HADITHA, Iraq -- When the long history of what military leaders are beginning to call the Long War in Iraq is written, the events in a dusty, tumbledown city hard upon the Euphrates River called Haditha will probably serve as a Rorschach test.
By nearly everyone's lights, the degradation of prisoners at Abu Ghraib was an outrage and a monumental setback to the U.S.-led mission of winning over the Iraqi people.
For The Record
Los Angeles Times Thursday, February 21, 2008 Home Edition Main News Part A Page 2 National Desk 2 inches; 73 words Type of Material: Correction
'Rules of Engagement': In some copies of Tuesday's Calendar section, a word in an article about the PBS documentary "Rules of Engagement" was dropped from this sentence: "To be sure it would have been better if 'Frontline' could have gotten cooperation from the prosecution but the military justice system does permit that kind of media scrutiny." It should have said that the military justice system does not permit that kind of media scrutiny.
But Haditha, where 24 civilians were killed by Marines as they "cleared" the street and houses near where a roadside bomb had just killed Lance Cpl. Miguel Terrazas, is open to myriad interpretations. Into this maelstrom comes a "Frontline" documentary, "Rules of Engagement," that tries to get to the truth about that chaotic morning two years ago.
Pick your viewpoint about the war, about the U.S. military, about the media, and there is something in Haditha, the media coverage, the military investigations and the trials to back it up.
The killings at Haditha were the result of untested, immature leadership that gave tragically imprecise orders to young troops? Check.
The killings at Haditha were the result of a morally brutalizing war in which decent young men from the U.S. are pitted against an enemy that hides behind women and children and hopes to make propaganda out of civilian casualties? Definitely check.
The media, starting with Time magazine, did its job by digging out an awful truth despite misleading statements from officialdom? That's one interpretation. Here's another: The media, starting with Time magazine, relied on information from questionable sources and then rushed to judgment.
And what about the investigations that led to charges against four enlisted Marines who did the shootings and four officers who allegedly did not investigate with much vigor?
Were they a sign that the Marine Corps was determined to investigate its own -- to prove to the public that the Marines mean that stuff about keeping their honor clean? Or were they botched by Naval Criminal Investigative Service agents who displayed an appalling predisposition to levy criminal charges regardless of the truth?
There's evidence to support either assertion.
Well reported
Tonight's "Frontline" is a yeoman effort, balanced and thoughtful, and with sympathy for the relatives of the Iraqi dead and for young Marines, past and present, who must make life-and-death decisions in the blink of an eye.
