Iraq Murder Charges Dropped Against Marine

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Iraq Murder Charges Dropped Against Marine

Thursday, May 26, 2005



RALEIGH, N.C. — A former Wall Street trader who rejoined the Marines after the Sept. 11 attacks will not be tried on murder charges for killing two suspected Iraqi insurgents, a Marine general decided Thursday.

The decision by Maj. Gen. Richard Huck, commander of the 2nd Marine Division based at Camp Lejeune, ends the prosecution of 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano (search), whom prosecutors accused of killing the men without justification.

"Down at the unit level, there was never a question about Ilario's conduct and whether or not he did the right thing," Charles Gittins, Pantano's civilian lawyer, said. "It was up in the higher echelons. The people removed from combat situations needed to put more trust in their officers rather than assuming they're guilty."

"That's exciting, isn't it," said Pantano's mother, Merry Pantano of New York, who said she hadn't yet spoken to her son about the decision. "Needless to say, we are quite ecstatic."

The two Iraqis were killed during an April 2004 search outside a suspected terrorist hideout in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. Pantano contended he shot them in self-defense after the men disobeyed his instructions and made a menacing move toward him.

Prosecutors alleged Pantano intended to make an example of the men by shooting them 60 times and hanging a sign over their bodies — "No better friend, no worse enemy," a Marine slogan. While citing self-defense as his motive, Pantano did not deny hanging the sign or shooting the men repeatedly.

An Article 32 hearing (search), the military equivalent of a grand jury session, was held in April. In a report dated May 12, the hearing officer, Lt. Col. Mark Winn, had recommended that the murder charges be dropped.

While finding some problems with Pantano's behavior, Winn concluded that one witness' accusation that Pantano shot the detainees while they were kneeling with their backs to him was not supported by other testimony or evidence.

Witnesses testified the sergeant who was Pantano's main accuser was a weak Marine who was bitter about Pantano removing him from a leadership role within the platoon.

More than a half-dozen Marines who served with Pantano in Iraq praised him in testimony, saying he was an able leader who remained cool in combat and was amiable with Iraqis.

Pantano, 33, is now helping to train troops at Camp Lejeune, but his attorney said he hopes the decision will clear the way for the Marine to return to a combat unit.

"I think (the decision) demonstrates that Ilario acted honorably in combat and the suggestion that he didn't that tarnished his reputation was unjustified," Gittins said. "I'm pleased for Ilario and his family because the nightmare is over."

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly ... 38,00.html


I love good news.

[Nick]

You also love doublethink.

This guy may or may not have done anything wrong but the amount of "suspected" insurgents that were probably innocent men when they got shot in the face far overshadows any pride you can hold about the conduct of the US military in Iraq.

I'm being harsh, moreso because I value life than the ability to give a reacharound to a fellow 'patriot'.

We have already seen "suspected" terrorists in "suspected" terrorist bases being shot for being "menacing" (i.e breathing in an insulting way).

Stop revelling in fucking murder Midnyte, it's creepy. It's trolling, it's pathetic and makes you look seriously bloodthirsty.

Whether this guy is innocent or not is totally irrelevant, there are more US and "ally" men guilty of murder than Al Quiada or Iraqi insurgents.

How is that good news?

[Lohrno]

Was that about this incident? or a different one?

[Niffoni]

I've never even heard of this case.

Was it a big deal a while back and I just missed it?

i think it's a bigger deal that he survived the advances of potentially dangerous folk, although we may never know just how dangerous they really were. Sorry, but threatening is threatening. Calling it self-defense might be being generous, but there's a difference between this case and some of the more ghastly accounts of abuse of Iraqi citizens.

Don't get me wrong, I just can't get riled up about a legal system that tries to ensure that those who defend american values also PRACTICE those values so that there are some to defend in the first place. They examined the case, found it to be cool beans, and let him go. Looks pretty open and shut to me, so I can't say I'm surprised.

Sounds like the guy is a total prick for buying into that retarded marine jingoism, but I don't see anything illeagal here.

[Animale]

Prosecutors alleged Pantano intended to make an example of the men by shooting them 60 times and hanging a sign over their bodies — "No better friend, no worse enemy," a Marine slogan. While citing self-defense as his motive, Pantano did not deny hanging the sign or shooting the men repeatedly.

