Talk:William Calley

message: I think this should be added at the top summary:
Calley only spent 3 days incarcerated, he was the only person convicted of killing 507 people, amongst them 107 kids, 70 babies and 60 geriatrics.
would that be a fair summary?  To me the word-rich article reads like typical legasleeze of the empire. I thought wikipedia would be able to name names and call things as they are.Nhzzs (talk) 15:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think the article already makes the point.  Adding your statement would be overkill, if you'll pardon the pun.  Eastcote (talk) 16:02, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  simple english 

message: "Many told Army investigators he lacked common sense and couldn't even read a map or compass properly. Calley's men admitted he was so disliked some even thought of "fragging" him." While these may be true, where are the sources for this?--Tarpy 17:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: How so?  You don't really think the U.S. Government, either with a Dem or Rep President, is ever going to allow an American soldier to stand trial at the ICC, do you? 69.58.248.102 09:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Early discussions 

message: What did he do after the war, and where is he now?  A2Kafir 03:52, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: [inappropriate comment deleted] Ahem.JF Mephisto 10:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

text: No one can.  Double jeopardy. 69.58.248.102 09:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Where is he now? 

message: This article, especially the background, really needs to be cleaned up. The entry is essentially nothing but a smear attack that serves no purpose. The article's main reason for existing is his role in the My Lai massacre. There is no need to make (uncited) speculation about his life prior to My Lai. Talk about somebody having an axe to grind.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.42.48.135 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 6 May 2006.
:(response):
:Regarding the background information, while it certainly ought to be cited, I believe a person's history has a great deal of importance in influencing their behavior.  This makes the background extremely relevant information, as it allows for speculation as to what potential changes in his psychology may have influenced the decisions that he made at My Lai.  However, I think it's unfair to assume that because one considers these things that one has "an axe to grind."
:-John Philippi, Thursday, 2006-08-24 T05:09 UTC—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.159.136.1 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 24 August 2006.
"Normal background"?  What is that?  Is someone going to NPOV this article? --Jickyincognito 23:35, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: How could a guy who failed out of junior college become an officer?  The Army must have been pretty hard up for officers that they were plucking draftees fresh out of basic and sending them to OCS. This makes no sense to me, surely there were enlisted men more qualified than him who could have been sent for officer's training.  Obviously, "My Lai" is what happens when the military lowers its standards.  Draftees being commanded by a college dropout.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.43.81.191 (talk • contribs) 04:23, 11 June 2006.
So you are saying only people who can stay in junior college should be officers? That is about the stupidest logic I have ever heard of.
My lai is not what happens when the military lowers standards. My lai is what happens when wars are fought by politicians instead of the military.
Why don't you go to the Robert McNamara page and make your comments? He and Johnson are the ones to blame for the whole mess.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.72.141.22 (talk • contribs) 00:03, 23 August 2006.
Uhhh, yes I believe that an officer should at least be able to get through junior college, and why is that illogical?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.100.63.179 (talk • contribs) 20:29, 22 October 2006.
An Officer is first and foremost a LEADER. To say that My Lai was caused by politicians is preposterous.  Officers are decision makers, and those decisions have consequences which they must take responsibility for.  Past behaviour is one of the best predictors of future behaviour - that is why dropping out of college is not 'Officer like' behaviour.  Men want to be led by MEN, so the first comment is reasonable. This page on Calley should not be 'toned down' or cleaned up.  Like most things in life, My Lai was an example of choices, where certain people made the choice for right and certain people made the choice for wrong.  To attempt to mitigate their responsibility merely confirms their lack of leadership.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 218.215.133.33 (talk • contribs) 05:16, 27 October 2006.
The valid question remains. If he dropped out of college, how did he become an officer? You have to have a degree to be commissioned in the armed services. This might be just an incorrect inference made from the claim that he dropped out of college. The article never mentions that he might have received a degree from another school. BBODO 18:52, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I just wanted to chime in here and say that there are a couple of things that should be considered as well. First the lifespan in the vietnam war for a lieutenant was extremely low so a lot of folks (with ot without degrees) didn't want the job, so on occasion it went to someone who was less than qualified but willing (and potentially expendible). Previous to and including the vietnam war it was relatively common for enlisted folks to receive promotions for bravery in the field (brevets, temporary promotions, battlefield promotions and frocking are examples of this). So, its possible that played a factor although I doubt it.  Another possibility is nepootism. If they had a familily member in the military or a politician at a high enough level they might be granted a commission (to essentially any grade from Private to General if it gets enough votes in congress).  A little knwon fact is that congress still possesses (although it doesn't use it more than a couple times a year, typically around the same time they vote on the general officers) the ability to establish an individual at a certain grade regardless of other requirements. So my point is however it was done, the fact of wether he had a degree or not means relatively little.--Kumioko (talk) 22:59, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why was he made an officer? 

