|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
 Posted - 06/01/2006 : 09:38:11
|
As the months have rolled on, it's looking more and more like US Marines killed 15-24 unarmed civilians, including children, in Haditha. Here's the time line thus far: http://english.ohmynews.com/ArticleView/article_view.asp?no=296124&rel_no=1
On NPR today a military official was talking about additional "moral and ethical training" for soldiers. Lieutenant-General Peter Chiarelli, commander of the Multinational Corps in Iraq, said, quote:
As military professionals, it is important that we take time to reflect on the values that separate us from our enemies.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5036686.stm
Seems to me that's part of the reason soldiers have occasionally targeted Iraqi citizens. I mean, who are the "enemies"? Tony Snow is blathering on about how the insugency has been quelled because the current terrorists are mostly not Al Quada, but rather, supporters of Sadaam and others in opposition to the new government. So does that mean that any Iraqi opposed to US presence and the new government is a potential "enemy"? And how the hell is an American soldier supposed to tell the difference between an Iraqi "enemy" and a civilian when the terrorists are mostly civilians?
When my brother joined the Marines in 1998 he was forced to sing racist songs about killing (insert a variety of racial and ethnic slurs). He was shown a picture of a dead Japanese civilian killed in Hiroshima and asked by his superior "Isn't that great?" When he replied, "No, it's wrong." he was chastised. This is why my brother got the fuck out by the end of boot camp and is now an actor. I can't imagine that training of marines has changed all that much between 1998 and now. My dad said when he was in the army in the 70's they sung about killing Vietnamese people, so teaching soldiers ethnic and racial hatred is the norm.
I know a lot of these young guys and gals are good people who can think outside of their training, and many can let all the racist crap go in one ear and out the other, and realize Iraqis are just as human as anyone else. But a lot are also impressionable soldiers who went into the military right after high school. A lot have never left their little niche in the USA before being sent to Iraq. I'm sure plenty had racial prejudices before they went into the military. And they are all trained to be able to kill without overthinking the matter. So is "moral and ethical training" really going to do much good at this stage in the game?
Maybe we should just acknowledge that included in the cost of war is turning some soldiers into monsters, as well as the deaths, injuries, and monetary costs. And maybe if we had considered the whole cost of war, we wouldn't be in one right now.
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2006 : 10:53:21 [Permalink]
|
There are some fundamental problems, as I see them.
Marines, Soldiers, and military personnel in general are killers. They volunteer and are trained to do a job, a necessary part of which involves killing "the bad guys."
Terrorists look like civilians. They have to, or they would quickly be killed by Marines, Soldiers, and military personnel in general. Terrorists know that, by looking like civilians, they will not be killed until they attack; this provides for them the advantage of surprise.
Every military officer takes an ethics course, part of which involves the distinction between combatants and non-combatants, and the Doctrine of Double Effect.
Military personnel in Iraq are being attacked by people who look like civilians. The only defense against this is to kill combatants, even when they look like civilians. The horrible consequence is that those people who look like civilians may very well be only civilians. There is no good military solution to this problem.
More "moral and ethical training" will not solve this problem.
The Iraqi people need to force out the terrorists, realizing that every time somebody who looks like a civilian kills a Soldier or Marine it puts everybody who looks like a civilian at risk, because it makes the military personnel more paranoid and more likely to unintentionaly commit an atrocious act.
The US military needs to investigate without bias every report of civilian deaths; and, if there is not enough justification, arrest those responsible. The problem with this course of action, of course, is that it weakens the readiness of each fighting unit, since every officer will feel compelled to wait until some of his men are killed, and only then can the person who looks like a civilian be attacked. |
 |
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2006 : 11:21:19 [Permalink]
|
| I understand that the current enemy cannot be distinguished from the civilian population, but some were reported to be children - very young children. What could possibly go through someone's mind (someone who isn't mentally ill) that killing a young child is eliminating the enemy is beyond me. |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 06/01/2006 : 15:07:19 [Permalink]
|
What's been coming out about this incident implies rather strongly that it was hardly a case of being unable to distinguish between fighters and noncombatants in the heat of battle but rather a coldly carried-out reprisal against a population thought to be hostile.
Whether carried out as policy or not (and thank the FSM that it is definitely not policy), reprisals against the civilian population are still war crimes. Period. End of story.
Unfortunately, since the concept of war crimes was first formulated the record of nations getting serious about investigating and punishing crimes committed by their own forces has left a great deal to be desired. As far as I can tell, the only country to have made a serious and sustained effort to do this is post-World War II Germany, and they had both considerable tutelage in how to do it (from the Allies) and a powerful incentive to get it right, it being an inescapable condition of their ever being permitted to rejoin the roster of "civilized" nations.
|
"The Republican agenda is to turn the United States into a third-world shithole." -P.Z.Myers |
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 02:26:16 [Permalink]
|
| I can sort of understand (not condone but understand) going bananas and killing men, maybe even women. But I can't fathom shooting children because you're upset your buddy was blown up. There is no excuse for that at all. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 09:53:27 [Permalink]
|
All military personel in combat are well aware that if they kill unjustly, they will be punished. I don't think moral training will be effective. Most military personel know what is right or wrong and will not kill innocent civilians on purpose. The people that would do this (there are some) won't listen to the training anyway.