Yeah, that's the type of guy I really want protecting "freedom."
This marine is a fuckstain who, while not necessarily guilty of murder, should never see combat again and be sent to a dead end desk job (which will probably happen anyway I guess). War is hell, but that's no reason to make it any worse.

Animale

Edit..
p.s. nice troll Mid

[Sylvus]

Prosecutors alleged Pantano intended to make an example of the men by shooting them 60 times and hanging a sign over their bodies — "No better friend, no worse enemy," a Marine slogan. While citing self-defense as his motive, Pantano did not deny hanging the sign or shooting the men repeatedly.

Yeah, great news!

While I'm all for soldiers using force if they feel threatened, and for the sake of this argument I'll assume that he felt threatened, there's a difference between killing someone and shooting them 60 times and hanging a sign over their bodies.

[Nick]

60 times?

Yeah...self defense....no really........

W

T

Hoof

Thats this amount.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Half way there!

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


I think self defense could have been acceptable before about the 5th shot.

Which is this amount.


. . . . .



Yeah, fucking great news Midnyte.

[Lohrno]

Well, he might have been under a lot of stress and wanted to make absolutely sure he was quite dead. I might be able to give him the benefit of the doubt there, especially when we might be talking about an automatic rifle which can shoot many times a second.

Hanging the sign though does make it a bit suspicious. At the very least that's desecration of corpses, but not murder. I don't know the situation well enough to make too much of a judgement unless it is talking about that incident in the link I posted...

[Xzion]

Iraq Murder Charges Dropped Against Marine

Thursday, May 26, 2005



RALEIGH, N.C. — A former Wall Street trader who rejoined the Marines after the Sept. 11 attacks will not be tried on murder charges for killing two suspected Iraqi insurgents, a Marine general decided Thursday.

The decision by Maj. Gen. Richard Huck, commander of the 2nd Marine Division based at Camp Lejeune, ends the prosecution of 2nd Lt. Ilario Pantano (search), whom prosecutors accused of killing the men without justification.

"Down at the unit level, there was never a question about Ilario's conduct and whether or not he did the right thing," Charles Gittins, Pantano's civilian lawyer, said. "It was up in the higher echelons. The people removed from combat situations needed to put more trust in their officers rather than assuming they're guilty."

"That's exciting, isn't it," said Pantano's mother, Merry Pantano of New York, who said she hadn't yet spoken to her son about the decision. "Needless to say, we are quite ecstatic."

The two Iraqis were killed during an April 2004 search outside a suspected terrorist hideout in Mahmudiyah, Iraq. Pantano contended he shot them in self-defense after the men disobeyed his instructions and made a menacing move toward him.

Prosecutors alleged Pantano intended to make an example of the men by shooting them 60 times and hanging a sign over their bodies — "No better friend, no worse enemy," a Marine slogan. While citing self-defense as his motive, Pantano did not deny hanging the sign or shooting the men repeatedly.

An Article 32 hearing (search), the military equivalent of a grand jury session, was held in April. In a report dated May 12, the hearing officer, Lt. Col. Mark Winn, had recommended that the murder charges be dropped.

While finding some problems with Pantano's behavior, Winn concluded that one witness' accusation that Pantano shot the detainees while they were kneeling with their backs to him was not supported by other testimony or evidence.

Witnesses testified the sergeant who was Pantano's main accuser was a weak Marine who was bitter about Pantano removing him from a leadership role within the platoon.

More than a half-dozen Marines who served with Pantano in Iraq praised him in testimony, saying he was an able leader who remained cool in combat and was amiable with Iraqis.

Pantano, 33, is now helping to train troops at Camp Lejeune, but his attorney said he hopes the decision will clear the way for the Marine to return to a combat unit.

"I think (the decision) demonstrates that Ilario acted honorably in combat and the suggestion that he didn't that tarnished his reputation was unjustified," Gittins said. "I'm pleased for Ilario and his family because the nightmare is over."

http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly ... 38,00.html


I love good news.

what a disgusting thing to say, goddamn dude

i guess hes following bush’s philosophy of pre emption, kill (as we know) innocent people because there’s a chance they might be guilty in the future

[Sylvos]

what a discusting thing to say, godamn dude

while i agree with you...
You had one sentence and had two spelling mistakes. Come on man, I will link you a spellchecker.

