Americans cheered Gen. Patton when he urinated on the enemy

When Patton urinated on the enemy they cheered him

By Robert K. Wilcox

(Wilcox is my friend and the author of Target: Patton: The Plot to Assassinate General George S. Patton. He served in the U.S. Air Force for 6 years as an information officer during the Vietnam War from 1968 to 1974. ~Eowyn)

The last soldier I heard of urinating on the enemy was Gen. George S. Patton. Should the general, who, as much as any other, was responsible for defeating the Nazis, have been driven from the military for such and act? You’d think so from the hysteric response building in the mainstream and Left-leaning press to a video allegedly showing marines urinating on dead Taliban fighters. Presuming it’s authentic, such reaction is absurd.

We send these young men out to kill and maim their enemy. That means snuffing out their life, with all the heartbreak and tragedy involved. They usually do this with bullets that rip and tear; or larger projectiles like grenades, artillery shells, or air-dropped bombs which can shred or disintegrate a body. Often fire is involved. Is urinating on a dead body worse?

Yet as I write I can feel the hope and purpose in a headline like AOL-Huffington Post’s, “Outrage over Purported Marine Video: A shocking video that allegedly shows American soldiers performing a ‘disgusting’ act sparks a US Marine Corps investigation.”  It’s already tagged under “atrocities” and “war crimes.” What the headline writers are really saying is, “Oh please, please, another Mai Lai Massacre type scandal like in Vietnam. Well, we know it’s not going to be that big, but we can again throw bad light on the US military, which we basically hate and fear and are mad at for doing all the bad things they do.”

Of course they’ve gone to the Council on American-Islamic Relations for comment. As if they didn’t know they’d get a condemnation. But did they balance it with someone at war with the Taliban? Not a chance. And the statement says, “The video shows behavior…totally unbecoming of American military personnel and that would ultimately endanger other soldiers and civilians.”

It’s so predictable, petty, and blown out of proportion by a media that largely knows nothing of the battlefield and why a crude but ultimately innocuous act like this might happen. What do they expect in war? Tea and crumpets and the Marquess of Queensbury rules? War is hell. Most of those fighting it are young, usually 18 to 22. They are inexperienced. They are sent to deserts and other uninhabitable places with stinging insects, maddening heat and sanitary conditions the Left would be screaming was child abuse. They forge a bond with each other few peacetime friendships can ever hope to equal. They have to. It’s the only way to get through. And some of them, if not more, see that bonded friend killed or mutilated as only war can do it.

No one who has not gone through it will understand the depth of a combat relationship. There are no phonies in a firefight; no pretense of who one is. You can’t cover up. Combat soldiers get to know each other very well. That breeds the bond – that and the dire situation combatants share. And when that bond is ended in the most brutal way, by the death or maiming of a buddy in the bond, pissing on the bastard who represents that end is small payback for the tragic loss and what else has been commonly endured.

Is that what happened in the video in question? We don’t know at this point. It’s possible. But even if not, what’s on the video isn’t an atrocity or war crime. It’s a logical rarity by young men in harms way against what they know to be the threat that can snuff any one of them or their buddies if the tables were turned. How quick we forget the blood curdling screams of Nick Berg and Daniel Pearl. Are urinations on lifeless bodies anything near that?

Patton urinating into the Rhine

Gen. Patton did his public urinating not on a dead body but into the enemy’s most famous river, The Rhine. His Third Army was the first Allied army to cross it and take the war on the ground past that last German barrier. A photographer caught the act as Patton stood in the middle of a pontoon bridge and directed his stream defiantly into the enemy’s larger one – like a dog marking its territory. War is a dirty business, with minimum rules for the living, notably the Geneva Convention, prisoner of war dictates the Taliban, by the way, does not recognize. But as repugnant as they may be to some, there are no rules for the dead, for that is the point of war.

Pile them up, let them rot, piss on them. Like it or not, it’s what happens in such a nasty business. Don’t make more of it than what can be expected when young men are sent to kill others.

Source of pic of Patton urinating into the Rhine:

http://www.scrapbookpages.com/EasternGermany/Buchenwald/GeneralPatton.html

119 responses to “Americans cheered Gen. Patton when he urinated on the enemy

  1. ….just markin’ their territory :)

  2. Good summary. War crimes my arse….

    I don’t care what the SRM says, fools all of them.

  3. Yup, exactly.

  4. I’m glad you brought up Daniel Pearl. What’s worse, beheading an innocent who is alive or peeing on a corpse?

    • Well, we can’t do anything about the Taliban but we can about our side… as left/liberal whiners would go, justifying undermining our guys because “all violence is wrong,” etc.

  5. I am about as left as one can get. But, on this issue, I agree with you. I understand and appreciate but do not agree with the opposing view [killing ok; urinating not ok] largely on practical grounds, many of which I think you describe well. Without getting in to whether or not the US should be there in the first place, if the US does send troops and does train and motivate troops to kill in a war or a war-like circumstance, it seems impractical to me to add to that training and motivation a respect for the enemy that begins primarily at the point the enemy becomes dead–or that certain standards of etiquette apply–except killing.

