Congressman John Murtha is dead at 77.
In 1974, Marine Colonel John Murtha became the first Vietnam War combat veteran elected to Congress. Considered one of Congress’ most hawkish Democrats, in 2002 Murtha voted to authorize President George W. Bush to use military force in Iraq.
By November 2005, however, it became politically expedient to join the growing number of Democrats criticizing the administration’s handling of the war. In calling for an immediate withdrawal of U.S. troops, Murtha said, “The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion.”
In 2006, Murtha’s criticism of the Iraq war morphed into emotional accusations when he claimed Marines murdered Iraqi civilians “in cold blood” at Haditha, Iraq, after one Marine died and two were wounded by a roadside bomb. On December 21, 2006, eight Marines from 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines were charged in connection with the incident.
Murtha unfairly held the Marines responsible before an investigation was concluded and fueled enemy retaliation. Latching onto defeatist liberal sentiments of the day, Murtha said the war couldn’t be won militarily and such incidents dimmed the prospect for a political solution.
“This is the kind of war [where] you have to win the hearts and minds of the people,” Murtha said. “And we’re set back every time something like this happens.” Murtha’s strident accusations against the Haditha Marines helped the Democrats gain a majority in the House of Representatives.
Murtha’s disgraceful accusations against fellow Marines were reminiscent of another Vietnam veteran’s ungrounded claims about the conduct of U.S. servicemen in an earlier conflict.
Charges against seven of the eight Marines were ultimately dropped, and murder charges against the eighth were reduced to negligent homicide. In the course of the Haditha Marines’ Article 32 hearings, the investigating officer told the prosecution so far, “The account you want me to believe does not support unpremeditated murder.”
John Murtha’s conduct throughout this incident was considered shameful by my Marine brothers. Murtha played the incident for maximum media coverage; it was impossible to avoid the subject as his face dominated television screens in mess halls, orderly rooms and other gathering places throughout the military.
I have always admired the Marine Corps; probably the finest fighting force ever to march across a battlefield. I have served alongside Marines, in training and operationally, overseas. My only regret of my entire military career is that it did not include a hitch in the Marine Corps. To this day I count Marines amongst my truest friends.
During the time of John Murtha’s betrayal, more than one Marine I know looked down, shook his head and said, “He’s not one of us. He’s not a Marine anymore.” For a Marine to say such a thing of another Marine is bad enough; for a Marine to say such a thing in front of a non-Marine, in the company of other Marines, is unheard of.
* * *
Murtha joined the Marines in 1952, served in the 2nd Marine Division, and did a stint as a drill instructor at Parris Island, South Carolina. He served as an intelligence officer in Vietnam from 1966 to 1967 and received a Bronze Star and two Purple Hearts.
Murtha routinely drew the attention of ethical watchdogs for off-the-floor activities, and his entanglement in the Abscam corruption probe three decades ago.
In the 1980 Abscam corruption probe, the FBI caught Murtha on videotape turning down a $50,000 bribe offer while holding out the possibility that he might take money in the future. “We do business for a while, maybe I’ll be interested and maybe I won’t,” Murtha said on the tape. Six congressmen and one senator were convicted in that case. Murtha was not charged, but the government named him as an unindicted co-conspirator and he testified against two other congressmen.
More recently, Murtha drew scrutiny for the connection between special-interest spending known as earmarks and the raising of cash for campaigns.
Originally posted at STORMBRINGER.
21 responses so far
1 balconesfault // Feb 9, 2010 at 8:30 am
This screed gets the toppost this morning?
As much as the right wing hated to hear it – Murtha was right:
“The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion.”
In 2005, the Iraq War was not going as advertised. Had it been … there would never have been the need to send in the surge a couple years later, would there? Who was wrong – Murtha, or the diehards who defended Rumsfeld’s Iraq strategy up to the day Bush fired him?