[Hesten]

Just a question. How many bullets are in the magazine on whatever gun that guy used?
Just wanna know if he had to reload to fire his 60 bullets in self defence.

Cant wait to see the first trial for a wife that get hit by her husband and stabs him in 60 times in self defence.


Oh, and btw, what do you call a guy that fire 60 single bullets on unarmed persons? Serial killer.
What do you call a guy that fire 60 bullets in a row on a unarmed. US marine.

[Canelek]

Probably an M-16. I think they use 30-round mags in the military. Either way, that is a pretty horrid act, even in war.

[Aabidano]

Sounds like the guy is a total prick for buying into that retarded marine jingoism

That would be 99.9% of Marines, combat pilots, and most Army infantry... It's either that or come back a basket case. How else would you expect a regular person to justify their actions to themselves in wartime?

IT'S A DEAD PERSON

Who cares how many times he was shot after he was dead? Inappropriate perhaps, but probably a decent tactic given the enemy they're fighting.[/quote]

[Niffoni]

Probably an M-16. I think they use 30-round mags in the military.

Wait.. So he killed them, then emptied the remainder of his clip into their dead bodies, then CHANGED CLIPS and shot the bodies some more?

Forget murder, fire him for wasting ammo. Hell, if i did that with PAPER, the office would show me the door.

I guess someone had some serious blue balls for shooting brown people. This guy isn't a killer.. he's a tard.

[Canelek]

Well, unless he was a heavy machinegunner, it can be assumed that he did indeed change mags.

[Deward]

Just to give a different view here. The 60 bullets was an estimate and I severaly doubt that the two people killed were hit with every bullet. If it was the older m16 than it would take only a few seconds to blow through a 30 round clip on full auto and be very inaccurate except at close range. A newer m16 actually fires 3 round bursts and would take a bit longer.

The other thing that people are failing to mention is that the only witness to this crime was a guy that was pissed at him for removing him from a leadership position. No one else would corroborate the accusers story. The incident also occurred durign some pretty severe house to house fighting. I do think hanging the sign over the bodies was in very poor taste and he should be punished for that in some way.

[Niffoni]

Well, I guess Rummy was right that the military needs to be made more efficient... I just didn't think he meant "we waste too much ammo on dead people"

[Nick]

Niffoni, I fucking love your signature. Bill Hicks was a complete legend. You're the first person here in 5 years to acknowledge his existence.

You're a fucking star.


That is all.

[kyoukan]

US Military Whitewashes Another Brutal Murder By Savage US Solider. Film at 11.

yeah that is great news. some fucking whack job leaves his high paying wall street career so he can make 80% less for the sole purpose of murdering muslims in some 9/11 revenge spree, and gets off scott free. and you actually think its a good thing because another white man gets away with killing another brownie. and you wonder why everybody hates you why now?

[Niffoni]

I may not have agreed with everything Hicks said, but he was a damn funny guy, and, in some ways, far ahead of his time.

[Aslanna]

Oh, and btw, what do you call a guy that fire 60 single bullets on unarmed persons? Serial killer.

I don't think 2 people, at the same time, can be considered a 'serial killing'.

But yeah. I don't see the "good news" about this. Just another typical Midnyte posting.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Oh, and btw, what do you call a guy that fire 60 single bullets on unarmed persons? Serial killer.

I don't think 2 people, at the same time, can be considered a 'serial killing'.

But yeah. I don't see the "good news" about this. Just another typical Midnyte posting.

Yup it is. One of those Midnyte posting where he revels in the release of an american soldier who killed the enemy in combat. What was wrong with what he did? If he killed them with 4 shots we never would have heard anything about it. Because he used 60 shots, taking out some frustration on the already dead fuckers, somehow this is wrong? They were already dead, why is anyone wasting time and money on fucking semantics? Yes a typical post by me, finding humor in the insanity of this bullshit world at times.

[Lohrno]

Yup it is. One of those Midnyte posting where he revels in the release of an american soldier who killed the enemy in combat. What was wrong with what he did? If he killed them with 4 shots we never would have heard anything about it. Because he used 60 shots, taking out some frustration on the already dead fuckers, somehow this is wrong? They were already dead, why is anyone wasting time and money on fucking semantics? Yes a typical post by me, finding humor in the insanity of this bullshit world at times.

