War is Hell...

[DVZ3]

Don, would you the same reaction to a civilian shooting up a Ruby's cafeteria?

Dante, I apologize for assuming that your question was a setup for a retort for being on the 'opposite' side of my position.  You see in life especially on the internet, 9 times out 10, most of the time, typically always, as far as my experience (ok, I ran out of ways to say this....  ) your position would be assumed to be on the opposing side.

I guess my logic failed me here... 

Damn LOGIC!  Ignore that christian, black and white thing.  That's insulting...

[Babdah]

If any other nationality had done this you would want their blood. Well this time an American did it and the afghans and a whole lot of other people want his and I can't say as I blame them. "war is hell" my arse, It was premeditated murder.

If they were at "war" and they had to go through such long deployment I don’t think I would say that about any other nationality. These guys go through long deployment and a lot of them, the stress is bound to build up, and the only ones that are really to blame are the politician for this. This guy was just doing his job and did not know when to say when, the stress built up and he broke, I know the family gets something like 25000 apiece for each death, not like that it is going to bring back their loved one, but America should take this hint and pull out before more bullshit happens.

[ungod]

Battle Hymn of Lt. Calley
(Tune: Battle Hymn of the Republic)

My name is William Calley, I'm a soldier of this land
I've tried to do my duty and to gain the upper hand,
But they've made me out a villain, they have stamped me with a brand
As we go marching on.   


(For those of you too young to remember http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_lai.)

Oh, that's so sweet, just tugs at your heartstrings - got any nice songs/poems about Uncle Adolf?

When all the wars are over and the battle's finally won,

Ah yes, that great Victory of the mighty USA over Vietnam!   

[screwtape]

I recently learned about fundamental attribution error. It is when we see other people's behavior as inticative of their personalities, but our own behavior as situational and in contexts. 

So I found this whole tragedy interesting and exemplary of this concept.  When I first heard about the Butcher of Baghram, I thought "man, he is a terrorist".  Then I heard the media immediately describe him as "deranged", "disturbed" and "under great stress".  Then they ramped it up to talk about his personal problems, his four tours, his debt. 

I recognized the fundamental attribution error at work.  The media, military and DVZ3 are all bending over backwards to put the atrocious actions of one of our own into context and atribues his actions to his situation, thus absolve him personally. 

But imagine an Iraqi in the US who had endured our occupation, whose family was killed by "smart" bombs, who had endured Abu Ghraib.  If he were to murder 17 people, 11 of whom were women and children, would we bother with understanding anything about him other than those murders?  Terrorist would be the only label anyone would bother with. 

I think Bales is a terrorist.  The result of his behavior is no different.  I think he should be treated as such.  While I agree that circumstances affect and mitigate the judgment, I also think we cannot have such egregious double standards.  This guy has to be locked up for life at the least.  Either that or we have to stop calling people who injure us "terrorists" and treat them as kindly and compassionately as DVZ3 would have us treat Bales.

[Dante]

But imagine an Iraqi in the US who had endured our occupation, whose family was killed by "smart" bombs, who had endured Abu Ghraib.  If he were to murder 17 people, 11 of whom were women and children, would we bother with understanding anything about him other than those murders?  Terrorist would be the only label anyone would bother with. 

I think Bales is a terrorist.  The result of his behavior is no different.  I think he should be treated as such.  While I agree that circumstances affect and mitigate the judgment, I also think we cannot have such egregious double standards.  This guy has to be locked up for life at the least.  Either that or we have to stop calling people who injure us "terrorists" and treat them as kindly and compassionately as DVZ3 would have us treat Bales.

Well said.

This is exactly what I was attempting to get at with DVZ3. The double standard.

I've no doubt that Bales suffers from PTSD, and, he has my sympathies. My bone of contention is that other deranged lunatics aren't afforded the same sympathies, merely because they weren't subjected to mentally and emotionally damaging situations by volunteering to go to war for the US.

I think it's illogical and irrational to have that double standard. And, when more people start to realize that, the world will be a better place.

[Historicity]

Oh, that's so sweet, just tugs at your heartstrings - got any nice songs/poems about Uncle Adolf?

I had heard the first 2 lines sung in a mention on a TV show.  That was one of the last recordings by Tex Ritter.