The best we will get from a few trillion spent and the loss of thousands of our young men and women (and the serious life-long injuries inflicted on many, many tens of thousands more) will be to replace an anti-Iranian Baathist regime with a pro-Iranian Shiite regime. But at least we found and eliminated those troublesome WMD stockpiles, right? And we made a lot of money for Sean’s true brothers these days – not the Marines who dedicate their lives to serving our nation in uniform … but to the contractors like Blackwater/Xe whose net value grew massively over the Iraq War years.
Meanwhile, I’d like to see Sean Linnane here and now pledge that he will never support a candidate who pushed for earmarks in a specific piece of legislation, btw.
2 teabag // Feb 9, 2010 at 8:39 am
Murtha was 100% correct. The war was totally miss managed, it was a total disaster on all fronts.
3 jakester // Feb 9, 2010 at 8:56 am
At least wait a well after he is buried before shoveling the trash on his grave. What ever happened to taste and decorum? It’s not like he murdered anyone.
4 sdspringy // Feb 9, 2010 at 9:12 am
Murtha was a political pig and toward the end of his political career he epitomized the worst traits of that portrait. He will be most remembered for his comments concerning Haditha and for little else. His stance on the Iraq war will resemble Reid’s, where elected politicians state the war is lost while men are fighting on the ground.
It is and will always be considered a disgraceful act and neither will be missed.
Five hundred tons of yellow cake uranium was removed from Iraq. Iraq had in the past enriched uranium and seems to have had plenty in reserve. The Iraq policy can be argued till we are all blue in the face, however the alternative method now plays out in Iran. Can sanctions and international pressure prevent the Iranian bomb? Anyone willing to bet the center of New York city on it?
5 sinz54 // Feb 9, 2010 at 9:33 am
No elected official should ever prejudge an American defendant to be guilty or innocent. Every American, including these Marines, is entitled to a fair trial with presumption of innocence.
Murtha’s declaring these accused Marines to be guilty of “cold-blooded murder” before they were even tried in military court was disgraceful. It also turned out to be wrong, since not a single one of these Marines was convicted of premeditated murder.
But Murtha’s dead now, and after he’s buried, we should just let the issue rest, OK?
Let Murtha rest in peace.
Now he must answer to God.
Not to us anymore.
6 franco 2 // Feb 9, 2010 at 10:08 am
The US Congress just went down a notch on the corruption meter Hooray!
Murtha was 77 years old. If these these politicians would start retiring at a reasonable age I’d have a chance to forgive and forget, and bestow kind words and prayer upon them. But they don’t, so I won’t. Good riddance.
7 Danny_K // Feb 9, 2010 at 10:21 am
Classy.
8 balconesfault // Feb 9, 2010 at 11:13 am
No elected official should ever prejudge an American defendant to be guilty or innocent.
Seriously dude? Good luck with that one.
As a principle, just like I asked Linanne about earmarks – will you pledge to never vote for a candidate who has publicly prejudged an American defendent to be guilty or innocent?
9 grackle // Feb 9, 2010 at 11:20 am
The war in Iraq is not going as advertised. It is a flawed policy wrapped in illusion.
There’s a couple of things wrong in the above. First, it conflates policy with one of the tools(war) to implement the policy.
The specific policy: To topple a cruel and murderous despot who for 13 long years purposefully violated every post-war agreement after his defeat in a war which was necessitated by his attempt to destroy an ally and if possible to replace him with a democratic regime not hostile to the US.
The war: A conflict which has its up and downs, as most wars do, and which has gone through changes of strategy and tactics, as most wars do, which in Iraq is currently considered as going very well, and which has taken fewer American lives than any other major war that the US has ever conducted.
Actually, although it is referred to as The Iraq War, or The Second Gulf War, the conflict in Iraq is more correctly thought of as one of the fronts in a war against Islamic jihad. There are presently two other fronts in this war, one in Afghanistan, the other in Pakistan.
The second thing wrong is the “as advertised” canard. Just what Murtha thought was wrongfully “advertised” is not revealed but Bush, just after the 9/11 attack, addressed a joint session of Congress on September 20th and had this to say:
Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there.