message: The article never states if his conviction was overturned or just commuted.  If it was overturned, then this article should not be in the categories of "American Murderers" or "War Criminals" as an overturned sentence means he was never convicted.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.70.23.45 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 30 June 2006.
---From what I can remember in reading I've done, the conviction did stand, and he was released on parole. Anyone wish to confirm this?--Silver86 08:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Did his conviction stand?

message: (MARK S. 16:24, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Reference doesn't work

message: Shouldn't his rank be at the top, as his title, along with his name? As in: 2nd Lieutenant William Calley or some such? Is there a Wikipedia standard on this somewhere? --Howdybob 01:47, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Putting his rank at the top 

message: Online, public tax records show that William Calley was living in Columbus, Georgia in 2006. BCE753 07:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Why is everyone worried about where this guy lives?  Someone planning to do something stupid? Equinox137 07:47, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If the American consciousness knew what was just, that "something stupid" would have been done long ago. You war criminals go to jail for 3 years?! Such a travesty. Even if the North Vietnamese or VC torturing to death a thousand US POWs could not make up for Calley's and his fellow rednecks' crimes! Le Anh-Huy 08:01, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Redneck's?"  "OUR" war criminals?  Who are YOUR "war criminals"?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.127.163.141 (talk) 21:52, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No kidding..... Equinox137 (talk) 03:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Where is he now?

message: Fraggin is a term from the Vietnam War, used primarily by U.S. military personnel, most commonly meaning to assassinate an unpopular officer of one's own fighting unit, often by means of a fragmentation grenade. 75.108.24.77  —Preceding comment was added at 17:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Fraggin" 

message: Could someone please explain. Thanks Axamoto (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why NPOV? 

message: In the sentence "Others, knowing nothing about his education or background, sought to excuse his actions because of his allegedly low intelligence and cultural background," is the phrase knowing nothing about his education or background necessary or even accurate? How does the writer know the minds of the people holding this opinion? Indeed, the entire sentence carries no footnoted source.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.213.86 (talk) 19:49, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Superfluous phrase 

message: Seems to me that there's a bit of a chasm between his 'military career' and murder trial. Isn't it important what he actually DID in My Lai/Vietnam in general (or, at least, as accurate a depiction as possible)? This article seems to skip over the most notable part of Calley's existence, focussing more on the lead-up and aftermath.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.70.65.13 (talk) 21:17, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Actions in My Lai 

message: "Calley was sent to the United States Disciplinary Barracks at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. At his release, the press eagerly awaited his arrival at the prison's South Gate, as promised by the prison commandant. Instead, at Calley's request, he was released at West Gate and taken directly to the Fort Leavenworth airfield, where his escort, an unnamed Georgia Congressman, had him flown home.
:Its probably impossible to verify at this late date, but I'll bet that was Larry McDonald. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 21:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Although maybe not.  McDonald didn't enter Congress until 1975, and it appears this event occurred in 1974.  The article isn't entirely clear, however; could have been '75. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 21:16, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

text: That was a specific war strategy that was signed off by the President, among other higherups. Its purpose was to end the war to save more lives down the line--eventually it accomplished this, although Japan refused to sign the peace treaty even after one bomb. My Lai wasn't policy and didn't accomplish anything except murder innocents for no larger purpose. 64.132.218.4 (talk) 15:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: My Lai wasn't written policy but instead mimmicked it which is why it became so controversial and well known. I'm fairly sure it was an attempt at copying Operation Pheonix.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.205.156 (talk) 22:50, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  unnamed Georgia Congressman 

