Members of U.S. platoon in Afghanistan accused of killing civilians for sport

[kin hell]

The most extravagant idea that can be born in the head of a political thinker is to believe that it suffices for people to enter, weapons in hand, among a foreign people and expect to have its laws and constitution embraced.  It is in the nature of things that the progress of reason is slow and no one loves armed missionaries; the first lesson of nature and prudence is to repulse them as enemies.  One can encourage freedom, never create it by an invading force.”

Maximilien Robespierre

Speech to the Jacobin Club, Paris, 1792


............sometimes the message takes a while to sink in.

[generousgeorge]

Okay, okay......     Lets get the record (and my intentions) straight.


1.) I do not regard soldiers doing their duty, no matter how dangerous or difficult, as heroes.

2.) I'm an offshore fisherman. I know how dangerous the sea can be. Still, there is no comparision to the dangers of nature and the danger of our fellow humans armed with modern weapons trying to deliberately do us harm. Also, the fisherman are getting paid much, much more for their risk than the soldier and they are not required to spend 14 straight months at sea.

3.) In comparision none of the "dangerous" jobs listed are close to the same category of danger and mental stress that results from sustained combat. I don't comprehend why anyone would even try to make them synonomous. It tells me that those maintaining that opinion are either very self serving for the sake of their position or just have no real idea the danger and stress of sustained combat operations.

4.) Young people that join the military have no idea that the job of adventure and patriotism blah, blah, blah they sign up for is not like the movies or adventure novels. Nobody really understands the horror of combat unless they have been there. So, while there is truth to the fact that they signed up, once they realize their mistake there is no going back. The fisherman after one trip, can say "screw this" and not go back. The soldier has no choice (other than to go to jail) and many are put in combat for 14 months straight, go home for 6 months and then back to hell for another 14 months.  Saying they are volunteers and comparing that to dangerous civilian jobs is insulting, self serving and ignorant.

5.) In the for what it's worth category, there probably is not much merit to the term heroes in general. I received 4 Bronze Stars in Vietnam. I only did what I needed to do to stay alive and keep my comrades alive. It was really not a choice I made. The medals and talk of heroes is really just grist for the recruiting propoganda mill.

[plethora]

^^^ Ok. I can agree with most the above. I don't want to get picky... I think the point has been made. 

[generousgeorge]

Ahhhh... Thanks, plethora.....reason and good intentions overcome difference of opinion...too bad the Christians could not be so flexible.   

[Frank]

Asmody said...."Suffering, both mentally and physically, does not elevate anyone to hero status by default. Just because I am "fighting for a country" (whatever that means these days) does not automatically grant me any more respect from other people than one should have for every other human being."

Bull Shit!!  Asmody, so you think a day at war is just like your day in the frickin office.

You don't think these young people should be respected for the inhuman conditions and tasks they are asked to perform? Whats wrong with you? Plethora is the one throwing around the hero word here. He is presuming that someone, some group (somebody) is treating more soldiers as "heros" than deserve it.

You seem to agree that fighting a war and seeing your comrades die and having to try and kill the enemy is just another day at the office and deserves no more respect than anyone else putting in a hard days work at McDonalds.

You two elitists snobs need to get your heads out of that dark place and recognize the extraordinary conditions and tasks our leaders are asking these young people to do. And.... then show a little fucking gratitude for their sacrifice.

I wonder if either one of you could survive a week of what these people put up with for over a year.  Very sad!

So should the title heroes be extended to the taliban also. After all they are taking far greater risks than our soldiers are. No artillery, tanks, air support, drones, body armour, high tech equipment for them. Just an AK47 and away you go. Or does only one side get to be heroes?

[Asmoday]

Okay.... Asmody.......  I see that because I am angry at your (and others) insensitive comments, that you are using that to dis my comments.

No, not because you were angry. Because you tried to out-scream anyone who did not share your particular position.

And while we're at it, I reject the notion that my comments were insensitive.

Very well....I have my respectful listening hat on and I reread your post.

Too little, too late.

As you have proven in this thread and in your reaction to posts from people not sharing your opinion, you are one of those people that jump on certain catchphrases (in this case that would have been "soldiers are not automatically heroes") and ignore everything else. Then you simply try to badger the other side into submission by screaming the loudest and hurling red herrings.