  6. No wonder we can’t win any war(s) these days
    .
    General Patton couldn’t wait to “piss” in the Rhine WW2. Now we are going to court martial some marines for doing same on some dead enemy fighters?

  7. George S. Patton, Jr. is my all-time favorite American combat general.

    There is a reason why this country has not actually won a war since WWII.

    America has been officially wussified.

    -Dave

  8. Those soldiers are not fighting honorably like we did in the South 150 years ago. No wonder they come home screwed up in the head. There is an honorable way to wage war and we are not doing it.

    • Just a dumb Yank

      This bozo needs to learn about Andersonville. So honorable, what a twit.

      • At Andersonville, the guards ate the same rations as the prisoners. In the Yank prisons they would not give them blankets and the guards ate much better. That same army also knowingly gave blankets exposed to smallpox to Indians. One of there Generals wanted to commit genocide against the Southern race, as he called them and the list of Yank atrocities could go on and on. By the way, I was born and raised a Yank so I know my own kind too well.

        • You’re off topic.

          What does this have to do with Patton or the Marines urinating on a dead body? Or are we now gonna dredge up and revisit, ad nauseum, every misdeed ever committed by America and Americans? I’ll confess mine — but only after you, in deference to your senior age (since you call yourself “Old Sarge”). I’m all ears!

    • You speak of waging war honorably yet from your statement you obviously have not been to war. You’re words carry no wait. You are out of you’re element.

    • How the hell would you know? been to war lately? there an’t no Glory & there an’tno Honor, God Bless our Troops

  9. This article is right in that killing is worse than urinating on someone. But killing someone is not worse than killing someone and then pissing on him. It’s just adding insult to injury. What those lefties are on about is not about the aftermath but about honor and I understand them too.

    • Remember, kUrc, those lefties feel the ends– “social justice”– justify the means– often lying, breaking rules/promises when they like– so consider the source when they go on about honor. It’s an Alinsky-ite tactic of holding their opponents to their opponents’ own rules to the extreme and then amplifying any failings to the point of moral equivalence and it’s, at least, lying by omission when they refuse to discuss their own shortcomings or the Taliban’s behavior in comparison.

      • Sounds like a “Godlikeproduction-ite” tactic of saying Saul Alinsky-ite tactic. I have a less than informed 1st cuz once removed in the KC metro who is in your corner. Good thing your vision of this fine land is slowly going away. Yes I served in the U.S. military, yes we were told to BE HONORABLE, it is in the UCMJ, look it up. To wit, we are BETTER than the Taliban, we need to prove it by not desecrating the dead.

        • No, it realiy is an Alinsky-ite tactic (straight out of Rules for Radicals)… all part of “framing the debate” so our guys can’t win (either we’re morally bad as the taliban or we’re hypocrites for not living up to our own standards, either way should declare defeat and come home in their solution). Ad hominem attacks are good when you can’t attack the argument so you attack the arguer instead. And, yes, “conduct of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces” is punishable under Art. 134 of the UCMJ… give ‘em an Article 15 and be done with it (not a reason to strike the tents and bring everyone home).

        • I agree in a perfect world we wouldn’t piss on the enemy. But has anybody asked them exactly why they did it. I am a Marine and the proper punishment should be a gentle slap on the hand and tell them don’t take pictures of something like this again.

    • Kill honorably? This isn’t a Jerry Brucheimer film….

  10. Who give a f*ck about those dead bastards anyway!!! You NEVER hear a damn word about our brave men and women getting maimed, beheaded and gutted like a dead animal….but to piss on the dead enemy…hell….I only with they were still alive when they pissed on them!! Better yet…they should have gutted a pig and dumped the guts on ‘em!! Pundits..you can kiss my ASS!!

  11. Peter V if you have never been to war shut the F up

  12. We are fighting to restore peace and honor between our country and other countries. What these marines presumably did was NOT honorable, and in no way makes us better than countries who dishonor our citizens who fight for us. War is brutal, but necessary to keep the peace, but this would make us no better than those who we fight against. We fight for justice – that is what we stand for. If we want to be a model country, then we need to act like one.

  13. But when they are dead and gone, you have done your job. Why humiliate yourselves and your corp by this degrading act? I totally support the Marines, but not the act.

  14. Not every war is dirty , the war of Muslims is much more honored than these , when you read the instructions of the prophet Muhammad to the soldiers : “do not embezzle the spoils; do not break your pledge; and do not mutilate (the dead) bodies; do not kill the children. When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them….”Muslim Book of Hadith 019, Number 4294:

    “……Allah’s Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.”
    Bukhari Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 258.

    “I advise you ten things| Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly.”

    • Quran 4:24 And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.

