War crimes? Really?

It's War....and that Why They Say...

..."War is hell!"

My dad (WW2), and tons of friends who went through Nam, tell me of the atrocities they witnessed and even participated in during the height of battle. The desecaration of the dead is a more common event than those of us not involved in war know about. And the truth is, we don't need to know.

I remember quite well Lt. Calley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Calley) and how this government made a scape goat out of him and his actions at My Lai. Well, I went through two weeks of Viet Nam Jungle Warfare training at Fort Ord, and the procedure of search and destroy missions was one we practiced while there. And the general standing order was that when we went into a village (where everyone was supposed to have been warned of our coming, and to leave if they wanted to avoid certain death) on a search-and-destroy mission (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_and_destroy), we were responsible to kill any living beings and destroy the village.

We were not taught to rape, torture and mutilate bodies. If this happened under his directive, it was wrong. But the true definition of "search and destroy" was taught, and carried out more often than not!

Of course, since the Lt. Calley fiasco, the government changed their description of what the mission actually meant, but I know what we were taught (and I didn't think there was any way I could go along with this), and I doubt that the non-commissioned officers and the officers involved in teaching us in 1967 were only doing what they were told to do. Public awareness meant putting a different spin on the mission and that left a ton of early troops like myself, scrambling to change what was drilled into our heads.

I was blessed that I never had to step foot in Viet Nam, and I feel for my fellow friends who did, because they came back quite different from the horrors of the war they were forced to participate in, and the atrocities they often participated in while releaving stress.

War is not pretty, and the problem with modern-day warfare is, the media. Soldiers need to be trained to be cognizant of the fact that he media is always lurking in the wings, which means their behaviors need to be more civil, and politically correct. After all, they are Americans, and Americans live and act by different standards?

That not only puts the soldier at immediate risk (fear of not doing anything that could be construed wrong), and that hesitation could get them killed.

Of course, these Marines were in a different situation, but we should ask, did this photo take place immediately after the heat of battle? Were these guys ambushed and did they have to fight their way out of the ambush? Did they lose a close comrade in the fire fight? There are still some unknowns that need to be made public before judgment can be made!

Still, the question is: were these guys wrong? No doubt! And they never should have taken photos of their actions, and they should have thought before doing it in the first place.

However, the stress of battle is tremendous, and none of you sitting safely in your homes and typing on the PC to judge them know what they are going through! This is one way to release stress and tension, and it beats cutting off an enemy head on videotape; or arbitrarily raping women and killing babies and old people. Now those things are "War crimes!"

I agree with Salty, the worse they should face is an Article 15 and loss of pay. Not a discharge. One stupid act (that didn't cause another living being to suffer) does not make them criminals. They are still heroes for doing what so many will not do, and so many others protest their doing!

Viet Nam and this Iraq/Afghan thing is filled with the kind of warfare that is more stressful than just going out and taking city by city. The IEDs and other boobie traps are extremely stressful. No one knows when they will hit one and be killed or permanently disabled, and while I don't condone the activity of these boys, however I can understand it!

 

Look, fellas, if I had been there in the heat of the battle, I might have done worse than what these guys did. I'm just saying that we Christians have got to stop trying to justify such wicked behaviour with catch phrases like "war is hell". We need another reformation to get the taste of blood out of our system.

By the way, did you see where Leon Paneta has atmitted that Iran is not developing nuclear weapons?

 

You may not have been taught this, but I know what I was taught, and I know others who had this same understanding of search and destroy. I was honestly horrified with the thought, and even discussed it with my DI, who got all over me for thinking like this. I was then made an example of in front of my peers, and it was humiliating to say the least!

 

My friend. Who is justifying wicked behavior?

 

Good Question...

...and I did, and he told me that since I joined the Army (my dad talked me into joining after I received my draft notice, because he called the recruiter and they told him I could guarantee my job and duty station - what a joke), and was not a conscientious objector, I needed to "grow up" and be the man I was trained to be!

BTW - I requested telephone repair training, and was sent to cook school. I was gauranteed Europe as my first duty station, and still got orders for Nam. And the final switch-a-roo was my being assigned to the Seventh Cavalry as a rifleman. My dad meant well, but, he was lied to just as I was! :laugh:

 

From the very start I will admit that I have never served active duty. That was my goal and desire. After three years of ROTC the army decided that my broken neck precluded my from serving. My dad, brothers, son, and son-in-law have served. We are a military family, but I have not 'been shot at by the Taliban.'

While I quickly admit that those who have served have more weight in the debate I am totally opposed the concept expressed by 'unless you have been shot at by the Taliban shut up!'

You don't have to have served to know right from wrong. You don't have to have served to know what actions bring shame on the US military or the US as a whole. The US has plenty of enemies who attack and vilify us with no reason. We should never give them justification to do so.