You only put on your "respectful listening hat" after the other tactic didn't have the desired effect.

I see you served in the military. What branch? What did you do? Did you go to war? If you don't mind my asking.

I've had my fair share of things to see and live through. But apart from that I have no interest in sharing anything of it with you.

Who is "throwing around the word heroes" How did that become my position. Maybe I read too much into your (and others) posts, but I see a lack of recognition of a very dangerous and hardship filled job being disguised as ...... well it's not really that difficult, kinda like commercial fishing, so why should we recognize the soldier in wartime anymore than the commercial fisherman?

Well, I guess it became your position after you said so several times!

And saying "soldiers are not automatically heroes" and that it does not demand default additional respect is not equal to not recognizing hardship and suffering.

For one thing the fish dont have AK 47s. You are downgrading the suffering and agony of war to the level of the fisherman in bad weather all under the guise of......  well, they are all not heroes. There is an undertone of lack of recognition for the hardship and inhuman cruelty of war these young people are thrust into by using the "strawman" well then .... "justify these people as heroes" . That is not and has not been my position, rather, it is your and others "Strawman" position you have bestowed upon me.  Yes or No  please??.

No. There is no strawman except the one you have been building in the form of a false dilemma, that not acknowledging all soldiers as heroes carries "an undertone of lack of recognition" with it or somehow equals thumbing ones nose at them.

PS.... I'm not you dear friend.

Indeed. Yet it is more effective than using all the more descriptive titles imaginable while replying to a post like yours. 

[generousgeorge]

Frank....yes the poor misguided young men fighting for the Taliban have just as much right to be called heroes. IMHO

[generousgeorge]

Asmody....you greatly misjudge me and we will have to agree to disagree. If you would like to start over with any of these issues I would be willing to try again.

[Gnu Ordure]

GenerousGeorge:

In the for what it's worth category, there probably is not much merit to the term heroes in general. I received 4 Bronze Stars in Vietnam. I only did what I needed to do to stay alive and keep my comrades alive.

Let's not throw the baby out with the the bathwater.

The term 'hero' applies when people do more than is expected of them ("above and beyond the call of duty", as the phrase goes). Or when people volunteer to do something which carries extra risk and danger instead of choosing to something relatively safer.

There's a case in point in the UK at the moment; a little 89-year-old lady, Eileen Nearne, died last month in Torquay. None of her neighbours knew that she was anyone noteworthy. It turns out that in the war she was an agent of the SOE (the Special Operations Executive, aka Churchill's Secret Army), trained to operate as a spy behind enemy lines - crucial work in preparation for the D-Day landings.

In March 1944 she went to occupied France to join the resistance network as a radio operator. So far, so heroic. Five months later her radio was detected and she was captured by the Nazis.

Here's the amazing bit.

She thought up a cover story to explain the radio. The Nazis then tortured her - and she stuck to her story.

That is heroism.

She refused to admit she was a spy, she revealed no useful information, she betrayed none of her colleagues - and this is a 23-year-old woman (not even a soldier) being tortured by Nazis.

Imagine that.

Can any of us, hand on heart, say that we would and could do the same? On the whole, if we learn that someone has revealed something under torture, we tend not to blame them, because it's understandable.

Yet Eileen resisted, and saved her colleagues' lives (and no doubt many soldiers' lives)  - which definitely makes her a hero.

Yesterday she got the hero's send-off she deserved - report of the the funeral from the Guardian. Her wiki article here. (She survived the war by escaping from the forced labour camp where she was held. Imagine that).



Respect and gratitude to Eileen Nearne. RIP.



Gnu.

[xphobe]

a little 89-year-old lady, Eileen Nearne, died last month in Torquay.

Torquay?  I'm picturing one of the sweet little old ladies who lives in a room upstairs in Fawlty Towers.

[Ananukia]

I live in new york, and I want a sleek handgun so much.

I realize it's as personal as buying shoes, but may I recommend the Springfield XDm line?  I can't say enough good things about them.  Light, ultra-reliable, accurate, thinner than a Glock, hi cap, comfortable to hold, a buttload of safetys... what's not to like?