      23:5 And who guard their modesty –
      23:6 Save from their wives or the (slaves) that their right hands possess, for then they are not blameworthy,

      Guess what you get to do with any hot infidel women, married or not, that you capture in war?

      • One guess… and it ain’t playing Tiddlywinks.

      • Right hand possession was an old practice during war times….practiced even against Muslims as a RAPE but Islam came with legalization to honor those women captives as by giving them a degree that’s near equal to wives !

    • …..wow,the prophet Muhammad told the soldiers, “….do not kill the children.”
      Why don’t you ask the parents of the children mutilated by the Taliban or the parents of the children who have been forced to wear bombs into crowds of people then denonated , yeah ask those parents how they really feel about what happened to their children. The ten commandments say thou shall not kill. Just go to prove all people of all faiths can be hypocrits. No matter what either of the doctrines say war and the consequences of war is hell, period. This left nut supports our troops and feels it is past time for us to stand for our troops and the injustices that are being committed against them for doing their jobs. Bring back Gen George Patton!

      • As a Muslim I don’t support the crimes of Taliban and your using them as an example of the proper Islamic faith is an invalid argument ….

    • Do not steal from the booty because it was appropriately divided among the qualifying muslims, and the children were taken for slaves, the elderly died on their own soon enough, and mutilated bodies would make a mess and make the dead’s jewelry harder to find. The inhabited places houses were given to muslims too, after the inhabitants were beheaded, and probably urinated on. Beheading is not the same as mutilation in islam. I have read two specific accounts where the muslims dined on top of the dead bodies.

      • Oh, and dont break your pledge with who? Each other (muslims)!

        • No , for anyone who is given a pledge, God says in Qur’an :

          “O you who believe! Fulfill (your) undertakings….” 5.1

          Even when you hate someone you MUST treat him fairly (as a Muslim) :
          “.and do not let the hatred of a people prevent you from being just.” (Quran 5:8)

          The Prophet said, “Whoever killed a person having a treaty with the Muslims, shall not smell the smell of Paradise though its smell is perceived from a distance of forty years.”

          Saheeh Bukhari – Volume 4, Book 53, Number 391:

          what more do you want ? :)

    • As a Muslim I don’t support the crimes of Taliban and your using them as an example of the proper Islamic faith is an invalid argument ….

      2- the verse you quoted is wrong translation !!!!

      The correct one says : “These two opponents (believers and disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Lord; then as for those who disbelieve, garments of fire will be cut out for them, boiling water will be poured down over their heads.” 22.19

      which means the torture of Hell to the disbelievers (and this is no way far from Christianity as well)

      3 – The next verse is also lied about !

      The correct one says :
      “(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

      This verse is in reference to those who have disbelieved and fought against Muslims and stood against spread of the Noble Islamic message

  15. I think that whomever sparked these allegations needs to visit the, “crime scene” and gather evidence.

  16. So sad ppl think this is ok, What kind of minds do u have?

  17. Again those who don’t remember History are doomed to repeat it, God bless those who are passionate FOR the United States. It might not be politically correct but it is an emotional response . God Bless America .

  18. Most of the comments on this thread are beyond idiotic. Just imagine the outrage and hysteria there would be if the roles were reversed and it was dead Americans being pissed upon! The morons that did this should not only be kicked out of the army, but also jailed. Their actions will cause the US to be even more despised around the world.

    • Aw Pete (or is it Paul?)…where WAS the outrage when our soldiers and US citizens were being beheaded or burned, dragged through the streets, and hung up on a bridge? Did you call for the moronic Taliban to be jailed?

      I don’t give a rat’s arse if the Taliban despise us even more (and how is that possible?). Have you been to Iraq and spoken with those people that were glad for our presence? What about those in Afghanistan? Take your “despised” comments to DailyKooks or HuffPo where you’ll fit right in.

      Calling our Marines morons? Well because of them, and our US military, you have the right to make that idiotic statement. Without them you’d be writing that statement in German, if you were even allowed to voice an opinion.

    • AND IT’S MARINES, LIBERAL MORON. Soldiers are in the Army, Marines…are in the MARINE CORPS. You must of been bullied in school. I bet u wouldn’t even punch them back when u were bullied. No wonder you’re such a wuss. Liberals are weak willed chicken shits. Political correctness is KILLING our military. (And the world).

    • Up yours, sideways, you spineless chickensh*t wussy.

      Little wonder we are losing the GWOT.

      BTW, they are Marines, not army, you ignorant POS.

      I am sick to friggin’ damn death of PC sh*theads like you wrecking my country.

      Go wash a stinking camel, you cowardly f*cking ahole.

      You make me want to hurl, choke, and puke – all at the same time.

      And if Dr. Eowyn and Steve wish to banish me from the pages of this blog, then so be it.

      But that won’t change the fact that you are still a chickensh*t wussy.

