Marines accused of desecrating bodies

[J_Wales]

Question for the Audience....

If I were to kill your Father/Uncle/Brother, pick one, and then **** on his corpse videotaping it for posterity and the World to know. Would this action not anger you?!

What did my father / brother / uncle do to you? We're they working to eliminate you?

 

[thebishopp]

There are times when emotion carries the day in battle. WWII, from the American standpoint, was largely a war fought by "amateurs" - conscripts and we used superior numbers and equipment equal to or superior to our enemies'. It was also largely a war with - somewhat - clear battle lines and an identifiable enemy. The conflicts we've been in since the Korean conflict generally defy such easy identification of the enemy and require different tactics to deal with a brutal and callous enemy. We also are using a smaller, all-volunteer, professional military force to fight our battles and such professionals need to be trained to be above such displays of emotion - in public - except possibly where such emotional outbursts serve as a deterrent to the enemy. While these Marines' conduct has not, apparently, aroused as much emotion in our foreign enemies as it has our domestic ones, it is still behavior that cannot be condoned because it is contrary to the "good order and discipline" that must be maintained to allow us to kick the bad guys' butts with fewer - but better trained, equipped, and lead - military personnel. Demanding anything less will make a difficult duty even harder to accomplish as our government is again cutting the muscle from our military forces.

Exactly.

In addition people must realize that anything we condone or find acceptable to do to the enemy also becomes acceptable for the enemy to do to us.

 

[halfmileharry]

Exactly.

In addition people must realize that anything we condone or find acceptable to do to the enemy also becomes acceptable for the enemy to do to us.

I love your idealism.
I hope there's never a humane or sterile war. Realizing the horrors of war will be the only way there's going to be an end to war.
IF you want to be a nice country and fight a nice war than you should flip a coin and be done with it.
IF you're contending that our behavior in war is going to relegate the enemys action towards us then I think you've got your thinking all screwed up.
We're fighting an enemy that has no respect what so ever for life and absolutely NO respect towards us.
I find your thinking naive but honorable. IMHO I wish you were correct.

 

[The Stig]

I have mixed feelings on what did happen and what should have happened.

First of all, I empathize with what our soldiers have to go through in hostile territory. I have had my travels while in (or in support of) the military, but never had to deal with anything of this magnitude. I don't know how I would've reacted if in the same situation.

My biggest concern is with regard to image - not what our enemies think of us (of that I am not overly concerned), but what the military should represent to our country.

Maybe many within our country don't mind what they saw - obviously some do. That being said I don't condone what the Marines did, but in The Stig's court I would give them a slap on the wrist. Unfortunately per the UCMJ this may not be the case in the long run. In our "PC" world the results of their actions may get them an other-than-honorable discharge and sent on their way. Kind of crap sandwich for volunteering to put themselves in harm's way...

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I love your idealism.
I hope there's never a humane or sterile war. Realizing the horrors of war will be the only way there's going to be an end to war.
IF you want to be a nice country and fight a nice war than you should flip a coin and be done with it.
IF you're contending that our behavior in war is going to relegate the enemys action towards us then I think you've got your thinking all screwed up.
We're fighting an enemy that has no respect what so ever for life and absolutely NO respect towards us.
I find your thinking naive but honorable. IMHO I wish you were correct.

Naivety has nothing to do with the proposition that we should behave morally in war despite how our enemies may behave towards us. Clinically, killing is a very hard thing for most people and most people experience various negative consequences as a result of being responsible for the deaths of others. Some people, however, get pleasure/satisfaction from killing others; society considers them to be aberrant. ANY society considers them to be aberrant. We discourage our military personnel to [STRIKE]fight[/STRIKE] behave within the rules because the consequences of not doing so lead to unpleasant consequences in the long-term; both for the "soldier" and for the organization and the society. THAT is the practical reason for playing by the rules.

Examples cited by others of what their fathers experienced in WWII or what they or their fathers did during Vietnam are either isolated (in the case of WWII) or widespread (in the case of the latter stages of Vietnam) and the ratio of psychological damage to the individual and the organization are pretty proportional.

When people rationalize doing something they know is wrong, they usually either say "well so-and-so did it first!" or "it's so terrible I/we were justified in doing it". Would you let your child get away with that sort of rationalization? It's even more important that we not let the organizations we arm and train and send off to fight and die for our national objectives allow that sort of rationalization to become the norm.

 

[jeremy]

What did my father / brother / uncle do to you? We're they working to eliminate you?