It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated.
Later in the speech:
Now, this war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion. It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat.
Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes visible on TV and covert operations secret even in success.
The implication of Murtha’s “as advertised” phrase is that Bush somehow claimed that the war against Islamic jihad would be easily and quickly resolved. But clearly, from the beginning, Bush “advertised” a long and difficult war.
10 jakester // Feb 9, 2010 at 12:04 pm
grackle.
But Saddam was not building any WMDs nor enriching any of his yellowcake, which btw were still in UN sealed drums and buildings. Yellow cake is pretty benign unless one has huge amounts of time, money and privacy to enrich it. Those were the reasons we used to invade, that Saddam was a potential threat. All you have cackled here is some cheesy self justifying rationalizations for war, which since the world is full of despots and groups who use terrorr tactics, an open license for war.
11 blowtorch_bob // Feb 9, 2010 at 12:14 pm
Why does everyone call it a “war?” It was a mugging, a bank heist, excuse me, an “oil heist.”
12 rbottoms // Feb 9, 2010 at 12:50 pm
You mean it finally became politically possible to say that George Bush was a complete screw up mismanaging a war that ultimately cost over 4,000 troops their lives and maimed 50,000 more along with shoveling a trillion dollars into an incinerator? That finally Senators finally started pointing out that the United States Army was being ground down to a nub sending soldiers on two, three and four combat tours while stop lossing thousands more?
All problems super-patriot chickenhawks never had to worry about since they still can’t find their way to a military recruiting office and join up to fight the wars they love so much? The OP served, I served, but David Frum, Jonah Goldberg, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck all have have found serving their country something to be avoided at all costs.
13 grackle // Feb 9, 2010 at 2:20 pm
grackle. But Saddam was not building any WMDs nor enriching any of his yellowcake, which btw were still in UN sealed drums and buildings.
I did not mention WMD or yellowcake in my comment. But since the commentor brings them up, I’ll attempt a response. Yes, the yellowcake was “still” there. Why? Because Saddam was toppled before he could use it. I’ve found that Saddam-apologists frequently imply that Bush should have waited until the nuclear materials were processed into weapons. And in that event they would no doubt declare that to act might precipitate a nuclear conflagration – and they would be right. The time to topple Saddam was BEFORE he had a chance to use the yellowcake. Also, the yellowcake was far from secure. Let us go to the report of the IAEA itself:
During the second IAEA inspection, Iraqi military authorities denied or restricted access to an IAEA inspection team at various sites designated for inspection by the Special Commission of the UN Security Council pursuant to Part C of UN Security Council Resolution 687. After protests, full access was granted on Wednesday, 26 June 1991, at which time activities which had been observed from a distance during the first visit had ceased and objects that had been seen had been removed.
Naturally, this circumstance disturbed the IAEA inspectors and a high-level IAEA group was dispatched to look into the situation:
The mission was to discuss with senior officials of the Iraqi government the visit by the inspection team to different locations near Baghdad which encountered refusal of access to designated sites and witnessed removal by Iraqi personnel of equipment and materials from such locations to unknown sites.
The IAEA mission group made objections but their protests were ignored by Saddam.
And this is what the commentor dismisses as safely “still in UN sealed drums and buildings.” Things at the site were “removed,” and “activities” were observed at a distance by IAEA inspectors. When the inspectors tried to get a closer look Saddam refused access, in violation of agreements signed by him after his defeat in Kuwait, undoubtedly so he could have enough time to cover his tracks. Doesn’t sound very secure to me, readers. Read for yourselves the official record of Saddam’s constant deception and obstruction about his nuke program. If you do you will find that the document relates this interesting tidbit:
An initial examination by the IAEA indicated the existence of three parallel programmes for uranium enrichment and related equipment and facilities.
http://tinyurl.com/bdzcb
A sage observation from the commentor: Yellow cake is pretty benign unless one has huge amounts of time, money and privacy to enrich it.