message: “Apologized” is not the correct word. 
The newspapers misconstrued Calley’s remarks, probably to sell a story.
In fact, Calley expressed regret for what happened at My Lai. 
Orders are orders, and one must obey them or face the consequences. Questioning or ignoring orders is strongly discouraged in the American military. One who does so can find himself in serious trouble. 
Refusing to obey orders is a serious offense and punishable by dishonorable discharge, imprisonment or worse.   
On that day in My Lai, would it have been foolish to refuse to follow orders from superiors? Calley did not have much choice. Follow orders or face the consequences. 
The Wizard of Oz  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zofodraziweht (talk • contribs) 07:11, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That argument didn't fly at Nuremberg nor did it work at his trail.  There is a reason that "man" was convicted of war crimes.24.22.49.209 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 06:04, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:   Mine is to do or die, not to reason why  

message: The article as it reads now says that when he enlisted in the Army, he was traveling for purposes of receiving a medical reevaluation at the request of his Draft Board.
Does this imply that he had a medical deferment, and was going to be reevaluated to see if it should remain in effect?  Or was this a routine procedure preliminary to drafting any civilian?
Can anyone clarify?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldsmobile (talk • contribs) 16:24, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed this from the article. There was nothing mentioned in the attributed source regarding a medical condition, San Francisco, or an automobile breakdown in New Mexico (all which the article asserts).--Chimino (talk) 08:53, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Medical condition?--related to draft status? 

message: The article states, "On November 9, 1974, the Court noted that although by now Calley had been 'paroled' from confinement by the Army, that did not moot the habeas corpus proceedings. Later in 1974, President Nixon tacitly issued Calley a limited Presidential Pardon." Nixon could not have issued anything presidential some time later than November 9, 1974. He resigned the presidency on August 9, 1974.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 56.0.84.23 (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology? 

message: I noticed an edit (then a reversion, and then a reversion of that reversion) to change the first line of the article from "William Laws Calley, Jr. (born June 8, 1943) is a former United States Army officer found guilty of murdering 22 unarmed South Vietnamese civilians in the My Lai Massacre on March 16, 1968, during the Vietnam War." to "William Laws Calley, Jr. (born June 8, 1943) is an American war criminal, former United States Army officer found guilty of murdering 22 unarmed South Vietnamese civilians in the My Lai Massacre on March 16, 1968, during the Vietnam War." 
I'd like to run this by the talk page before any more reversions are done to come to some sort of consensus. I believe that describing Calley as a "War Criminal" in the opening line is not NPOV, especially as the same sentence goes on to describe exactly what he was convicted for. As a check, I compared Calley's entry to the individual articles for the first ten people listed on the List of Axis personnel indicted for war crimes page. None were described as a "war criminal"; when required, more neutral phrasing such as "At the Nuremberg trials, he was found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity and was executed" was used. Keep in mind that Calley is still alive and that the WP:BLP page stresses that "Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy". 
The "War Criminal" description should be removed. Carl Henderson (talk) 01:58, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: As no one has objected, I'm going to remove the "war criminal" phrase from the intro for the reasons given above.Carl Henderson (talk) 04:31, 7 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  War Criminal? 

message: :
Did this sentence formerly discuss more complicated nomenclature? —Tamfang (talk) 00:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  a place known as a place 