I prefer the look of antiques. C96 is hot shit.

[Gnu Ordure]

Torquay?  I'm picturing one of the sweet little old ladies who lives in a room upstairs in Fawlty Towers.

Either of those sweet little old ladies could have killed Basil at any moment with a single karate chop to the neck - as he knew well, hence his obsequiousness in their presence.

[generousgeorge]

I guess it's an American thing, but for my taste the word 'heroes' gets thrown around too much when it comes to soldiers (and I say that as someone who once was one). Being in the army and being deployed does not make you a hero by default. The term 'hero' for soldiers is used so often these days that it doesn't have much meaning to me anymore.

No, the majority of all soldiers are not heroes. Suffering, both mentally and physically, does not elevate anyone to hero status by default. Just because I am "fighting for a country" (whatever that means these days) does not automatically grant me any more respect from other people than one should have for every other human being.

Okay..... You don't get second chances in life, but you can perhaps on posts on this website. I over reacted to your comments Asmoday and also responded to them grouped with comments from others whose opinions may not necessarily have been shared by you.

I apologize for that.


As far as your first paragraph, I agree with you. Everything you say there is true.

Second paragraph.....  I pretty much agree with as well. Suffering is not the primry and certainly not the only criteria for being a hero. Getting more respect for suffering the mental and physical ordeal of war as a relative term compared to the respect we give all others was/is not an issue for me.

The issue for me is the discounting by some posts of the mental and physical challenges and suffering from war our young soldiers are forced to endure. In that same vein, I resent and disagree with  posts that trivialize or understate those hardships.

The final issue is whether or not respect is due the vast majority of soldiers for enduring the hell of war because they relied on the direction of their misguided national leaders that they were "fighting for their country".

What bothers me the most is that many posts seem to want to deny any of these soldiers any more respect for enduring the hell of war than the respect due plumbers and commercial fishermen etc. for doing their "dangerous" jobs.

Rather they want to lump the majority of the soldiers with the idiots publicized by our sensation driven press who, love to focus on those few who, for whatever reason, go off the deep end and commit atrocious and evil acts against humanity.

 The vast majority of soldiers fighting "for their country" are  due a great deal of respect for the great hardships and dangers they were forced to endure by the misguided national leadership of the USA.

Asmody, I should not have lumped you in with all the other posters and see on rereading your post that I was mistaken in doing so.

[generousgeorge]

Plethora asked.... "You were in Nam ... I have a question to which I'd like an honest answer please. Can you say you never saw any of your fellow comrades do something immoral that was unnecessary? How many civilian deaths did you witness?"

I only give honest answers.   Sometimes not very good ones, but always honest.

I think everything done on both sides in a war to inflict pain and injury on the other side (civilian or not) is pretty much "immoral". If I had it to do over, I would not have gone to Nam, whatever the personal repercussions. "Too soon old, too late smart." as they say.
 
If you mean did I ever see anyone commit acts like killing woman and children, abusing prisioners, My Lai kinds of things, the answer is definitely not. I was with a company on the ground in armed combat for the entire year, so I saw a considerable amount of combat. In all that time, I saw no civilian deaths.

What I did see several times was American soldiers killed or wounded because we, the leadership, the press etc. were overly concerned about civilians, women and children. Because of the added caution to not use jet strikes,artillery etc when there was a chance of collateral damage, I saw soldiers killed and wounded that very well might not have been if we had been allowed to use our fire power properly and not been so "Western Culture Civilized".

The extreme case of this of course, is when women and/or children have concealed weapons and open up on soldiers who gave them the "benefit of the doubt" as to their intentions. I did not personally see that happen, but have friends whom I believe, tell me it happened to their units.

One personal incident....my company was in the jungle climbing down a difficult mountain side when we spotted about a dozen people in a rice paddie, but could not tell if they were "armed" or not. It was the Ahn Lao Valley which had been cleared of civilians and was a "free fire zone" meaning anybody in there was automatically, "the enemy". I was the company Forward Observer and called a fire mission in to the artillery battery supporting us and was going to direct artillery on them to kill them before they spotted us.

