Absolutely! When I recoil in horror at unspeakable brutality, that is precisely the same as unspeakable brutality. Couldn’t be clearer.
Hey, you said “…where lots of people have said it’s completely okay for government officials to behave in a completely lawless fashion, and where lots of people think we should be violating treaties up and down the wazoo.”
…and since this thread is about alleged wanton recklessness by our soldiers in Afghanistan, 2+2=?
I wasn’t trying to offend you. I thought your implication was clear. Maybe I was mistaken. But at any rate, you were painting the US populace with a pretty broad brush there.
The part that puts you beyond the fringe is when you jump past the point of saying the soldiers simply didn’t care if they were executing children, and started saying that the soldiers were seeking children to execute. Why on earth would we send soldiers to hunt down children? I’ll agree, terrorist tactics are not above our morals, but terrorism is usually accompanied by much credit claiming and chest thumping. The attempted cover up makes it resemble negligence and recklessness to me- simplest explanation and all that.
Der Trihs: Location California :dubious:
Why not go over there and defend these children from the heinous American Soldiers? Talk is cheap.
How exactly can someone be an enemy if they are implementing policies that a lot of people want? Like I said, I don’t know exactly what happened here, and I’m waiting to come to a conclusion. But to this day, when there’s a discussion of something such as Abu Grahib, there are plenty of people on this board who think what happened there was proper policy, or nothing more than fraternity pranks. And this is despite multiple convictions, a pretty damning IG report and statements from Congressional oversight panels. If someone can call that torture and those extra-judicial or non-combatant killings “fraternity pranks,” then why would that person be bothered by other torture or extra-judicial or non-combatant killings?
I’m hardly painting with a broad brush. I said nothing about the entire US populace, nor did I even indicate how widespread these viewpoints were. I stated that these viewpoints are now considered an acceptable part of our mainstream discourse. If lots of people can freely advocate for torture and lawbreaking and not have society treat them like some outcast, then it’s fairly obvious that torture and law breaking is within the Overton window. That’s hardly painting with a broad brush. I personally think torture and lawbreaking is repugnant, and hopefully you do too, but there are a lot of people here who think it’s just fine to do those things.
If I say gambling is now part of acceptable mainstream culture, am I painting with a broad brush? Sure, there are a lot of people who are against gambling, but if you advocated for legalized gambling, I don’t think you’d be treated as a pariah. And if someone were to pop up in a thread stating that Americans supported gambling, would you act as if it was some outrageous accusation? Of course, it might be the majority of people don’t support gambling, and you could clarify that with poll data and the like, but it’s not as if the claim that Americans support gambling is absurd on its face.
Maybe I could clarify this by taking another tactic. If I was running for office, and I started advocating for legalized kiddie porn, do you think my candidacy would go anywhere? If I wrote an editorial advocating for kiddie porn, do you think any newspaper would print it? I highly doubt it. If someone were to pop up saying Americans support kiddie porn, I’d find that statement absurd on it’s face, and it would take a huge amount of evidence to convince me otherwise.
But right now, in this country, the idea that government personnel would torture or break laws is mainstream enough that I could freely advocate for those things and get my editorials printed and run for office and get elected. It’s highly possible. So, I just find it odd for people to act as if suggesting that someone engaged in torture or law breaking is beyond the pale.
Fighting against the Taliban
To free Afghanistan
They shot young boys, as asleep they lay,
Those assholes in the Green Beret.
– SSgt. Barry Sadler, somewhat revised to reflect modern reality
Well put. It is exactly what it comes off as – a very murderous amateur hour.
Problem is, it’s been going on for close to a decade now.
Maybe I should have qualified that with “if the allegations are true”, but my point was that I don’t see why people are so concerned with whether or not the the soldiers when following misinformation, when that’s not even the biggest issue here.
That said, based on what I’ve read so far, I’ll be very surprised if what actually happened isn’t a lot closer to the eye witness reports than the official story. That’s if anybody even follows up on this.
Some things about this nag at me for no good reason, perhaps. Why were the weapons silenced? To what end? If they were under fire when they arrived, as has been alleged, then there was no element of surprise to conserve.
And how come they didn’t notice that the enemy didn’t have beards? In a country where just about every man you see has some sort of facial hair, from the scruffy to the spectacular. And they didn’t notice that none of these dreaded insurgents had beards?
Must be that “fog of war” again.