Does it matter?!

Not really, you would be madder than Hell and want to Kill anyone in the Uniform of the People who pissed on your dead family. The only thing these ignorant Marines done is get more Marines hurt...

 

[J_Wales]

Does it matter?!

Not really, you would be madder than Hell and want to Kill anyone in the Uniform of the People who pissed on your dead family. The only thing these ignorant Marines done is get more Marines hurt...

I highly doubt it.

The enemy already hates the Marines, kills them at every opportunity, and wants them exterminated. I doubt they would be more deadly because somebody took a **** just as I doubt they would be appeased by somebody withholding their urine.

 

[The Stig]

I highly doubt it.

The enemy already hates the Marines, kills them at every opportunity, and wants them exterminated. I doubt they would be more deadly because somebody took a **** just as I doubt they would be appeased by somebody withholding their urine.

I think it is more about converting neutrals into enemies. Perhaps make it a little easier to add to the ranks by posting pics at the local Taliban recruiting office of the Marines urinating on their countrymen...

Just sayin...?

 

[jeremy]

I highly doubt it.

The enemy already hates the Marines, kills them at every opportunity, and wants them exterminated. I doubt they would be more deadly because somebody took a **** just as I doubt they would be appeased by somebody withholding their urine.

I'll give you that..
But is a HUGE event for Recruiting more Persons to the Cause...
I have seen it to many times. The Pashtoons are like the Hillbillies of Afghanistan, they have a very unique Code of Honor (Pashtunwali) that they live by, often conflicting with the Koran in their daily lives. I would wager that the Marines have gone into Overdrive in Damage Control in their COIN Efforts in this region. I would also Wager every commander in the Area has been out having KLEs with every AG Official, Tribal Elder, and Cleric in their AO's discussing what the US is going to do to these miscreants...

COIN is what wins wars like we are in their, not barbarity. History has demonstrated this numerous times...

Hearts and Minds...
Hearts and Minds...

 

[jeremy]

I think it is more about converting neutrals into enemies. Perhaps make it a little easier to add to the ranks by posting pics at the local Taliban recruiting office of the Marines urinating on their countrymen...

Just sayin...?

Exactly...

 

[J_Wales]

I'll venture a guess that the enemy doesn't wait for an incident like somebody pissing on a corpse to come along to use it as a recruiting tool.

My guess is they already use whatever misinformation and propaganda they can make up to do their recruiting.

This is only an issue because the bleeding hearts are making it an issue.

 

[J_Wales]

The role of the military machine is to destroy the enemy.
Hearts and minds is the role of the diplomat and is for after the enemy is destroyed.

I know we disagree on this and are likely to continue to do so, but mixing these roles contributes to the protracted conflicts we continue to be involved in that never come to a final resolution.

 

[jeremy]

I'll venture a guess that the enemy doesn't wait for an incident like somebody pissing on a corpse to come along to use it as a recruiting tool.

My guess is they already use whatever misinformation and propaganda they can make up to do their recruiting.

You are correct, they do try to actively recruit daily there.
Some Regions/Tribes are very Pro Afghan/US.
Some are very Pro Taliban.
And yet some are playing both sides for their benefit.
And the ones this effects the most are the ones that are sitting on the Fence Undecided on whose side is the worst.

This is only an issue because the bleeding hearts are making it an issue.

And you can feel that way from behind your computer screen. But over there on the Ground crap like this does matter. This will make moving in all of the Pastun areas, interesting and fun. The days of going into a territory
and killing all the males, raping the livestock, slaving the females, burning the structures and salting the Earth are gone just like the Roman Empire.

 

[The Stig]

I'll venture a guess that the enemy doesn't wait for an incident like somebody pissing on a corpse to come along to use it as a recruiting tool.

My guess is they already use whatever misinformation and propaganda they can make up to do their recruiting.

This is only an issue because the bleeding hearts are making it an issue.

IMHO, I think our enemies and the bleeding hearts are eager to capitalize on the opportunity.

 

[jeremy]

The role of the military machine is to destroy the enemy.

Yes and no...
Sometimes the only way to win is to not destroy but to build...

Hearts and minds is the role of the diplomat and is for after the enemy is destroyed.

This only works in Countries that the People trust and recognize a government beyond their Tribe. The Military is the Diplomat to the vast majority of the Country there. What the Individual Soldier does/does not do there can make insane changes in the locals on a daily basis. I have seen it first hand entirely to many times.