      -Dave

  19. My Dad served under Gen.Patton in WW2 and I served under his Sonin 1978 at FtHood Tx.-2ndArmrDiv.and I believe that Patton did everything right under the acts of war because through-out history the Enemy’s have far-much worse in torcher tactic’s then what we use….

  20. God bless Gen. Patton and those fine Marines!

  21. Two thoughts, I would like to think that we are an honorable nation. What other country rebuilds conquered countries? Second, thankfully they did not have this technology during WW2, Korea and Vietnam. As a Marine that served in Vietnam 67/68, I can assure you that this article is right on. No one who has seen a comrade blown into little pieces, is unaffected. As far as I know, we don’t behead people that are alive. Has everyone forgotten what happened to Daniel Pearl? Get a grip, why do you think your brother, father or grandfather, didn’t come home and start talking about what he did in the war. My father passed away 7 years ago, a WW2 vet, who never once talked about what he did during the war. And guess what, he never asked me what I did in Vietnam.

    • Thanks to you and your dad for your service Mark.

      Was just speaking w/my father (Korean vet) and he said the same thing re: technology. Marines should have handled this internally yet someone, IMO, had an agenda and released the vid. War ain’t pretty and a lot of stuff happens. Unfortunately this gets released and all proggies go ballastic. “sigh”

  22. Considering what the Taliban have done to our soldiers, our son’s, fathers, husbands, daughters, and mothers etc., can’t say that I would blame them if they did. However, notice the article says it APPEARS, they did it, maybe it was something symbolic for them and nothing more. Besides what do you expect…train them to be warriors, make them put away some of their human compassion for the sake of self preservation and then condemn them for what they are trained to do…yeah right makes sense to me…get over it…move on, it’s a war for God sake!! Or maybe after losing my 22 year old son in Afghanistan 2yrs ago, I just don’t give a sh*t if they did or not. Right now I just have way to much pain, sorrow and hatred in my heart to really much give a damn what is done to them. In all honesty…I can only hope that one of them was the one that killed my son. Like it or not, agree or not..this is how I feel…whether you think it is right or wrong I don’t care…walk a mile in my shoes then judge me.

  23. All us military ammo should have a the tip coated in pig sh*t.

    Make it known that if killed attacking us or allied forces they will be denied entry into paradise.

    take the fight out of em

  24. National Piss On A Terrorist Day – February 2nd, 2012
    Find it on Facebook.

  25. I hope they had something to disinfect with after they pissed. So da widdle muzzies is upset. Boo hoo. If they don’t want to be urinated on, my advice is take up an activity that won’t get your ass shot by the Marines. Mess with the best, suffer like the rest. Too bad.

  26. Way to set the standards high… real Pulitzer Prize material. Only imaterial redneck white trash with a limited knowledge of history, and a retarded view of today’s realities, would attempt to justify pissing on the enemy. Can’t wait to read your next installment of how it’s ok to take a dump in the mouths of our enemy… maybe drag their bodies through the streets or behead them. You fail to understand the very thing that makes our soldiers, and most Americans, better than the enemy – not to mention the damage a 24-7 worldwide news network can do given fodder like this. Do everyone a favor and don’t think, much less attempt to frame your idiotic ideas into words for your fringe and surely limited readership.

    • Can’t wait to read your next installment of how it’s ok to take a dump in the mouths of our enemy…

      That would have been my next move.

      -Dave

    • Hey “patriot”…You do know a Pulitzer means nada these days, right? As does a Noble Peace Prize.

      Throwing out the race card? How ORIGINAL of you…

      You want to talk about decapitation? Check your source…it’s the Taliban that do that. If you want to sympathize with the terrorists, go play at DailyKooks comrade.

      Got none, nada, nil use for sympathizers like you. Take up your complaints w/the Taliban and let me know how much they give a shoot about your opinion.

    • Hey, PJones and Hhel Raiser, are you a product of the U.S. public school system? ‘Cause you sure fail at Reading Comprehension.

      Read Robert Wilcox’s essay again. S-l-o-w-l-y. With lips moving….

      Did he anywhere say he thinks it’s just okay for the Marines to urinate on the Taliban corpse? Did he? Um?

      No? You finally get a “Pass” on this reading comprehension test.

      What Wilcox say is for us NOT to blow this incident out of all proportion. Pissing on the dead body of the enemy is not a war crime. It is an act unbecoming of an American soldier, and for that, these Marines (if indeed they did that) will be appropriately disciplined.

      End of story.

  27. I ask you This, What if it was a Taliban Soldier Urinating On Dead Marines … Still Okay ??

    • With for-real Marines around, noTalibastard camel-washer would have been able to piss in any direction, period.

      -Dave

    • I ask you this, What if a Taliban soldier decapitated your fellow brother or raped your wife? Still ok?

      Get back to me when you have done combat duty and watched fellow soldiers die. War is hell, DEAL.