Also, why isn't the ACLU complaining about the government teaching morals. Whose morals are they going to teach?
It is also interesting to note that the media and our government point out that radical Islam is only a small portion of the peaceful Islamic faith but they assume that because 8 or so marines might have commited a crime, the whole US military is suspect. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 13:29:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Also, why isn't the ACLU complaining about the government teaching morals. Whose morals are they going to teach?
For one thing, I would guess that they're going to be taught to adhere to the Geneva Conventions. According to the first link in Marf's OP:...the training would emphasise "professional military values and the importance of disciplined, professional conduct in combat" as well as Iraqi cultural expectations... For another thing, it's being called "ethics" training, not moral training.
For a third thing, if I remember correctly, the military has always treated civil liberties a bit different from the rest of the citizenry. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 17:21:14 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
quote:
Originally posted by Robb
Also, why isn't the ACLU complaining about the government teaching morals. Whose morals are they going to teach?
For one thing, I would guess that they're going to be taught to adhere to the Geneva Conventions. According to the first link in Marf's OP:...the training would emphasise "professional military values and the importance of disciplined, professional conduct in combat" as well as Iraqi cultural expectations... For another thing, it's being called "ethics" training, not moral training.
For a third thing, if I remember correctly, the military has always treated civil liberties a bit different from the rest of the citizenry.
Ya, I know, I was trying to be funny. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
JohnOAS
SFN Regular
Australia
800 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 17:55:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by beskeptigal
I can sort of understand (not condone but understand) going bananas and killing men, maybe even women. But I can't fathom shooting children because you're upset your buddy was blown up. There is no excuse for that at all.
Killing anyone because you're upset has got to be unacceptable to most intelligent people. Revenge attacks on non-participants is irrational. Going bananas is going bananas, understanding is mostly irrelevant.
Unfortunately, there are many instances where children are used as weapons, with or without their knowledge/intent or even actively participating in conflict. In many militias, boys (and girls, although usually to a lesser extent) of single-digit ages are taught how to and will fire upon their enemies. What's a soldier to do in these circumstances?
I'm not a soldier. I do however work with law-enforcement and military personnel. These people are often criticised for their cushy jobs, conditions or attitudes. Sometimes these criticisms are understandable, during peaceful/inactive periods. However, when you understand the jobs these people have to do when the going gets tough, I find you tend to be a lot less critical. (This paragraph, BTW is not aimed at anything anyone here has said directly, I just wanted to say it). |
John's just this guy, you know. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 06/02/2006 : 18:01:47 [Permalink]
|
I don't think this is about momentary rage. It is possible to murder anyone if you see them as less than human.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
| Edited by - H. Humbert on 06/02/2006 18:05:43 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2006 : 00:02:04 [Permalink]
|
quote:
When my brother joined the Marines in 1998 he was forced to sing racist songs about killing (insert a variety of racial and ethnic slurs). He was shown a picture of a dead Japanese civilian killed in Hiroshima and asked by his superior "Isn't that great?" When he replied, "No, it's wrong." he was chastised. This is why my brother got the fuck out by the end of boot camp and is now an actor. I can't imagine that training of marines has changed all that much between 1998 and now. My dad said when he was in the army in the 70's they sung about killing Vietnamese people, so teaching soldiers ethnic and racial hatred is the norm.
So... two anecdotes and you conclude teaching racial hatred is the "norm"?
Interesting.
quote:
Maybe we should just acknowledge that included in the cost of war is turning some soldiers into monsters, as well as the deaths, injuries, and monetary costs. And maybe if we had considered the whole cost of war, we wouldn't be in one right now.
Want to place a bet on that? I'll cover any ammount you care to bet.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2006 : 10:47:56 [Permalink]
|
Robb wrote: quote:
It is also interesting to note that the media and our government point out that radical Islam is only a small portion of the peaceful Islamic faith but they assume that because 8 or so marines might have commited a crime, the whole US military is suspect.
Please quote me something from that article or from anything anyone here has said that makes the entire military suspect of encouraging the cold-blooded murder of innocent citizens. The entire military isn't suspect. The concern is that by simply being engaged in this conflict it is inevitable that such horrors will occur.
I agree with Humbert who wrote: quote:
I don't think this is about momentary rage. It is possible to murder anyone if you see them as less than human.