So I googled and found quite a lot of ditties defending Calley or saying he was programmed by the government.  This was the best of the lot.

For nice songs about Hitler check Prussian Blue, the duo of Lamb and Lynx Gaede who have been nicknamed "The Cute Klux Klan".  I know they have one about Rudolf Hess who flew to England at the beginning of the war.  "Rudolf Hess, a man of peace / something, something who would not cease."

[ungod]

I had heard the first 2 lines sung in a mention on a TV show.  That was one of the last recordings by Tex Ritter.

So I googled and found quite a lot of ditties defending Calley or saying he was programmed by the government.  This was the best of the lot.

Have times really changed? Used to be, such things as the My Lai massacre were
basically dismissed as "collateral damage", and the victims not human enough to be
deserving of a body count, hence the USA claiming not to have a count of Iraqi
civilian casualties.
Surprising to hear that Robert Bales faces a possible death sentence. Will that turn
out to be just BS to placate the victims, with the eventual sentence being much more
lenient? After all, the CIA does depend heavily on the Afghan Poppy farmers.

Lieutenant Calley only had a few years of "house arrest", and was soon enjoying
freedom tooling around in his his nice Corvette sports car, after killing not 16 or
17, but hundreds, mainly babies, grannies, and the elderly.
Bales is currently incarcerated in a "medium to low security" facility, according to
news reports. Compare that with the treatment of "whistleblower" Bradley Manning, in
high security, solitary confinement, although he never killed anyone. His main crime,
of course, was not revealing state secrets, but ratting on his fellow soldiers, who
slaughtered innocent civilians by shooting them from a helicopter. Have any of them
ever been charged? Or, was it just another case of "collateral damage."
And, remember the Iranian civil airliner shot down by the highly trained US Navy
because they (supposedly) mistook it for a fighter? Did you know every one of them
got a medal for that?
I tell ya, there is real justice in the USA. Manning and Bales face the death
penalty. Henry Kissinger, responsible for the illegal bombing of Cambodia, Laos,
coups in Greece, Chile, hundreds of thousands of deaths, the slaughter in East Timor,
why, 'ol Henry gets to sleep in his comfy bed every night, scot free, and the darling
of the talk show circuit.
Yup, justice prevails in the good ole democracy of the USA.

[Nick]

We are truly an "exceptional nation" as the repubs like to say.

[DVZ3]

I think Bales is a terrorist.  The result of his behavior is no different.  I think he should be treated as such.  While I agree that circumstances affect and mitigate the judgment, I also think we cannot have such egregious double standards.  This guy has to be locked up for life at the least.  Either that or we have to stop calling people who injure us "terrorists" and treat them as kindly and compassionately as DVZ3 would have us treat Bales.

That soliders main goal was not to over there to shoot and kill civilians and that's what you're implying.  Absolutely failed logic comparing to a terrorist here.  I'm sorry, can't disagree with you more. It feels awkward and weird that that's what you are actually implying he did.

Absolutely no double standard.  It's as if you guys are making up failed logic just to disagree with me now... 

[Historicity]

Have times really changed? Used to be, such things as the My Lai massacre were  basically dismissed as "collateral damage", and the victims not human enough to be  deserving of a body count, hence the USA claiming not to have a count of Iraqi  civilian casualties.

You are dead wrong about the body counts.  Body counts were very important for gauging the success of the war.  Some American units would count all the headstones in a village cemetery to enhance their body count stats.

Yup, justice prevails in the good ole democracy of the USA.

Here's an irony that few people know about.  There was a guy who got a medal for what he did at the My Lai Massacre.  Let that soak in for a minute.

He was Warrant Officer Hugh Thompson, Jr.  He got a medal for saving 11 women & children:

Thompson quickly received the Distinguished Flying Cross for his actions at My Lai.  The citation for the award fabricated events and praised Thompson for taking to a hospital a Vietnamese child "caught in intense crossfire" and said that his "sound judgment had greatly enhanced Vietnamese-American relations in the operational area." Thompson threw the citation away

After the news came out that he wasn't rescuing the children from commie gunfire but from Americans, his award was taken away.