  28. The Marines I have seen around the world have, the cleanest bodies, the filthiest minds, the highest morale, and the lowest morals of any group of animals I have ever seen. Thank God for the United States Marine Corps.
    – Eleanor Roosevelt (a Democrat)

  29. General Patton in my opinion was the greatest general to ever live.

  30. Patton was a jerk.

  31. The guy who wrote this article wrote a book? You’ve got to be kidding me. “Commit” for comment? The premise of this article is stupid. Pissing into the Rhine can’t be compared to pissing on dead bodies, and even calling it “pissing in the enemy” is a wild stretch. Having served in the Infantry, I found this video disgusting, stupid, braindead AND a violation of the Geneva Conventions. The PTB in the Marines and the Defense Department have a lot more sense than this “author” and many of the commenter’s.

    • Oh yeah, this Wilcox fella wrote : “No one who has not gone through it will understand the depth of a combat relationship. There are no phonies in a firefight; no pretense of who one is. You can’t cover up. Combat soldiers get to know each other very well. That breeds the bond –that and the dire situation combatants share. And when that bond is ended in the most brutal way, by the death or maiming of a y in the bond, pissing on the bastard who represents that end is small payback for the tragic loss…blah blah blah”. This guy never served so I’m not sure if he even has the right to be so sanctimonious. “No one who has not gone through it” indeed.

      • tele,

        Why are you so hostile and full of bile and venom for Robert Wilcox? Please ask yourself that question and undertake some self-examination. Then come back to us with your honest answer. Until then, all your comments will be held for moderation.

        Your hostility really speaks more about you, than Wilcox.

        -FOTM’s owner & administrator

        • OK, since you asked. First of all, when someone is an author, I hold them to higher literary standards than the average Joe. This article is pretty poorly written and edited, and I’m not talking about typos, which we all commit on occasion. I’m talking about swapping words, poor sentence construction and, frankly, a faulty premise. It’s funny how pointed criticism becomes “bile and venom” when someone expresses a viewpoint counter to their own viewpoint. Frankly, and I know that you’ll disagree with this, is there was plenty of “bile and venom” toward the Left in Mr. Wilcox’s own article. But I let that pass and only commented on what I thought was egregious about the article, the worst of which was his statement about people who haven’t served in combat can’t possibly know…while being exactly such a person. That doesn’t mean that he or anyone else can’t comment or write about war if they haven’t been in combat, but for someone who hasn’t even SERVED to make such a statement smacks of irony, no matter how much he treasures those of us who have.

          I have never served in actual combat either. I was an 11B under Reagan in the 80s, serving 75 miles from the East German border in Northern Germany. My job was basically to die in place should the Russian Shock Army invade. My unit was given a life expectancy of about 72 hours, just enough time for NATO and the US to marshal its forces. But I speak with at least a little authority when I say that for many soldiers, this act was both dishonorable AND stupid from a tactical standpoint, and Mr. Wilcox is seemingly blind to this, being more concerned about “overreaction” by the media. What about HONOR? And, regardless of what you think about them (here taking a page from Mr. Wilcox’s own rhetorical devices), we are signatories of The Geneva Conventions, of which the First is quite clear on this matter:
          Art. 15. At all times, and particularly after an engagement, Parties to the conflict shall, without delay, take all possible measures to search for and collect the wounded and sick, to protect them against pillage and ill-treatment, to ensure their adequate care, and to search for the dead and prevent their being despoiled.
          To me, sinking to the level of an enemy who doesn’t respect this tenet brings dishonor, especially if it serves no tactical purpose or worsens the tactical situation as this does. I will admit that there are plenty of soldiers who might disagree with me, but you’d be surprised how many actually do agree with the idea that we are better than those who defile the battlefield dead. Westmoreland saw this quite clearly, I’m not sure how Patton might have felt as he was a pretty contradictory character when it came to “the honor of war”.

          I would be once again disappointed in the Right should you take the stance that my clear and pointed speech be suppressed, because I have neither been profane or defamatory. I say “once again” because I have found this to happen on certain Rightist web sites and blogs – the odd idea that freedom of speech only happens in America when a belief system is shared, and coming from the Right, which worships the Constitution, I find this very odd. This is the first time that I’ve visited your blog (the FB sharing of this article will bring you many new readers!). You shouldn’t do yourself a disservice by silencing voices that offer a different perspective. Hate speech, yes? I don’t think I fall into that category by a long chalk. I’m sorry if I’ve been hard on your friend. The measure of a free thinker though is to be able to separate personal connections and weigh ideas on their merits.

          I’m surprised that you didn’t just send me an email so that we could hash this out in private. Being a fellow WP blogger (non-political), I understand that this is currently a “private conversation”, but would hope that, should you remove my previous comments or ban me from future participation, that you have the courage to say so publicly and post this as my final rebuttal. There is nothing so frustrating as to not get the whole story and your readers would not get the whole story without my viewpoint.