 At the last minute, waiting for the Battery to tell me they were ready to fire, and all the time watching the  actions of the people in the Rice Paddy, , I got the feeling they were not Viet Cong and told the Company Commander that I did not want to fire the Artillery at them. He reluctantly agreed.

It turned out they were women and children who had "snuck in" the valley to harvest rice. If I had killed them, I would have had that on my conscience for life, if they turned out to be VC and ended up killing some of my comrades because I had not fired the artillery, I would have had that on my conscience for life. "Just another day in Nam" as they say.

Certainly a lot different then another day as a commercial fisherman or other dangerous civilian commercial jobs though.  

[plethora]

Thanks for that anecdote.

War sucks. The political motives suck, the fact that the american govt is sticking their noses where it doesn't fucking belong sucks. That the soldiers are kids who don't know jack about politics or the reason for the war they are being sent to sucks... Being a soldier in a place where you can't distinguish between civilians and the enemy sucks.

I'm glad you personally didn't see civilian deaths... I'd rather soldiers be killed than innocent civilians by collateral damage but either way, the picture is quite bleak.

btw ... check out the Quoting FAQ before the mods call you out on your quoting.

[generousgeorge]

I might have the same sentiment about soldiers being killed rather than civilians with the notable exception of that soldier being me. 

Of course, the problem was which were "innocent" civilians and which were disguised as "innocent" civilians and when you find out it's too late either way.

[velkyn]

as an aside, GG, I'm curious what you fish for?  

And I don't find soliders automatically "heroes" or any such nonsense. Neither does my husband who served or say, his reserve sergeant who was in the Vietnam War like GG.  

I also think it's good to have soldiers, police, etc since I believe we need the "rough men" so everyone doesn't need to be one.  The lyrics of a filk song sum it up for me

Who will say the job is wrong
And shouldn't be at all
Must then take up the gun themselves
To guard each door and wall
Must spend their nights in sentry lines
Their days in packing heat
It's easier to pay the man
Full time to guard your streets

http://www.elyrics.net/read/l/leslie-fish-lyrics/the-guardian-lyrics.html

EDIT: one of the lyrics was wrong.

[generousgeorge]

I'll fish in the bathtub if I hear they are biting there.    I like offshore, light tackle a lot, but also freshwater bass fishing and Red Fish & Trout in the bays. It's kinda like sex, the worst I ever had was wonderful.  :shrug

My brother and I went fishing in Cabo from Kayaks for Mahi Mahi...that was a blast!

[xphobe]

Hi GG,

I've been using commercial fishing (not plumbers, and not sport fishing - no red herrings please) as an example ONLY because statistics from several different sources indicate it is THE most dangerous job, period.   If you want to factor in job difficulty, stress, having to make life & death decisions, etc. then we need to also consider cops and doctors who deal with that every day.

My only point was that doing a dangerous or difficult job doesn't automatically make one a hero, which I think we've all come to agreement on.  Does it automatically make one deserving of respect?  I think so, if they're doing their job correctly.  I respect commercial fishermen and cops and doctors for what they do.  Like soldiers, cops and doctors (and presumably commercial fishermen) can sometimes do unethical or immoral or even illegal things.  That doesn't mean they're all bad, or that we'd be better off without them.

Your point is well taken though:  Unlike commercial fishermen, cops or doctors, kids who have signed up because they were lied to by recruiters can't just say "screw this" and quit.  They're basically prisoners, being emotionally tortured.  They deserve a special type of respect, or maybe compassion.

[generousgeorge]

Compassion is probably the right word.

I have watched those TV series on crabbing in the North Atlantic and I must say it looked terribly dangerous, but which would you rather do, run across a football field with a couple of guys shooting at you with automatic weapons or spend a month at sea with these guys. The guys in the combat jobs in the military (not the support troops) have by far the more dangerous jobs than any other job I can think of.

I think where this whole dialogue got out of whack a little was the differentiation of who deserves "respect" and who deserves to be regarded as a hero. I will be first to plead guilty to that by the way. 

The other factor is we are reluctant to convey respect to people doing a dangerous job when we regard the mission they are on as unworthy. Somehow the soldiers get some of the bad press that the politicians and national leadership deserve. Don/t blame the hammer, blame the guys that are swinging it.