And arsenic is “benign” unless it’s slipped into someone’s food.
More from the commentor: Those were the reasons we used to invade, that Saddam was a potential threat.
Naw, Saddam was no threat – he just had THREE “parallel programmes for uranium enrichment and related equipment and facilities.” Please.
As a matter of fact the October, 2002, U.S. Congress Iraq War Resolution(Congress, NOT Bush) gave 10 reasons to topple Saddam, only one of which cites “Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons.” Get it readers? Even the US Congress at the time KNEW that Saddam probably did not yet have any WMD but wisely chose to stop Saddam before he could develop them. Download the pdf and read them yourself.
http://tinyurl.com/yejkg2h
14 GOProud // Feb 9, 2010 at 8:34 pm
I was sorry to hear that Jack Murtha died before Lady Justice could finally catch up with him and nail his butt to a solid prison wall –not that Lady Justice has been active since Obama and Holder started telling her to stay put and not do any heavy lifting.
Big Jack was as corrupt as any Democrat FatCat could possibly be in the 21st C and, frankly, I hope the people of PA do to his seat what the good people of MA did to Kennedy’s… replace it with an honest legislator and begin the process of purging his memory and mark from the public arena. He almost got nailed in ABSCAM but got away by snitching on fellow Democrats. Like fellow Congressman and felon Duke Cunningham, Murtha’s career in politics was a string of corrupting moments followed by periods of ego-centric excess.
Good riddance. I hope they have a cork-screw to put that crook’s coffin in its grave. And I hope NancyBoTox’s face can still shed tears –after all that surgery and those injections, it may not even be possible for her to mourn her corrupt pal.
15 Sean Linnane // Feb 9, 2010 at 8:48 pm
Sorry “balconesfault”
The ballot is secret for a reason.
In any case my Warrior Code forbids me to get involved in wagering with Trolls . . . no go back under your bridge and stay there . . .
STORMBRINGER SENDS
16 balconesfault // Feb 10, 2010 at 11:47 am
The ballot is secret for a reason.
Sure – the ballot is. But if you expect to be taken seriously when you damn one politician or party for earmarks, you should be willing to declare that you won’t vote for another politician who injects earmarks into bills.
Otherwise, it’s not a principle. It’s just a cynical tool to use against opponents.
17 Carney // Feb 10, 2010 at 1:48 pm
Murtha was a traitor. Enough said.
18 andydp // Feb 10, 2010 at 2:10 pm
Do not speak ill of the dead.
The Seven Sages, (Bias, Chilon, Cleobulus, Periander, Pittacus,Solon, Thales) c. 650 – c. 550 BC, From Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, bk. I, sec. 70
(650 BC – 550 BC)
There’s a reason for that statement. Rep Murtha is now dead. Let it lie.
Or as said in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar:
The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,…
O judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason…
19 Churl // Feb 10, 2010 at 4:03 pm
“We are enjoined not to speak ill of the dead, but I think an exception should be permitted for an influential legislator trying to ensure defeat for his own nation in the middle of a war. In a way, “speaking ill of the dead” is what Congressman Jack Murtha did for the last six years of his life, dishonoring the sacrifice of his countrymen in the cause of tarnishing their mission.”
Mark Steyn
http://www.steynonline.com/content/view/2910/28/
20 Carney // Feb 11, 2010 at 12:54 am
blowtorch_bob, if all the powers that went to war with Ba’athist Iraq were merely motivated by desire for its oil, we would simply have dropped the sanctions and bought it cheap from Saddam, as he was eager to have us all do.
21 Sean Linnane // Feb 12, 2010 at 7:09 am
balconesfault -
I am not here to serve as a platform for your ideology. Get your own blog, write your own posts.
I am a retired Special Forces soldier. I served with honor on five continents; I continue to serve in other capacities, and I blog at STORMBRINGER:
http://seanlinnane.blogspot.com/
You must log in to post a comment.