          Thank you for your consideration Dr.

          • I WILL apologize for my rather dismissive comment toward Mr. Wilcox at the beginning of my comment. As I said, I tend to hold authors in high esteem and found this article lacking in the standards that I come to expect from even “off-hand” writings by published authors. Frankly, I was stunned in reading it, hence my backhanded dismissal. Of course, at the time, I was posting from my smartphone so brevity was key. Being on an actual keyboard as I am now, helps to be able to make a more measured response.

          • Tele, PLEASE tell me HOW you know that Mr. Wilcox did not serve our country! I actually know Mr. Wilcox, do you?

            • I’ve updated this post with Robert Wilcox’s military service: 7 years with the USAF in Vietnam!

              • Thank you for updating this. Perhaps that would be an interesting thing to put in his “official bio” on his own web site. Or perhaps I missed it. In either case, I stand corrected on that point.

          • You’re wrong. Simple as that. I hope you are willing to acknowledge this as I did in regard to Mr.Wilcox’s military career. I’m not holding my breath though. As to not moderating, I referr to above green I

            • Sorry, my smartphone crapped out on me. I’m now on a real keyboard. To finish, I refer to above where I was explicitly told “Then come back to us with your honest answer. Until then, all your comments will be held for moderation”. So you were wrong there as well.

            • You asked me to correct you if you were wrong in your theory that I’m jealous of a “published author”. I said you were wrong. And, I can only go by what was written about me being moderated. You seem to be saying two different things. On one hand, “We don’t moderate”. On the other, “We will moderate if we wake up on the wrong side of the bed”. I don’t mind rough and tumble debate and I’ll take my hits and body blows. Seems like there are some thin skins on the moderators’ side though (not sure if you are or aren’t an actual moderator because it sounded like you are). For the record though, I consider it the right of any blog owner to moderate if he or she feels that it’s necessary. On my own blog, I’ve never moderated anything other than spam, but I have reserved the right to moderate hate language, outright racism and spam. And I have withheld comments if someone has accidentally listed personal information that could be harmful to them such as a telephone number. Just don’t tell me that you don’t moderate when I’ve been told that I am being moderated. I’m glad that you guys have left my comments standing and I salute you. I was banned from Debbie Schlussel’s blog for simply pointing out that she had posted something that she claimed she hadn’t, and I posted a link to it. That’s one example of why I’m sensitive to the issue.

    • I will take the hit for my smartphone’s attempt to autocorrect my swyping the word commenters in my original comment. Editing in the small comment block of a smartphone is very difficult. However, I note that you haven’t actually edited the word in question after all. So…

      In any case, I used the commit example because I was indeed on a smartphone and needed to be brief. As I wrote right after that, there was a lot that I as a reader found lacking in terms of the quality of the writing from a published author. I think it’s fair for a reader to judge that sort of stuff, don’t you? And, as I later said, I wasn’t talking about typos, which I admitted to having committed. In fact, I can find several in my posts here, both self-created and created by autocorrect. However, I’m NOT a published author per se (I have a non-political blog which can certainly be picked apart for typos and grammatical monstrosities). But I don’t have a bunch of books under my belt. If I did, I would submit my incidental articles to a more rigorous editing process. But that’s just me.

      You talk about bile. Seems like I’m getting my share of bile, with comments about spelling Nazis and unfounded speculation about my motives. I’ve already apologized about being snippy and acknowledged my error regarding Mr. Wilcox’s service but I guess I don’t get any extra credit for that. There seems to be a certain double standard working here.

      But it’s fair that a blog owner is the master of his domain. I’m just saying that my comments have been very mild compared to some of the discourse by many of the commenter’s (sic) and by the author himself, so really, there is no high ground here.

      • I agree that this has gone a little far. But first, thanks for the oops. Second, the word commenter’s is still there so I don’t know what correction you speak of. You said you corrected it. I assumed that you meant in the post itself. Since you said that “We don’t moderate”, I think it’s fair to assume that you are a moderator and you kindly edited my original post. Finally, I answered your question about moderating my blog in another response. I’m sorry that my going out to breakfast conflicted with your need for a speedy answer to the question. Don’t know what the Paul, Hall, Saul thing is, but I’m thinking it must be clever. Ohhhh, I get it. Alinsky. Not sure what the progression means though. Ron Paul? Kids in the Hall?

    • BTW, commenters is correct so I don’t know what there is to correct there. Commenter’s, yes, in that instance. If you prefer commentators,that’s ok I guess, but commenters IS a word and is more appropriate to people who comment about a commentator. Look it up. But I think this horse has been flogged enough…

  32. “There is nothing more terrible than a battle one except a battle lost.”
    -Duke of Wellington

    Gen Patton urinating in the Rhine is completely different than idiots urinating on corpses. Its a river, not a body. Anyone who agrees with the latter should not be in the military else you would bring shame to our profession.