message: The article states, "Calley served only three and a half years of house arrest in his quarters at Fort Benning. He petitioned the federal district court for habeas corpus on February 11, 1974, which was granted on September 25, 1974, along with his immediate release, by federal judge J. Robert Elliott. Judge Elliott found that Calley's trial had been prejudiced by pre-trial publicity, denial of subpoenas of certain defense witnesses, refusal of the United States House of Representatives to release testimony taken in executive session of its My Lai investigation, and inadequate notice of the charges. (The judge had released Calley on bail on February 27, 1974, but an appeals court reversed it and returned Calley to U.S. Army custody on June 13, 1974.) Consequently, his general court-martial conviction and dismissal from the U.S. Army were upheld; however, the prison sentence and subsequent parole obligations were commuted to time served, leaving Calley a free man.[8]" Other sources, however, give quite different accounts. "[H]is sentence was reduced to 20 years by the Court of Military Appeals and further reduced later to 10 years by the Secretary of the Army. Proclaimed by much of the public as a “scapegoat,” Calley was paroled by President Richard Nixon in 1974 after having served about a third of his 10-year sentence." http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/calley-charged-for-my-lai-massacre Another source: "Though sentenced to life in prison, Calley ended up serving three years under house arrest after President Richard Nixon later reduced his sentence." http://www.nbcnews.com/id/32514139/ns/us_news-military/t/calley-apologizes-role-my-lai-massacre/#.WaDwhSiGOM8 Krakatoa (talk) 04:25, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: See this: . Nixon was busy with other stuff in 1974. Nixon did get Calley's sentence reduced to 10, and him placed in house arrest on a military base, but he did not quite set him free.Icewhiz (talk) 06:03, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  And this from 1974 . When he was given bail by the appeals court (setting him free), the army secretary paroled him on time served. Nixon was out by then, but what set him free was the civilian appeal process.Icewhiz (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Disposition of Calley's sentence? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on William Calley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070625192221/http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1990/1/1990_1_44.shtml to http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1990/1/1990_1_44.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110718010108/http://www.hughthompson.org/ to http://www.hughthompson.org/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20030416002424/http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/MYLAI.HTM to http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/mylai.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I have to say this is one of the oddest articles I've read in a while. Was the actual description of the My Lai massacre removed? We read about Calley's trial. We read about a physical fight between a few Marines and a few members of the Army in 1969. We don't actually read about the events of the My Lai massacre itself, so this whole article leaves one with a puzzling lack of context. I do know that My Lai has its own article, and all of it need not be repeated here, but there's a gaping hole in this article that makes it really difficult to get a grasp on the topic. Read it from the beginning as a new reader, and see if you don't agree with me. Moncrief (talk) 18:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree. This article is missing a lot of information regarding Calley's substantial involvement in the My Lai massacre. Mooonswimmer 20:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Really odd article 

message: “…the White House received over 5,000 telegrams; the ratio was 100 to 1 in favor of leniency.[“2
According to Walter Cronkite on the date of President Nixon’s intervention, it came amidst a deluge of 25,000 telegrams to the White House a day since Calley’s conviction.   (I even recall a network special news bulletin the evening of Calley's conviction concerning the telegrams evidencing the massive outpouring of support for Calley.) This can be verified by the following documentary from American Experience in which one can note protest marches and the marching song:  “Battle Hymn of Lt. Calley’ using the melody of “The Battle Hymn of the Republic.” :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDh1isMZMTM  (The relevant part begins around  1:12:30 into the video for a minute or two.)
I was in high school at the time and remember the incident as one of the most astonishing political events in my lifetime when Nixon’s alleged "silent majority” finally found their voice outside the ballot box.  However, perhaps surprisingly it should be noted that it wasn’t strictly thunder from the right.  I knew many anti-Vietnam War fellow students who sympathized with Calley on the grounds that they thought the entire war was immoral and therefore Calley had been sucked into the whirlwind as a scapegoat.HistoryBuff14 (talk) 19:13, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The extent of the reaction against Calley's conviction is seriously understated 

message: "he and his men gang-raped many of the women", according to the wiki-article (as of today).--Please remove "he", from the quoted sentence.--(Were any named persons, convicted of rape? Did any (named) person claim (or admit) that oneself was a rapist?) 2001:2020:315:B114:A80C:9F56:DDDB:9F31 (talk) 19:57, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Rape and "he and his men" ... "many of the women" 

message: Please remove the word "mugshot".--All military services take photos of their personnel.--Yeah, he and twenty-some others were taken to court for killing civilians, but there is no (available) source that shows that he was detained at the time of the photograph.--Quite possibly, sources will show that the photo is from "Check-in" at new command in Vietnam, or photo at new duty station before he came to 'Nam.--The onus is on you to come up with sources, if someone thinks that the photo is from detainment (mugshot-during-detainment). 2001:2020:32D:9981:615F:CD83:73FE:6C00 (talk) 18:02, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Mugshot"? (see infobox)