Thompson did more than that.  He communicated to the unit on the ground to stop it:

    Thompson: What's going on here, Lieutenant?
    Calley: This is my business.
    Thompson: What is this? Who are these people?
    Calley: Just following orders.
    Thompson: Orders? Whose orders?
    Calley: Just following...
    Thompson: But, these are human beings, unarmed civilians, sir.
    Calley: Look Thompson, this is my show. I'm in charge here. It ain't your concern.
    Thompson: Yeah, great job.
    Calley: You better get back in that chopper and mind your own business.
    Thompson: You ain't heard the last of this!

He didn't stop at that:

Thompson heatedly reported the massacre to his superiors. His allegations of civilian killings quickly reached Lieutenant Colonel Frank Barker, the operation's overall commander. Barker radioed his executive officer to find out from Captain Medina what was happening on the ground. Medina then gave the cease-fire order to Charlie Company to "knock off the killing".

The leaders called off the task force (Medina and Calley mostly) that was to sweep a bunch of villages that way.

More fun.  The congress held hearings on the massacre:

Chairman Mendel Rivers (D-S.C.) ... publicly stated that he felt Thompson was the only soldier at My Lai who should be punished (for turning his weapons on fellow American troops) and unsuccessfully attempted to have him court-martialed. As word of his actions became publicly known, Thompson started receiving hate mail, death threats and mutilated animals on his doorstep.

Thompson remained in the Army and retired as a major in 1983.

In 1998 he and 2 others who assisted him were awarded the Soldier's Medal, the United States Army's highest award for bravery not involving direct contact with the enemy.

He was invited a number of times to all of the service academies as a guest lecturer on military ethics. Thompson and his crew's actions have been used as an example in the ethics manuals of U.S. and European militaries.

He died of cancer in 2006.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugh_Thompson,_Jr.

[Tinyal]

[
That soliders main goal was not to over there to shoot and kill civilians and that's what you're implying.  Absolutely failed logic comparing to a terrorist here.  I'm sorry, can't disagree with you more. It feels awkward and weird that that's what you are actually implying he did.

Absolutely no double standard.  It's as if you guys are making up failed logic just to disagree with me now... 

The double standard is indeed in full force - not just by you DV, but by thousands of other people  - public, private, gov't employees, military employees, many in the press (and here at work around the water cooler).  Many people are looking for and grasping at any information that can be used as mitigating/reducing/explaining what is simply mass murder of innocent, unarmed civilians.

While I personally have a different take on what 'free will' and choices mean in this context (read Sam Harris's small booklet he just released on free will for more background), the label of terrorist is being applied based on his actions - not anything else.  As far as the dead children are concerned, they are just as murdered if they were killed by a jihadist utterly convinced he's following his religious dictates , and who expect to be given a bunch of virgins as soon as they're martyred...

(I never did understand all this islamic excitement over virgins - personally, I prefer a relationship with a woman I don't have to train from scratch.  What about instead of 72 vigrins they actually get 3 well trained 'ladies of the evening' ?)

Back to the subject at hand.  What, DV, do you think is the actual difference in terms of being labeled a terrorist (and appropiate punishment based on that label) between the following 2 individuals:

1.  A young islamic man, brainwashed from birth to believe he must kill westerners to protect his religion, who's personally witnessed his parents or siblings blown to bits by bombs supplied (or sent by) western powers - who's therefore completely convinced he's doing the right thing by mowing down 11 American children as soon as he has the opportunity.

and

2.  A young American man, who joined the military voluntarily (in part) to avoid massive legal judgements, who chooses to drink far too much, who chooses to grab a gun and mow down 11 innocent women and children.

In my view, both of the above were subjected to highly stressful situations beyond their personal control, both of whom additionally made choices to use a gun/bomb (whatever), both of whom may have some kind of brain alterations (whether from brainwashing as an infant, or being exposed to violence on his friends or relatives, and both of whom killed innocents. 

Should not both of these 2 people either be punished (based on their actions) equally, or somewhat forgiven/given a lessor sentence/un-brainwashed/committed to psychiatric care/whatever (based on those things beyond their control that affected their brains) ?

I don't see much difference, myself - and as to whether either person can actually make choices based on free will - or whether their actions are mostly a function of cause/effect beyond the persons individual control - that's a  more complex (and slightly different) subject I may go into a bit more in another thread.   Again, I'll plug Sam Harris's latest booklet for an excellent read on whether or not free will exists (I don't think it does, myself), as well as the difference between making choices - and free will.