I know we disagree on this and are likely to continue to do so, but mixing these roles contributes to the protracted conflicts we continue to be involved in that never come to a final resolution.

Wrong the Mixing of the Roles was what helped settle Germany After WWII...

The mixing of the Roles is about the only damn thing being done right in Afghan right now...

 

[J_Wales]

Indeed.

Forcing the military to fight with at least one arm behind its back in prolonged conflicts "managed" by politicians (many of whom have never put on a uniform) with no resolution is much more fashionable.

pax tecum

 

[J_Wales]

Wrong the Mixing of the Roles was what helped settle Germany After WWII...
..

Yes...AFTER WWII... After destruction of the enemy.

pax tecum

 

[jeremy]

Yes...AFTER WWII... After destruction of the enemy.

Wrong even during the War. The Compassion that US Servicemembers showed is still talked about today in Germany in their own history books...

 

[thebishopp]

I love your idealism.
I hope there's never a humane or sterile war. Realizing the horrors of war will be the only way there's going to be an end to war.
IF you want to be a nice country and fight a nice war than you should flip a coin and be done with it.
IF you're contending that our behavior in war is going to relegate the enemys action towards us then I think you've got your thinking all screwed up.
We're fighting an enemy that has no respect what so ever for life and absolutely NO respect towards us.
I find your thinking naive but honorable. IMHO I wish you were correct.

Without idealism you wouldn't have even a fraction of the illusion of the freedoms you currently think you have

The only way there is going to be an end to war is not in realizing it's horrors. The thing is those who would have us go to war really care nothing for it's "horrors". They only care about using whatever motivators they need to (be it religious, nationalism, etc.) to gain whatever it is they want, be it money, power, notoriety, etc. etc.

They question would be more how do we stop people who want those things from manipulating the people into doing what they want.

I do not contend that our behavior will dictate the enemies behavior towards us. What I am saying is that we can not claim the moral high road if we in fact are not actually walking on it ourselves.

Want to desecrate bodies, torture prisoners, rape children, kill innocents, chop their heads off, hack them in half with blunt axes, cut off their heads with dull wood saws... whatever go for it. Just don't try to be "morally outraged" that the "enemy" does it to us... or surprised if it just makes things worse.

The ultimate in hypocrisy is our prosecution of people as "war criminals" for things we do as well. Ridiculous. Let's do it and be done with it but not try and act like we are somehow better for it. Like it's OK for us but a heinous crime for another.

As far as what our "enemy" does or does not respect. I say how do you know? How do you know what they do or do not respect? People get upset when someone "paints with a wide brush" a group of people or subject of interest that they themselves favor, but man they sure are willing to do it to others without hesitation.

I would be willing to bet that the people in power there who want war don't have the same motivations as the people who are actually doing the fighting (as is most often the case in war). It's been awhile and I can't remember the exact phrase but I recall that Patton said something about it. Officers and Politicians from both sides sitting around eating dinner together while their soldiers were killing each other. Didn't sit well with him.

In the end I believe that our "enemy" is fighting for something they believe, against an "enemy" that they were taught to hate. Pawns, probably taught that we are trying to destroy their way of life and take over their country. Much like what we have been taught about every "enemy" we've ever had. It was not so long ago that it was the "communist" that was born hating Americans and raised purely for the purpose of destroying the United States. Now it's the "muslim".

I can "respect" an enemy that believes in what he is fighting for. Doesn't mean I will hesitate to kill him if I need to, but I can respect his motivations even if I believe they are misguided as long as he truly believes them.



But back to what you said regarding stopping wars...I think there was much wisdom in what Hermann Goering (Hitler’s Reich Marshall) said:

Here is the complete quote, with a comment by Gilbert that occurred
midway through it:

"Nazi leader Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during
the Easter recess of the Nuremberg trials, 1946 April 18, quoted in
Gilbert's book 'Nuremberg Diary.'

Goering: Why, of course, the people don't want war. Why would some
poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that
he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece.

Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in
England, nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is
understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who
determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the
people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or
a parliament, or a communist dictatorship.

Gilbert: There is one difference. In a democracy the people have some
say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the
United States only Congress can declare wars.

Goering: Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the
bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them
they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of
patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in
any country."

 

[J_Wales]

Wrong even during the War. The Compassion that US Servicemembers showed is still talked about today in Germany in their own history books...

Of course... What else is the country responsible for one of the largest genocides in history going to say about that period? Heck, last time I was there displaying the face or images of their leader from that time was highly restricted.

pax tecum