    Yes, people die. Lives are taken. There isn’t gloryfully in combat, however you must conduct yourself with honor. Do you punch someone who is already down? If someone does it to you -is it ok to do it back? What does it make you?

    West point honor code “I shall not lie, cheat, or steal. Nor tolerate those that do.”

    You are taught in the military to hold yourself to a professional standard. Respect your enemy. This bas nothing to do with conservative vs liberal. Its a moral question. What these Marines did was wrong. Justifying it is wrong.

    • West Point honor code doesn’t say anything about peeing on dead Taliban. True, it was wrong of our guys to wee on ‘em, but they stil come out far ahead of such riff-raff… we don’t behead prisoners, rape any women/girl without a burqah or male guardian, or piss on anyone without their being dead and killed in combat against us first.

  33. I agree what the marines did was stupid, but to court marshal them that is absurd. Jail time no way. Yes they have to be punished but let the punishment fit the crime, bust them down in rank take money from them restrict them to the base, but to put them in prison for a lapse in judgement that is criminal. Make them go to counseling write an apology. But if obama and hillary clinton , and leon penetta dishonorably discharge these guys the military will feel the so called leaders in this country have let them down and moral will take a nose dive. I think if this happens we need a vote of no confidence on all three of these people and get someone that will back our fighting people. Obama, clinton, penetta need to put on a uniform and pick up a weapon and man a post on the front line and have a taste of life and death before they make a decision on something they have no direct experience in.

    • Don’t know if this will come up, since I’m in “moderation purgatory”, but I would be remiss if I (or someone) didn’t point out that Leon Panetta DID indeed put on a uniform and served as a Lieutenant in Army Intelligence, although he left the service before the major combat action in Vietnam occurred. I would hope that service at least counts for something these days.

    • I say piss on them. Put the above three in a uniform & put them in the vicinity of the enemies of our country & see how they feel about things. Of course Obama has already said if worse comes to worse “he’d side with the Muslims” .

  34. instead of pissing on them lets drag the corpses through the streets by the ankle and hang whats left of the body in public view. hmmm, well any desecration of a corpse is wrong, but pissing on one is not to the level of a crime

  35. If you become a martyr, God (their god) will give you 70 virgins, 70 wives and everlasting happiness (really it’s 72). It’s just took 4 or so Marines to provide the Golden Shower. Think of it as a Happy Ending with their virgins!!

  36. “It is not the critic who counts, not the one who points out how the strong man stumbled or how the doer of deeds might have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred with sweat and dust and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs and comes short again and again; who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, and spends himself in a worthy cause; who, if he wins, knows the triumph of high achievement; and who, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who know neither victory nor defeat”.
    – Carlos Hathcock, USMC Sniper Ret. Man In The Arena

  37. to Patriot Jones and Astrophyton, Get real. Your ignorance and total lack of experience is showing. You both live your lives on “Blood Welfare” That means someone else’s blood has paid for your freedom and you enjoy the benefits without cost to you. The only important thing in war is to win. That is it. By whatever means necessary. IF you do not know that, you will lose, and it means you have never experienced combat.

  38. War is not a beautiful thing to see, it is ugly , horrendous, and a lot more. Morally what was done recently may not be agreeable with many but when you send people to war things will happen and when the adversary can be anyone since all people dress the same, no set military uniform for the enemy, how can one tell combatant from non combatant, so yes things happen. Then add what your own rules of engagement are and add an enemy with no rules and no uniform…. Then what better way to get a message across that says I’M PISSED off at all of you ….. True not all of the people in that country are like Al Qaeda, or Taliban but when the same people don’t wear a visible uniform then one needs to look at everyone as a combatant …Don’t like what happens in war then don’t send the military in
    send the politicians and the ones that say a soldier can’t do this can’t do that wait until someone shoots your ass the shoot back….Then see what you do in same situation…By politicians I mean from top down see how long it takes to change rules..

  39. Them crazy towelheads can behead you, cut your arms and legs off, blow you up and the marines are in hot water for pissing on dead taliban, i would have poured pig blood on them, thus denying them all them virgins in heaven, then put them face down, shot them up the rear end with a m203, what’s america coming too, again screw them towelheads

  40. The title of this piece is not true and misleading. Patton did not piss on the enemy. He pissed in a river with photographic evidence that that is what happened. Write a piece and give your opinion, but please don’t mislead with the title.

    • It’s as if you didn’t read the whole post, Eowyn wrote that he “did his public urinating not on a dead body but into the enemy’s most famous river”. It was the enemy’s river so her title isn’t misleading. Nuance…but thanks for your advice on how we should title our blog posts. What would we do without you?

  41. Ever see CKY2K? Ryan (RIP) had the audacity to urinate on Brandon while he slept. Where was the the outcry of support for Ryan? Of course, this was after Brandon wiped feces on Ryan’s face as he slept.
    If there wasn’t a Pearl Harbor, there never would have been a Hiroshima.