And that is what war does: it separates people into good guys and bad guys and it is the norm anywhere (not just the USA) to start to view the “enemy” as subhuman. It is not the norm of all religions to view other people as subhuman, but it is the norm for radical religions to do that. So maybe the comparison you should be doing is not the military with all of Islam, but the military with radical Islam, since even the majority of Muslims with radical beliefs are not actual perpetrators of terrorism. Or maybe any comparison is simply invalid, which I tend to think.
Dude wrote: quote:
So... two anecdotes and you conclude teaching racial hatred is the "norm"?
Interesting.
I was adding two anecdotes to what is common knowledge. Almost everyone knows that racial and ethnic slurs are regularly used by military personnel, or have you never heard the terms “gook”, “jap”, “Charlie” or “sand nigger”? I typed “racist cadences” into google and immediately came across this testimony from an ex-Marine sergeant: http://www.counterpunch.org/white1023.html He says:quote:
In boot camp, deceit and manipulation accompany the necessity to motivate troops to murder on command. You can't take civilians from the street, give them machine guns, and expect them to kill without question in a democratic society; therefore people must be indoctrinated to do so. This fact alone should sound off alarms in our collective American brain. If the cause of war is justified, then why do we have to be put through boot camp? If you answer that we have to be trained in killing skills, well, then why is most of boot camp not focused on combat training? Why are privates shown videos of U.S. military massacres while playing Metallica in the background, thus causing us to scream with the joy of the killer instinct as brown bodies are obliterated? Why do privates answer every command with an enthusiastic, "kill!!" instead of, "yes, sir!!" like it is in the movies? Why do we sing cadences like these?:
"Throw some candy in the school yard, watch the children gather round. Load a belt in your M-60, mow them little bastards down!!" and "We're gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn, gonna rape, kill, pillage and burn!!"
These chants are meant to motivate the troops; they enjoy it, salivate from it, and get off on it. If one repeats these hundreds of times, one eventually begins to accept them as paradigmatically valid.
and this
|
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 06/03/2006 10:50:16 |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2006 : 18:34:02 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I was adding two anecdotes to what is common knowledge.
So, you claim that teaching racist hatred in military bootcamps is the norm and then claim it is "common knowledge" when pressed.
Sure, you can goggle up some annecdotes to further support your claim, and nobody doubts that there are some racists in our military.
But to claim that is the "norm" and that everyone knows it... is bullshit.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
beskeptigal
SFN Die Hard
USA
3834 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2006 : 13:11:34 [Permalink]
|
Dude, the military is well aware that you first need to dehumanize the enemy before soldiers will readily kill. While it isn't taught in boot camp during peacetime, racism is certainly encouraged during war.
There was the same problem in Vietnam. It's impossible to dehumanize the enemy and not have it spill over into the allies when both are from the same country/culture/ethnicity or whatever. It's one reason it is so hard to fight within a civil war where both the good guys and the bad guys look the same.
John, it's one thing to shoot a child you believe is coming toward you with a bomb, it's quite another to burst into a house and shoot the children inside. |
| Edited by - beskeptigal on 06/05/2006 13:13:08 |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 06/05/2006 : 15:05:18 [Permalink]
|
beskeptical wrote: quote:
While it isn't taught in boot camp during peacetime, racism is certainly encouraged during war.
But be, my brother's experience happened in 1998; we weren't at war then.
I haven't responded to Dude largely because I think an interview with an ex-Marine sergeant is more than a mere annecdote. I also named a whole list of racial slurs that have been used by the military and it is common knowledge that they were used. Are those all isolated examples? Are we do believe that between Vietnam and now that the military has just stopped using ethnic and racial discrimination to demonize the enemy enough that soldiers can kill without reservation?
More on "hajji" as an ethnic slur used by the military: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hajji
quote:
From March 2003 onwards, just before the invasion of Iraq, the term Hajji has been documented among U.S. military personnel as a reference to all things "civilian" in the Middle East. Some consider the use an ethnic slur directed at Muslims and Middle-Eastern people in general. The term has gained some minor use beyond the military also. So used, the term is often collective in sense, describing a community of Muslims or Middle-Eastern people, vehicles used by civilians in the Middle East, civilian dwellings, and civilian authority figures, rather than directed towards a particular individual.
I would also point out that this debate might largely rest on how we define "the norm" and "common knowledge". Here's what I meant by that in detail: While racism may not be on the military training books, it is a common experience in boot camp to sing cadences which use ethnic and racial slurs or for enlistees to hear racial slurs used by their superiors. I base this statement on what I've heard from everyone I know in the military (my brother, 3 friends about my age, my father and one Uncle) as well as accounts and interviews I've read written by vets from the Vietnam war, old cartoons and posters from WWII, news articles, etc. My claim that everybody knows about this is, admittedly, based on my projecting much of my own experience onto others. I assume most people know a few people in the military and that they occasionally read. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