This is from a citizen of a presumed ally nation that accepts our generous funding, military training, technology and weapons…real amateurs, huh? I mean, the Mossad would never do anything stupid like implicate themselves in an assassination of an alleged enemy non-combatant in a foreign country while using faked passports…right? And get caught at it too? Yeah. Real amateurs, those guys. C’mon Alessan, that wasn’t accurate and you know it.
Please tell me what happened to the brigadier general supposedly “in charge” of Abu Ghraib, and the soldiers under her command that were implicated in abuses?
Did they get off scott free? Why, by golly, no they didn’t. Abu Ghraib was a massive PR blow for America, and rightly so. The fault however lies in the lack of true leadership in the chain of command of the facility, most notably that bitch Janis Karpinski that tried to cry that the black helicopters overwhelmed her command. SHE is to blame for the lack of leadership. If in fact something was going on whereby CIA or whomever she claimed was usurping her command, there are channels for complaining about that, and it isn’t the media after the fact.
The article from the Times lists three separate witnesses saying that the children were killed. It’s not just Wafa, it’s the headmaster and the village elder. Given three witnesses testifying to this, the statement that there is “no direct evidence” is false.
Now, I have my doubts that U.S. soldiers would simply have purposely murdered innocent children in cold blood. But we need to remember that there is nothing impossible about soldiers doing this. Fighting men have been butchering the children of the enemy, for no better reason than sport or hatred of the entire enemy nation or a desire to spread terror or merely to vent the intolerable stress of combat, since the earliest times. The Apaches did it, the Romans did it, the Japanese and Germans did it, Americans have done it to Indians, Arabs have done it to Israelis, Israelis have done it to Arabs.
Are our soldiers better than that now? I fervently hope most of them are. But if we want our soldiers to be better than that, and if we want them to stay better than that, then we can’t afford to simply assume the best, pat them on the back, and say “I’m sure you had a good reason” every time they blow a child’s head off. I hope the soldiers made an innocent mistake, but they still should have to answer for it and justify their actions. Because when there is no consequence to killing children, soldiers will indeed kill children. History teaches us that if it teaches us anything.
Very well put. Reasonable, rational and respectable. Great post, and I now want your newsletter.
As for the bit about our soldiers being “better than that now”, I think it has to be put into perspective of not only SOP for soldiers now, but a lack of internet/video/news exposure then.
In an era of “everything is on YouTube”, now that we are allegedly “seeing everything” we are now in the unique situation of trying to interpret “what we see”.
If there were cameras during some of America’s other “more nobler” wars, I still think you’d be seeing some serious shit. Why? War is indeed hell on Earth. People that have never experienced military life and/or actual combat cannot possibly understand. The “Fog Of War” people often deride as some lame excuse (because they’ve never been there, done that) is REAL.
The wars I feel America fought that were actually “noble in concept” (and by that I mean the cause for the war was pretty much clear and just) were the Revolutionary War, The Civil War, WWI, WWII, First Persian Gulf War and that’s pretty much it.
But that doesn’t dishonor those that served in our military in any other excursion. Nor does it explain what is perceived to be as a new, problematic “rash” of minority activity on the part of our military in the wars we’re in now.
American soldiers are never as great as they are portrayed in wars that “matter” to the American mind, but neither are they as “dishonorable/horrorific” in unpopular wars either.
They are equally sacrificial in a sense. They are American soldiers, and if this is your country, you should honor their service.
I know, I know, the “just following orders” argument for the Nazis. Yeah, OK, whatever. Politicians govern our military.
Aww, that’s cold, money!
Typical American military worship. Politicians scum; soldiers, superior beings. Government evil, military good. Soldiers are noble heroes who should be admired, and at the same time mindless automatons who can’t be held responsible for their actions.
I’m not going to honor child killing rapists and torturers just because I happen to live in the same country. Nor am I going to let every evil act they commit slide just because they wear an American uniform. Nor do I think for one moment that the people making excuses would do the same if the victims were American and the perpetrators not.
Typical hyperbole and extrapolation. Yeah. Der, I’m not saying that anyone that ever serves in the military is a hero, nor worthy of “worship”.
What I am saying, which is undeniable, is that its in our Constitution as a country that the military always be beholden to civilian trust/leadership, and there’s a very good reason for that. So your problem is with voters, mouthbreathers, birthers, etc that vote the people into office that afford our armies the opportunity to kill. A minority of them will relish the thought and make news stories, but most will just go about their jobs and hope to survive.
Now, you can argue that militaries are always bad and have always been a necessary evil…or always killers…and both would be true. So what? Its always up to politicians not only IF the military will be used, but HOW it will be used.