Okay.

First of all whether it was self defense in my mind is questionable. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Since I don't know more details.

Second...what he did was a little wrong. If he reloaded that was desecration of cadavers. The sign thing definitely was. That's not good because it gives a bad image of our troops. Our image is especially important these days and we should be protecting it more carefully by not doing this kind of thing.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Yup it is. One of those Midnyte posting where he revels in the release of an american soldier who killed the enemy in combat. What was wrong with what he did? If he killed them with 4 shots we never would have heard anything about it. Because he used 60 shots, taking out some frustration on the already dead fuckers, somehow this is wrong? They were already dead, why is anyone wasting time and money on fucking semantics? Yes a typical post by me, finding humor in the insanity of this bullshit world at times.

Okay.

First of all whether it was self defense in my mind is questionable. I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. Since I don't know more details.

Second...what he did was a little wrong. If he reloaded that was desecration of cadavers. The sign thing definitely was. That's not good because it gives a bad image of our troops. Our image is especially important these days and we should be protecting it more carefully by not doing this kind of thing.

This never should have been brought to light. Therefore the image wouldn't be at risk. This is war. War is dirty and ugly. Asking young men and women to go out and kill people and put their lives at risk to be killed is dirty business. The media and the public sitting at home don't have the right to put their lofty expectations on those who are out there fighting for your freedom to say these stupid things.

[Lynks]

They burn your soldiers and they are considered a bunch of fucking animals. Your side puts 60 bullets in a guy then gets off and this is great news.

Fucking hypocrite but I'm not surprised this comes from the biggest idiot on the board.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

They burn your soldiers and they are considered a bunch of fucking animals. Your side puts 60 bullets in a guy then gets off and this is great news.
.

Yes to me they are animals. To them we are animals. I'm not being a hypocrite. I realize this. Why can't you?


Also, I would say that filming it and dragging the bodies through the streets, cheering, and releasing this tape to the media to incite the other side is just a smidge different than what we did. But, of course you forget the parts that make your comment null and void.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

They burn your soldiers and they are considered a bunch of fucking animals. Your side puts 60 bullets in a guy then gets off and this is great news.

Fucking hypocrite but I'm not surprised this comes from the biggest idiot on the board.

Did they get arrested and tried by their own government for burning our soldiers?

[Zaelath]

What was wrong with what he did? If he killed them with 4 shots we never would have heard anything about it. Because he used 60 shots, taking out some frustration on the already dead fuckers, somehow this is wrong? They were already dead, why is anyone wasting time and money on fucking semantics? Yes a typical post by me, finding humor in the insanity of this bullshit world at times.

Ahhh, so for example if the insurgents were humanely shooting their captives dead, then cutting off their heads, and otherwise mutliating the corpses, plastering photos of their naked, mutilated corpses all over the net, then burying them upside down. That would be just peachy! Boys letting off steam.

[Zaelath]

They burn your soldiers and they are considered a bunch of fucking animals. Your side puts 60 bullets in a guy then gets off and this is great news.

Fucking hypocrite but I'm not surprised this comes from the biggest idiot on the board.

Did they get arrested and tried by their own government for burning our soldiers?

Ah yes, the Lowest Common Denominator argument from people that attempt to claim the high moral ground.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

I must be missing the post where I was claiming high moral ground. Our military does have codes of conduct and this type of activity is not the norm....thus he was arrested and was going to trial. The American public does not go into the streets and cheer when they see brown people die like happens when other countries see whitey dying and drug through the streets......or when planes hit towers and kill thousands. When tragedies strike other countries, the US is there to help no matter who it is. Dickheads likes you conveniently forget that.

[kyoukan]

this is from a country that lets their pilots off without even a day in prison when they murder canadian soldiers. you think they are going to convict someone who kills a worthless muslim?

[Niffoni]

I don't see how this is even a discussion. The guy displayed behavior that red-flags him as potentially mentally unstable, so they tried him. They found that, obviously, he wasn't a murderer, so they let him go. I fail to see the problem with EITHER of these points.

Acting like a stupid redneck nimrod and being a war criminal are two different things.