My logic may be faulty (it usually is!), and I welcome criticism (and will undoubtedly get it in spades), but that's my 2 cents worth for the moment.

[Graybeard]

If you want an idea of what Bales did, how it is seen by those in command, and what justice is, I suggest Rudyard Kipling’s Danny Deever^Wiki, written over 100 years ago about a similarly inexplicable (maybe fictitious) incident:
For those of you who will not know what “Files-on-Parade” is, it is the soldiers lined up to witness the event.

"What are the bugles blowin' for?" said Files-on-Parade.
"To turn you out, to turn you out", the Colour-Sergeant said.
"What makes you look so white, so white?" said Files-on-Parade.
"I'm dreadin' what I've got to watch", the Colour-Sergeant said.
For they're hangin' Danny Deever, you can hear the Dead March play,
The regiment's in 'ollow square -- they're hangin' him to-day;
They've taken of his buttons off an' cut his stripes away,
An' they're hangin' Danny Deever in the mornin'.

"What makes the rear-rank breathe so 'ard?" said Files-on-Parade.
"It's bitter cold, it's bitter cold", the Colour-Sergeant said.
"What makes that front-rank man fall down?" said Files-on-Parade.
"A touch o' sun, a touch o' sun", the Colour-Sergeant said.
They are hangin' Danny Deever, they are marchin' of 'im round,
They 'ave 'alted Danny Deever by 'is coffin on the ground;
An' 'e'll swing in 'arf a minute for a sneakin' shootin' hound --
O they're hangin' Danny Deever in the mornin'!

"'Is cot was right-'and cot to mine", said Files-on-Parade.
"'E's sleepin' out an' far to-night", the Colour-Sergeant said.
"I've drunk 'is beer a score o' times", said Files-on-Parade.
"'E's drinkin' bitter beer alone", the Colour-Sergeant said.
They are hangin' Danny Deever, you must mark 'im to 'is place,
For 'e shot a comrade sleepin' -- you must look 'im in the face;
Nine 'undred of 'is county an' the regiment's disgrace,
While they're hangin' Danny Deever in the mornin'.

"What's that so black agin' the sun?" said Files-on-Parade.
"It's Danny fightin' 'ard for life", the Colour-Sergeant said.
"What's that that whimpers over'ead?" said Files-on-Parade.
"It's Danny's soul that's passin' now", the Colour-Sergeant said.
For they're done with Danny Deever, you can 'ear the quickstep play,
The regiment's in column, an' they're marchin' us away;
Ho! the young recruits are shakin', an' they'll want their beer to-day,
After hangin' Danny Deever in the mornin'.

The Afghan does not understand that the common soldier can have a breakdown. There’s not much doubt that Bales was deranged when he committed the crime and, as such, was not criminally responsible for what happened. Yet it is important that the Afghan knows that the blood is avenged with blood. Bales will be sentenced to death.

[Frank]

An American Solidier killed innocent people during his call of duty.  Having said that I don't think he deserves to be 'charged with murder' for 17 people like the scum of any ordinary city street. Soldiers are put in a situation of circumstances that your everyday person doesn't have to do, see, witness, or have any responsibility for an outcome.

The nazis could have done with you on the jury at the Nuremburg trials. "We're really sorry about all those atrocities. The war made us go a bit nuts".

[Poseidon]

Frank; that Nuremburg bit was rather harsh.  Besides in this instance you are using the same convoluted reasoning for which we gleefully pummel the xtians.   I have read other post from your keyboard and you are better than that.

This is a spirited and, in places, most erudite discussion. I doubt that we can come to a common agreement about a just outcome for the sergeant Bales dilemma.. 

Short of siding with DV, I suggest that he has been involved in life threatening situations that most of you have not.  That kind of experience tends to shape ones attitude whether we choose it analytically or not.

[DVZ3]

I give up... Let's exaggerate all we want here folks to make points that lead to the ditch.  It was one guy, who served many tours and indeed went nuts for whatever reason.  I highly doubt he signed up for the military to go kill innocent people.  I could be wrong but I'm not ready to go hang'em in the town square or put him away in prison for life thinking I will feel better tomorrow about it and justice has been served.