  42. What comes to mind for me is the photo of my SEAL buddy Scott H. hanging from a bridge after having been burned alive and dragged through the streets of Fallujah. War is hell, and actual combat is a motherf*cker

  43. Piss on the media who try so hard to impose their agenda on everyone.

  44. I had an uncle who was KIA while serving with General Patton. General Patton was the right man for the job needed to be done. Eisenhower and other members of his staff didn’t want to be involved in the “dirty” side of what war is. General Patton wasn’t only a soldier he was a true warrior. There is a hugh difference. What these Marines alledgely did makes sense to me. How would you react if you just saw your brothers-in-arms blown to high heaven? Their actions are not those of sane men but they have been living in an insane enviroment for God only knows how. The Marine Corps has its own honor code of conduct and they should be the only ones who should be allowed to decide what if any action is taken for those Marines involved. Sometimes we have to talk to people in a language they understand and it appears that these radical fringe groups haven’t got respect for their own people let alone any else.

  45. The enemy was not men of war they were ” Terrorists ” Hello !!!

  46. War’s over. Hit the showers, head for the slop chute, go see the old lady, etc. By the way, these folks won this one. Now, they’re out training for the next inevitable dust-up the politicians dream up. Cool. Try not to get wet, over here. They’ll likely piss on you, too, you don’t keep you mouth shut. These folks are fresh from the fight and ain’t skeered. – The Legendary

  47. Haha. Yet another pundit telling others not to judge unless they’ve experienced combat. I love the irony. The reality is – we veterans are taught appropriate standards of combat, both at home and in war. The Marines violated them, and took it to even dumber lengths by documenting it. They got busted, boo hoo, cry me a river. Take your deserved punishment and move on. It’s entirely appropriate to question WHY this behavior goes on, even after all the training we’re put through. I can chalk it up simply to vast stupidity – a vast stupidity echoed in those criticizing people offending by this behavior, or even better, attempting to justify it by comparing it to the behavior of the Taliban, Al Qaeda, or what people did 70 years ago – as if we’re the same…

  48. The headline is “Americans cheered Gen. Patton when he urinated on the enemy.” but the picture and the article both refer only to urinating into the Rhine. No doubt Patton took this action to disrespect the Nazi regime, but urinating in a river is a far cry from urinating on dead enemy soldiers. By the time Patton reached the Rhine the German army was comprised of old men and teenaged boys. Patton believed in the nobilty of the warrior, and if he ever urinated on dead enemy soldiers, this article doesn’t menti0on it.

  49. John P Walker Jr PM

    Why do we take history in school? So we don’t make the same mistakes. Well then lets fight like Sherman & his march to the sea. Take out every one from the North to the South & East to West. Then we will know when the war is over. But no we want to fight & be good about it. How?? And when, do we win? Lets stay out of war or fight like Sherman!! Keep the news people away from the war we don’t need them helping the other guys. From a guy that did Viet Nam in the & 4 years Air Force. And 7 years in the Army. Good or bad they don’t need jail time.

    • I agree about jail time. I agree with Allen West that an Article 15 is sufficient. And that’s probably the last time you will see the phrase I agree with Allen West ever used .

  50. Ok article but Patton’s army didn’t cross the Rhine first. It was Montgomery’s Ninth Armored Division. My father who is 90 was a Sergeant during the taking of the Ludendorf Bridge, the Bridge at Remagen. Patton was supposed to cross first according to Allied planning. My father’s Phantom Nine found it intact. Some historians still are not on board at this late date.

  51. I also remember something my grandmother said to the worse person in our neighbor hood ” I WOULDN’T PISS ON YOU , YOU ——- IF YOU WERE ON FIRE “

  52. An American soldier is defined by honor above all: “Death before dishonor.” To bring shame upon one’s unit and one’s country is simply an unpardonable offense in the eyes of any true Patriot.

    Desecration of the dead is an act that is universally condemned – whether it be in the field of battle or in a mortuary at home. It is an act condemned in the Bible and a crime in every Country on earth. Only incest in more universally reviled. Barbarians and heathens desecrate the dead.

    Putting aside the moral argument, desecration of the dead only emboldens an enemy to exact revenge and to claim a moral and spiritual “superiority” in their propaganda. When the enemy is able to bring us down to their level morally, they win. We become no better than them in the eyes of the world.

    As for Patton piss in the Rhine, nowhere in the documented history of Patton’s life will you find that he ever claimed to be making a “statement” in that photograph. Nor does the photograph appear to represent anything more than the fact that he needed to relieve himself: there is no gathering of soldiers around him to witness his “statement” – in fact no one but the photographer even appears to notice. But irrespective, pissing in a River is no where NEAR the equivilent of pissing on a combatant – dead or alive.

  53. patton’s army was the 2nd to cross the rhine, general hodges army was the first to cross the rhine, it’s good that two american armies beat the arrogant snob montgomery to it

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s