Hearts, Minds, Moral High Ground

Wonderful.

"The U.S. military and the Afghan government said Thursday they will investigate a TV report that claimed U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan burned the bodies of two Taliban fighters and taunted other Islamic militants."

Listen, I'm not one whose gonna kill military guys for doing what they have to do, 'cause lord knows what type of hell they go through daily, but after the fact burning of bodies? I'm also not gonna sit here and say this will lead to more folks being beheaded, because the sick fucks are gonna be sick fucks no matter, but at some point don't you want to have some basis for saying that "we" are better then "them"? Just a smidge?

Comments

[Killer Marine]

We prosecute people who do this.

[Johnnie]

Wow.

That is quite repugnant. I, being military, feel rather embarrassed in a way to hear of such things. To burn bodies after the fact? Absolutely rediculous. What does it prove? They are already dead. That's the mission. Kill people and break shit. Now if there is an agenda behind why exactly those bodies were burned (hygiene, apparently?) then there might be enough reasonable doubt. And hey look at their position. Psychological reasons? They would do it to us. But to just desecrate the dead for the sake of "we have nothing better to do"? Rather troubling.

Now this is just an extreme example of what happens when you put men in a location where they have to be aware 24/7 and fear for their lives at all times. They get stir crazy. Shellshock was what they called it back in WW2. (now it's the euphemized PTSD)

Also, I am one who KNOWS that the Geneva convention is there so that our worldwide PR isn't tarnished; basically we have to be put in a position to not be condemned by the rest of the world.(We have to follow higher morals and distinguished service in times like the present)However, it's the guidelines that only WE follow. ONLY the USA. No one else cares about that. Nations that we fight take the "low-road" and commit torture and senseless crimes; while we treat POW's in Gitmo to 3 meals a day and they have a better life than our own inmates in the USA. Then they belittle their preferential treatment as worse then dogs and whatnot; and on top of that, create falsities that we desecrate their holy books. And if they weren't POW's? Yea they would be absolute models of perfection in the terms of the Geneva Convention.[/sarcasm] They are bound by the same guidelines we are, yet they don't follow. And our military, when they don't follow, like in the absolute absurd Abu Ghraib college hazing incident, takes the PR hit.

All in all, this case is extreme. But to me if there is an ultimate strategic motivation behind it, no harm, no foul. I didn't see it. Nor did I hear about it. And if you were in their predicament, did you? ::wink, wink::

But, like I said, if it is done out of boredom and stupidity, by all means, prosecute them and bring them to justice.

Though remember. Kill or be killed...what would you do? Honestly if you aren't military, or haven't been, you can't give a complete answer. But think about it.

[daveNYC]

The only strategic outcome from this act is to make those who don't like us hate us, and to make those who hate us want to kill us.

[KHAN-yeezy]

Fuck the taliban BURN them all.

I cant stand GW as some of you might now and please tell me if i start to sound like him but look...

It was only 4 years ago that a plane was hijacked and flown into a building housing mostly civilians. Thousands dead. Dagger in the country's financial heart. like i said THOUSANDS OF CIVILIANS DEAD. Then you get the lil home videos with achmed and his cronies kidnapping our fellow citizens over in the desert with their heads hanging on by their veins. Graphic shit.Americans dying every hour. Americans being given no hope of surviving because we dont negotiate. Americans being sacrificed in Iraq for Mr. Bush's personal agenda.

Now you have a story about some soldiers that burned some members of the taliban. I understand Johnnie that we need to set an example and folow the "rules" that we helped create. I also understand about giving complete answers if you havent served. I have.

I dont believe that we owe these criminals one iota of dignity. In fact they need to be treated the same way we are over there. We need to be on attack and not always on the defensive. Instead of waiting around for someone to sucker punch us we need to be out there making some lips bleed so the next time they think about steppin up to us they remember how the blood tasted on their lips the last time they did.

Thanks for your time.

[Killer Marine]

I want to clarify my first statement. When/if the evidence bears itself out.....

[daveNYC]

The fact that we were on foreign soil and shot and killed those two shows that we were on the attack. Desecrating their bodies does nothing but bring us down to their level, and it will put us on the defensive in the future as individuals who were on the fence see that image and decide to take up arms against us.

We are very good at killing terrorists, we are not so good at preventing the creation of future terrorists.

[howard in new york]

when i first heard this story, i figured it was an individual case. men in war commit atrocities. and as km said, we (americans) prosecute those of our soldiers who commit such crimes.

but i read the article, which suggests this was a sy-ops crew (psy-ops? not sure what the acronym is), and i thought, uh-oh. this could be more standard operating procedure.

the pentagon sanctioned ignoring of the geneva convention rules, international law and moral right that rumsfeld has approved, in the name of fighting terrorism, and that bush has vowed to veto when the mccain bill passes the house (it passed the senate 90-9 i think) is beyond disgusting. bush's first veto will be of a law that reaffirms what america has practiced since the revolutionary war-that torture is wrong and we do not do it. desecration of enemy dead is just a twist on the same thing.

so i gotta disagree with you, johnnie (although i suspect we will ultimately be in agreement). a strategic goal of demoralizing the enemy is not an acceptable end to justify desecration as a tool of terror as a means to acheive such demoralization, imho.

otoh, for a hygenic purpose, (or some other that at the moment i cannot think of), of course that is different. but the article mentioned the sy-ops; if that turns out to be true.

[Bluehorseshoe]

The Russians have a better way - the terrorists who were killed after taking over that theatre a few years ago were buried in Pigskin, apparently so they couldn't get to heaven and get thier 72 virgins or whatever. Now THATs good Psy-Ops. Burning bodies is chump change. Just an early cremation if you ask me.

[daveNYC]

And that's why the Russians don't have any terrorist problems?

[Bluehorseshoe]

Actually they wouldn't if they wern't so worried about Western sensibilites.

The Russians actually have it worse than the US/Europeans in terms of terrorist activity. Kinda the same as if , say , Alabama went feral, wanted to cecede and was infiltrated with religious nuts (all jokes aside)