It's easy to judge when you haven't walked and/or 'marched' in another man's boots.  Don't forget, these guys/gals are dealing with folks who give guns to kids as well.  Who in there right mind would kill a kid even with a gun right!?   

I'm not ready to cast this mans final stone as fast some of you are, that's all. (I have a double standard then indeed and I confess)  I guess I have this double standard because I don't think he is a terrorist or ready to join the past Nazi regime.


To be honest, I think having todays countries boundaries and armies is really stupid but that's a whole other topic for humanity.  Even with the state bounderies people can't even get along or agree. And throw religion in the mix.....  But lets agree to disagree on this one for sure.

P.S. I hope he gets O.J.'s jury who will look at the evidence at hand and judge accordingly when people are labled as racists or Nazis so quickly by attorneys.

[Frank]

Frank; that Nuremburg bit was rather harsh. 

I don't think I'm being harsh at all. If a german soldier had committed the same atrocity they would have hanged him for it and complaining that the war made him go nuts would have not saved him.

If a taliban fighter had done the same thing and murdered 16 of your soldiers in cold blood and then tried to claim some form of insanity made him do it do you think anyone in America would buy it? Because I don't. For instance old Bin Laden never got a chance to plead his case did he? There was just a lot of national rejoicing that a defensless man had been shot dead. I don't remember anyone worrying that he might have a mental illness. Or is it one rule for Americans and another rule for everyone else?

[screwtape]

That soliders main goal was not to over there to shoot and kill civilians and that's what you're implying. 

1. How could you know even know that?  Do you know him?  Did he confide in you? Can you read minds?

2. Even if you are right, so what?  Did that have to be his plan from the start or could it have evolved over time?  Could he have become a terrorist after joining the army?  It seems your argument is resting on his intentions when he joined the army 10 years ago.  Things change over 10 years.

Absolutely failed logic comparing to a terrorist here. 

Maybe.  I am open to that possibility.  But you have not shown it.  You have only denied what I have spent time and effort explaining.  "Nuh-uh" does not amount to a counter argument.
 

It was one guy,

Irrelevant.

who served many tours

You are doing exactly what I said you were doing - explaining his actions by situation and context.  You are excusing him.

And so what? 16 innocent people are dead.  How is that paid for?

and indeed went nuts for whatever reason. 

You think all he should get is some mental health care?  Someone screwed up.  Someone is responsible for this.  Should his superiors - who should have detected mental health problems - be arrested and tried?[1]  Should the system be changed in some way?[2] 

Right now it looks like you want to white wash the whole thing. Throw me a bone here. 16 people were murdered.  It was not an accident.  It was not a flood or an earthquake.  Someone caused it to happen or failed to prevent it from happening.  Someone has to be responsible for that.  Right now, this is on the whole US.  I don't want it on me because I am not responsible for it.  I want the responsible parties to be held accountable.  I assume you do too.  So who is responsible?

I highly doubt he signed up for the military to go kill innocent people.

Irrelevant.  Major Nidal Malik Hasan probably did not sign up to kill innocent people either.  Yet, here he is today, a terrorist.  Reports say he was nuts too.  Do you think he should be let off the hook?  Have you searched as high and low for excuses for him?  If not, what does that mean?  What does that make you?

It's easy to judge when you haven't walked and/or 'marched' in another man's boots.

I don't accept that.  It is an argument I hear all the time from former service members when they want to shut people up.  "You didn't serve, so you can't talk!"  I do not have to have served to know that murdering 16 civilians - 11 of whom were women and children - is wrong.  I do not have to have served to know someone is responsible. Take that stupid argument and stow it.

(I have a double standard then indeed and I confess)

Then get over your emotional bias and look for justice.

I guess I have this double standard because I don't think he is a terrorist ...

That is not why you have a double standard.  That is your double standard.

I hope he gets O.J.'s jury...

Real mature.

1.	I think that is not a bad idea
2.	I think it should be

[DVZ3]

^^^ You're right screwtape. The only justice that is justified is for him to be put to death and/or life in prison.

This is your stance and not mine.   Real mature.....

That soliders main goal was not to over there to shoot and kill civilians and that's what you're implying. 