Anything beyond that is just you guys waving your dipsticks at each other.

[Lynks]

I don't see how this is even a discussion. The guy displayed

And I agree with you. I dont know much about the case so I will assume he was innocent. I wouldnt call this "great" news though. Thats having fucked up priorities.

Yes to me they are animals. To them we are animals. I'm not being a hypocrite. I realize this. Why can't you?

Actually, it does make you one. Praising one thing while bashing the same thing from another person is being a hypocrite.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

I don't see how this is even a discussion. The guy displayed

And I agree with you. I dont know much about the case so I will assume he was innocent. I wouldnt call this "great" news though. Thats having fucked up priorities.

Yes to me they are animals. To them we are animals. I'm not being a hypocrite. I realize this. Why can't you?

Actually, it does make you one. Praising one thing while bashing the same thing from another person is being a hypocrite.

Not really, because what one person does vs. what the policy of the entire enemy is, is a big fucking difference. He didn't do that to film and put out for the opposition to see and strike fear and terror into them. They do, do that. So we really are talking about apples and oranges here.

[Lohrno]

I don't see how this is even a discussion. The guy displayed behavior that red-flags him as potentially mentally unstable, so they tried him. They found that, obviously, he wasn't a murderer, so they let him go. I fail to see the problem with EITHER of these points.

Acting like a stupid redneck nimrod and being a war criminal are two different things.

Anything beyond that is just you guys waving your dipsticks at each other.

Well said!

I don't know about obviously he wasn't a murderer, but really how much do any of you know about the details. I've not seen an argument here based on details other than "fired 60 shots" "hung a sign". That's all you all really know isn't it?

[masteen]

this is from a country that lets their pilots off without even a day in prison when they murder canadian soldiers. you think they are going to convict someone who kills a worthless muslim?

I cant believe you would even call a friendly fire incident (which btw also happen to our own troops) murder.

[Lohrno]

this is from a country that lets their pilots off without even a day in prison when they murder canadian soldiers. you think they are going to convict someone who kills a worthless muslim?

I cant believe you would even call a friendly fire incident (which btw also happen to our own troops) murder.

I'm not saying it is, but boy the US does seem to have a lot of friendly fire incidents...

[miir]

I cant believe you would even call a friendly fire incident (which btw also happen to our own troops) murder.

Friendly fire?
HTF?
Are you a complete and total fucking idiot?



Some doped up American yahoo bombing a Canadian training excercise (in a marked/designated trainign area) is not friendly fucking fire.
It was not in a combat zone, there was no enemy/hostile fire.

The pilots asked command centre for permisison to attack the area when they saw gunfire...and were denied.
They thought they were being fired at and disobeyed orders claiming that they were 'rolling in self defense' bombing the area and murdering 4 Canadians.

[Niffoni]

Yeah, you know, it's funny, everytime I read an american source about that incident, they neglect to mention the parts of the story miir posted. Yet they're highlighted in every other major news source.

Incidently, there was a memorial service for those soldiers held a few days ago by the U.S. military. I guess they decided it was now safe to acknowledge that it actually happened.

A mistake, certainly. An isolated one, maybe. But an easily preventable, and terribly unfortunate one too.

[Nick]

Murder - mindless killing - friendly fire, call it what you want, the point is its fucking wrong.

If developed countries stopped oppressing the fuck out of the places the terrorists or suicide bombers are coming from there would be a fucking shitload less of this bollox.


Who is the terrorist here?

Some shmuck with a bomb around his waist or a huge fucking country with billions upon billions of dollars of murdering equipment that they use and threaten with on a constant basis, killing the first 'terrorists' family and exploiting their helplessness for decades.

It isn't even a debate, 60 times is FAR too fucking much to be shooting anyone even in self defense unless you are a crazed fucking pyscho.

Killing some canadians even though you were told not to is called murder.

Oh and just because some fucking hired thugs (the army) are "legally" allowed to murder people doesn't actually make it right.

Friendly fire is just a fucking phrase made up to make the bloodcurdling reality of murdering your own mates less horrific. Which is a joke and an insult to any compassionate non retard.

Fuck

Sake

Rant rant rant! Im away to get drunk. I have a stereotype to live upto.

