not been formally charged with any offense. The conditions of their confinement have now been abruptly changed, as a result of Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, and others in the New Media bringing this outrage into the light of day.
We expect any Haditha trial to follow and amplify this trend of New Media activism on behalf of US servicemen. No one disputes the notion that if the Marines committed atrocities they should be severely punished. But the New Media will not sit idly by and watch US Marines get railroaded so that the brass can make a problem go away. And that in turn may well expose and highlight some difficult questions about the kind of complex, hair-splitting, warmaking the US has been doing in Iraq. The NYT piece today set a little context:
Many of the marines in Kilo Company had served on their previous deployment in Falluja, which had largely been cleared of civilians before they entered, and where permissive rules of engagement were in force. But Haditha was a different combat environment, with insurgents intermingled with civilians. In training between the two deployments, marines were taught how to protect civilians, and were instructed on more restrictive combat rules.
Months of Violence
Haditha, deep in Sunni-dominated Anbar Province, had taken a heavy toll in marines that spring and summer. In August, six scout-snipers from an Ohio reserve battalion were ambushed and killed on patrol.
Two days later, 14 more were killed when their amphibious track ran over antitank mines stacked three high. Four others were killed early in a fierce firefight inside a hospital, where insurgents hid behind patients.
“Saying who’s a civilian or a ‘muj’ in Iraq, you really can’t,” the marine said. “That’s how wishy-washy it was. This town did not want us there at all.” Mr. Puckett, the lawyer, said that the marines in Haditha believed that they were operating within established rules when they cleared the house.
If Haditha serves as a platform for a debate on how you fight a war when it is unclear who is a civilian, that should be welcomed by those of both anti-war and pro-war sentiments in the US. (We discussed this subject previously.) What the New Media will insist upon in this matter is that the niceties of a parlor debate not be used to attempt to micro-manage and micro-judge the actions of men whose lives are on the line. All sorts of fault lines may be exposed in the coming months.
UPDATE
Oak Leaf has a useful primer on the differences among the three H’s: Haditha, Hamdaniya, and Hadji Girl. That last bit was meant to be silly, but the distinctions between Haditha and Hamdaniya are serious and important to remember.