I think most of us on this thread are really pretty close to the same mind set on these issues, but we are so used to battling the fundies we (me) lose our perspective sometimes. I know I did.

[Hatter23]

I live in new york, and I want a sleek handgun so much.

I realize it's as personal as buying shoes, but may I recommend the Springfield XDm line?  I can't say enough good things about them.  Light, ultra-reliable, accurate, thinner than a Glock, hi cap, comfortable to hold, a buttload of safetys... what's not to like?

Actually I'm preferential to the Walther PPK 380 auto with glaser saftey slugs or hydroshock rounds. Small, reliable, good stopping power, comfortable grip.

[xphobe]

Actually I'm preferential to the Walther PPK 380 auto with glaser saftey slugs or hydroshock rounds. Small, reliable, good stopping power, comfortable grip.

I have both.  The 380 is very concealable.  You can keep it in a pants pocket or a small purse.  The grip is comfortable unless you've got big hands, but due to its small size and weight ends up being surprisingly "jumpy" whn fired.  The barrel is very short so don't expect much accuracy beyond ten yards.  As for stopping power, rather than "good" I would say "better than nothing".  You wouldn't want to defend yourself with anything less than a 380, but if you have any option at all, something bigger is better.  I keep hydroshoks in my Springfield.

This is why I say it's like buying shoes.  Everyone's got an opinion.  Some folks wouldn't consider anything besides a 1911. 

[generousgeorge]

M-60 Machine Gun, Quad 50 MM and 105MM  Artillery used to work pretty well for me.   

[xphobe]

^ ok you win.     Closest I ever got to an M-60 was an M-14 (which was pretty sweet I have to say).  And I did run a 75mm pack howitzer.  Although it was officially blanks only, you'd be surprised how far a crabapple can go.  Well, you wouldn't, but I was!

[generousgeorge]

I was a door gunner for a month on a Huey Gunship, 1/9th Recon Troop....made semi-famous in Mel Gibson's...... "We were
Soldiers Once And Young". I was an Artillery Forward Observer, 1st Lt, but the Hueys in 1966 did not have enough radio capability to contact the air support, naval gunfire and artillery batteries.

Sooooo Lt Generous George would take the place of one of the regular door gunner with his PRC 25 Radio and Map to "call for fire" when needed. I had an M-60 on a Punji Strap and a big box of ammo..... I could lean out that door and let her rip. Pretty exciting stuff, they gave me an armored vest to wear, but I took it off and sat on it....figured it would do me more good there.  

 I had a lot of close calls in that 30 days, shot down twice...... but got to sleep on a cot and eat a hot meal at the end of the day. Then some fool FO got himself killed with a company on the ground and they sent me into the jungle to replace him, walking through the double canopy one day and the rice  paddies with the friggin Leeches the next.

Pretty exciting for a 22 year old kid......  aged pretty quick in a year though. Pretty high price for excitement over there.....like I said If I had it to do over, I would not go.

[kindred]

Aren't you all a bit too emotionally attached to the argument? Right now you guys are arguing whether: a)some soldiers are bad or b)some are good.

That's not exactly the best argument right there.

[Ananukia]

Actually I'm preferential to the Walther PPK 380 auto with glaser saftey slugs or hydroshock rounds. Small, reliable, good stopping power, comfortable grip.

I have both.  The 380 is very concealable.  You can keep it in a pants pocket or a small purse.  The grip is comfortable unless you've got big hands, but due to its small size and weight ends up being surprisingly "jumpy" whn fired.  The barrel is very short so don't expect much accuracy beyond ten yards.  As for stopping power, rather than "good" I would say "better than nothing".  You wouldn't want to defend yourself with anything less than a 380, but if you have any option at all, something bigger is better.  I keep hydroshoks in my Springfield.

This is why I say it's like buying shoes.  Everyone's got an opinion.  Some folks wouldn't consider anything besides a 1911. 

I have a Thompson Contender, I'm not supposed to have.

[plethora]

* resisting moving into a "right to bear arms" discussion *

 

[generousgeorge]

all good christians in texas sleep with their automatic weapons because of the huge vicious bunny rabbit population