[Lynks]

Not really, because what one person does vs. what the policy of the entire enemy is, is a big fucking difference

It doesnt matter what their policy is. I called you a hypocrite because of YOUR policy. Its ok if its for you but not if it is against you, thats what a hypocrite is. Or a more simple 1st grade explanation for you, little Johnny likes to hit people but thinks its wrong for people to hit him. Go ask a grown up if you aren't still sure what the word means.

He didn't do that to film and put out for the opposition to see and strike fear and terror into them. They do, do that. So we really are talking about apples and oranges here.

So when they set fire to your soldiers, you were disguted by the act itself or the act of filming it?

[Hoarmurath]

The lieutenant in question is an idiot, that much is clear. here is a quick breakdown of what happened:

1: Marines raid a suspected insurgent house (or group of buildings, whatever)

2: A car attempts to drive out of the target area, it is unknown whether the vehicle inadvertantly entered the area and was the tryng to leave, or if it originated from the target area.

3: The car is stopped by the Marines, specifically, by this Marine lieutenant.

4: The two "fighting age" males exit the car, and are "handcuffed" with tie wraps.

5: The lieutenant decides that searching the car himself could be dangerous, since it may contain munitions or a booby trap or who knows what.

6: The lieutenant decides that it would be better for the "detainees" to search the car themselves, while he watches, so he frees both of them, and they begin searching their own car while the lieutenant watches.

7: Apparently, the two men begin whispering to each other, and the lieutenant orders them to stop speaking. Since they are not speaking the same language, this does not work very well, and nobody knows what the Iraqis were saying.

8: At this point, the Iraqis apparently do something that the lieutenant finds threatening, so he shoots them. A lot. He's carrying an M16A4, which does not fire fullly automatic. It fires semi-auto or three-round bursts from a thirty round magazine. So that is at least one reaload and twenty trigger pulls at point blank range.

9: The lieutenant draws a little sign with a common Marine slogan on it and places it on the bodies and rejoins his unit.

This information is public domain and can all be found via searching. The lieutenant failed on a number of accounts regarding the physical security of detainees, most strikingly the fact that only one of them should have been released to search the car. Also, they should have immediately been seperated from each other to prevent collusion. Also, there should have been several Marines involved, not just one. For a moment, I will assume that the Iraqi men were insurgents and did, in fact, intend to attack the lieutenant. It's my conclusion that this lieutenant made a series of abysmal judgments calls, from the detention of the individuals right up to the excessive shooting and sign display. Obviously, we were not present at the incident, so we cannot say whether or not his killing of the detainees was justified, and anyone arguing that point is jumping to conclusion that they are not qualified to make, which is why this guy is getting off the hook. Unfortunately, the only thing that he is absolutely guilty of is being a complete idiot and a jackass that isn't fit to wear the uniform.

[masteen]

You are aware of how easy it is to modify an m16 to fire full auto, right? It's not as easy as doing it to an AK, but still pretty damn easy. It's so easy that a lot of infantry mod it after being issued for a mission, do their op, then return the gun to it's original state before returning to base. Unless there have been some DRASTIC changes between the A3 and A4 variants, I guarantee you that this still goes on.

[Cartalas]

this is from a country that lets their pilots off without even a day in prison when they murder canadian soldiers. you think they are going to convict someone who kills a worthless muslim?

WTF I thought they got a medal for that!!!

[miir]

WTF I thought they got a medal for that!!!

I hope you and your family die in a fucking car fire, you waste of skin.

[Cartalas]

Now its attacking the family? you fucking butt pirate!!!

[Winnow]

If we attack Canada, I want Cart as my wingman.

[kyoukan]

at least they'd finally start giving us military a medal for something other than tying their boots properly and starting a campfire. those underachieving retards have to do less than a contestant in the special olympics to get a bronze star these days. the bar is so fucking lowered that recruiters are letting in admitted drug addicts and high school dropouts. its a wonder they haven't all shot each other yet. it's a good thing you have all that money, otherwise those inept slack jaws wouldn't even be able to capture a rock in greenland from a pack of sea lions, much less baghdad.

oh wait, they can't capture baghdad either.

[Fash]

oh wait, they can't capture baghdad either.

[kyoukan]

yeah, you tards really have an iron grip on the city. what do you have, about 3 square blocks?