Look man, idealistically I’m honestly with you. I wish that armies were never conceived of. They ALWAYS breed war and death, and not solely amongst combatants. The degrees of atrocities vary throughout history.
I’m calling it as I see it. Just because the U.S. is our ally and patron, that doesn’t mean that a private citizen like myself can’t offer some constructive criticism (and for the record - Israel provides the U.S. with as much training as the U.S. provides Israel, as well as no small amount of weapons and technology). As someone with some small experience in these matters - infantry warfare and counter-terrorism - I can identify a non-functioning intelligence appartus when I see it. And frankly, I’m not the first to note the sorry state of U.S. Military Intelligence.
Bringing up the Dubai Affair is hardly relevant, BTW. The decision to take out the target camne from the political, not service level, and having the agents “made” after the fact is an acceptable risk of the trade. The Mossad (if it was them) got the right guy, didn’t hurt any bystanders, and got all their agents out alive. I wouldn’t call it a failure by any means.
Have been following this but haven’t wanted to really weigh in on it. But ISTM there are a lot of questions here, and that there is a distinct lack of any real evidence for several of the more volatile one’s.
First off, the facts…it seems clear that several civilians were indeed killed, and that the majority of them were what we would consider children (I’m unsure how rural Afghani’s would consider males between 8 and 12, but I assume they also would consider them ‘children’).
Outside of that, however, it seems…less clear. The cites range from it being ‘US Special Forces’ to ‘Western Troops’ to a mixed force of native Afghani’s, possibly US Special Forces and, I suppose ‘other’ (presumably one or more of the other NATO allied forces). There also seems to be some question about the whole ‘execution’ aspect, with some cites discussing it (in terms of supposed ‘locals’ anecdotes and statements) to others that don’t mention it at all, instead talking about a possible fire fight.
From this unpromising body of data and contradictory assertions a lot of people are jumping to a lot of conclusions here, IMHO. Personally, I don’t know what happened, but while I’m willing to acknowledge that some folks will take anything our military says with a huge grain of salt (to say the least, in the case of someone like Der), I don’t see why the ‘locals’ assertions or anecdotes should be necessarily taken at face value or automatically assumed to be true either.
My own completely uninformed opinion on what MIGHT have actually happened range from the well known fact that some of our valiant Afghani allies tend to get completely out of control (there are a lot of documented instances, especially early in the war, of Afghani allies summarily executing prisoners, regardless of age because, well, that’s what they had been doing and having done to them for the decade or so of civil war that we had inserted our selves into), to the kids being caught in a cross fire between Taliban or other combatants (ranging from other bands of insurgents, militia or even drug guards).
I, personally, find it incredibly difficult to swallow the line that US Special Forces (who are a highly trained and disciplined fighting force, not just in combat but also in the concepts of ‘hearts and minds’) handcuffed Afghani students, dragged them out and then summarily executed them. Hell, I find it hard to swallow that a Spec Ops team would handcuff ANY Afghani prisoners and then summarily execute them. Not because I don’t think these guys could or would be that ruthless, but because it would be so STUPID. I’m also not seeing any of our NATO allies doing anything like this.
Which brings me back to our valiant Afghani allies, who are usually local militia or tribesmen, and who are both undisciplined AND who tend to hold grudges against…well, everyone who is probably not part of their tribe, clan or group. I could certainly see (and believe) that THEY might do something like this, especially if they weren’t under the direct command of US or NATO forces.
The point of the above musings though is I see little actual evidence, one way or the other. And I see no reason to, on the one hand, automatically discount any investigations or assertions by our (or NATO’s) military while on the other hand automatically taking the word of the locals, who may have agendas or motives completely unknown to us…and who, even if they believe every word they are saying, may or may not actually know what happened and only be guessing or extrapolating. And, being honest, I don’t see any reason why the reverse couldn’t be true, and that someone (US Special Forces, NATO allies, or Afghani irregular allies) couldn’t have actually done what was claimed, or that this all went down some other way (or even that some other group did the executions…say the Taliban, or maybe the local warlord or drug king to squeeze the local villagers for some reason).
Seems to me we just don’t know enough to really be able to do more than speculate out our collective asses and get all worked up about it. And, bottom line, maybe it’s time to seriously consider getting the fuck out of there and letting them go back to killing themselves they way they would like too, without us there to muddy things up for them…
-XT
Fair enough. But you owe me money!
Did you even read my post? Did you see the part where I mentioned the multiple convictions? Why are you asking me to tell you what happened to the soldiers when I’ve already stated what happened to them?