1. How could you know even know that?  Do you know him?  Did he confide in you? Can you read minds?

^^^ Really, then if what you just said above is or isn't true, we have to investagate every young mind who inlists in the military then.

I think you're grabbing at straws in an attempt to discuss something you can so easily dismiss emotionally because you can.  And I'm glad that makes you sleep better at night with your undeserved freedoms then.

P.S. I'm sorry you took the fact that I called mods idiots but it's nice to see that you are certainly showing your apparent bias now all of sudden "you can't set aside emotion" But write what you did asking me to above.....  Double standard much....... I also never mentioned for him to be 'let off the hook' but given psychiatric help and evalution because I don't think 'he's a born killer' much like you do apparently.

Also, I would love to meet up with you in person.  Let me know when you're avaiblable. Don Van Zile

[DVZ3]

Really Azgari, you're going to pile on too without so much as a post......   This forum has become a big pile of I'll stroke yours because I always agree with you.... 

[Azdgari]

Why would I expect you to respond any more rationally to me than you have to anyone else in this thread?

[Dante]

Don, do you, or do you not, have a double standard when it comes to violence comitted by US servicemen vs. anyone else I've mentioned?

The reason many of us are in agreement on many things is because we attemt to use rational thinking couple with reason to shape our views.

[screwtape]

Don,

Before I respond to your last post, please answer one question.

Were you drunk when you wrote that?

[screwtape]

http://www.mattbors.com/archives/860.html

[Babdah]

http://www.mattbors.com/archives/860.html

That is a little absurd there, one kills in the name of a god and one kills in the name of a country who does not care for him or at the least in that name of the american god that bush declared. They are both piss poor excuses for their causes, just the afgan is honest were as the american could not admit his own wrong because he is blinded by something called patriotism and does not or cannot admit what is wrong.

[screwtape]

one kills in the name of a god and one kills in the name of a country

I do not believe either of those are true.

Bales did not murder 17 people out of patriotism.  He did it because he was screwed up, frustrated, stupid, etc.  Similarly, I do not think most afghans kill anyone in the name of god.  They do it because of their backward culture and for what they perceive to be invaders in their valleys.  I do not think either is simple or black and white.

Either way, the point is the same as I already pointed out.  The media is bending over backwards to find a context - ie, excuse - for Bales, but for Afghans, they look no further than "terrorist".  Fundamental Attribution Error.


They are both piss poor excuses for their causes, just the afgan is honest were as the american could not admit his own wrong because he is blinded by something called patriotism and does not or cannot admit what is wrong.
[/quote]

[screwtape]

Hi Don.

I see you came back.  Let's not pretend this thread never happened. 

It is not so much that I am interested in a response to my points - I can agree to disagree on the OP - as I would like you to explain why you would like to meet up with me in person, as you said.  It sounds ominous and vaguely threatening.  Were you drunk when you wrote that? 

I'm not looking for a fight, Don.  I would rather welcome you back.  But we cannot have people making threats to other members. 

Regards

[kindred]

Is there an in depth analysis of the guy's situation, online? An excerpt from a credible investigation or what have you?

[Graybeard]

No, the best I can find is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bales

Also http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165598/It-makes-sense-Robert-Bales-wife-believes-husband-shot-killed-16-innocent-Afghanis-innocent-shes-raising-defense-funds-insists-hes-great-dad.html
Staff Sergeant Robert Bales is the sole suspect in the deaths of 16 Afghans after the March 11 mass shooting, and he is also charged with wrongfully possessing and using steroids and unlawfully consuming alcohol while deployed.

There is a Facebook http://www.facebook.com/americanrobertbales "Support Staff Sgt Bales

[Nick]

No, the best I can find is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bales

Also http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2165598/It-makes-sense-Robert-Bales-wife-believes-husband-shot-killed-16-innocent-Afghanis-innocent-shes-raising-defense-funds-insists-hes-great-dad.html
Staff Sergeant Robert Bales is the sole suspect in the deaths of 16 Afghans after the March 11 mass shooting, and he is also charged with wrongfully possessing and using steroids and unlawfully consuming alcohol while deployed.

There is a Facebook http://www.facebook.com/americanrobertbales "Support Staff Sgt Bales

Well, then he should get off if he is a great dad.  Afterall, they were not Americans he killed.