It is also wrong to try and justify these action with 'well, they do a lot worse than this!' If the US indeed wants to be a world leader our actions should not be determined by what the enemy does.

I think that Sapper Woody is the only one posting who has experience in Afghanistan? He understands better than any of us and he says these marines should be discharged. I agree with him.

 

Might be a long post, buckle your seat belts...

I have been on mission, and haven't had a chance to check the board in a few days. I see that I have missed quite a bit of discussion. My intent with this post is not to judge, condemn, or even debate. I will simply state my piece and move on. But to understand where I am coming from, let me give you a little background on myself.

I joined the Army in January of '08. That's right, I've only been in the Army for a little over four years. I made my E5 in 31 months, just 1 month over the minimum time in service allowed, and about 18-24 months prior to the average. I am a "fast tracker".

Even though I have only been in for four years, I am on my second combat tour. My first tour was Jan '09 - Dec '09 in Iraq. I have been here in Afghanistan for 5 months now. I am a Combat Engineer, 12B, an expert in demolitions. My job is route clearance. I get in big trucks, and drive down the road in front of Marines, Infantry, or supply convoys looking for IEDs. We are basically targets. If an IED hits us, and not who we are escorting, it is a success. That should tell you a little about our mentality, when getting blown up is a success.

During my tour in Iraq, I started off in intel as their resident Engineer. I understood explosives better than "straight up" intelligence, and so they used me to identify similarities in homemade explosives. As a private, I worked alongside a Captain and frequently advised a Battalion Commander.

After working intel for 6 months deployed, I was replaced by an NCO (Non-Commissioned Officer) and sent to a line unit (a unit that actually does missions) where I was placed as the gunner of an RG31. In 6 months as a gunner, I conducted around 70 missions of route clearance. I was lucky. In that 6 months, my truck never got hit (although a truck less than 20 feet from me did), and I only saw about 15 IED Detonations, while our convoy discovered and BIPd (Blew in Place) about 25. We never took direct fire out there.

When I came home, I was diagnosed with "Combat Operational Stress Disorder", or a minor form of PTSD. "It'll go away in about 90 days" the therapist told me. It didn't. I was angry, hyper-vigilant, and crowds triggered my "fight or flight" response. I had to seek counseling with my father in order to cope and eventually get over my anger issues. I never got over my hypervigilance and FoF response.

I deployed to Afghanistan in the middle of August, 2011. My platoon is 0-7 in IED finds. That is, we've found zero, and gotten hit by 7. Out of those seven that hit us, 4 of those have disabled vehicles in our platoon, while 1 has produced a "casualty". A friend of mine received a concussion so bad that a helicopter had to come get him from the route, and he wasn't allowed to go back outside the wire.

Even though my platoon has only hit seven IEDs, that's not all that I have seen. As I believe I've posted on here before, in a one week mission I saw 14 IED explosions (2 on our platoon), 7 of those disabling vehicles. We received indirect fire (mortars) while stationed inside a tiny patrol base. We also received small arms fire in that patrol base. That is when I received my first kills.

After the firefight, I felt horrible. I threw up, even. I wondered if I could ever do it again if I needed to. I now think that I could if I had to. But I don't want to.

I am not a bloodthirsty killer. I do not enjoy war. But I'd do it again if needed.

Now that you understand where I am coming from; yes, I've been shot at by the Taliban. Yes, I've had mortars incoming at me from the Taliban. Yes, I've had vehicles hit by IEDs from the Taliban. I once again find myself struggling with hate. I frequently talk to my father about it, and he keeps me accountable with my attitude.

However, I could not urinate on dead bodies. It's not a matter of would I. I couldn't.

What these men did was wrong. Was it a product of stress, anger, hate? Maybe. Was it simple stupidity? "Hey, the boys back home will love this!"? Maybe. But it was wrong. It violated everything the military stands for. It was honorless, and brought shame upon the United States Military, and the Country.

It is my personal opinion that these men should be dishonorably discharged. Their actions are not in line with the military values, regardless of the motivation. Using the enemy's actions as an excuse is saying that it is ok to hurt those that hurt you. Past enemy offences do not excuse current indiscretions. If a spouse cheated on their spouse, we would not try and justify the other spouse cheating on them. Just because the terrorists flew a plane into the twin towers on 9/11 does not make us target civilians. I feel as if condoning their actions based on past enemy actions is condoning the use of force against innocents, since the enemy also did this.

Unfortunately for the men involved, it can be classified as a war crime. I personally would not like my comrades tried for war crimes. But what they did could easily be classified as war crimes. I personally hope that it does not come to that, and that it only goes so high as a court martial.

I can empathize with these men, and their feelings. However, I have no sympathy for them. If one of my soldiers did the same thing, I would immediately begin paperwork to try and get him discharged.

I know that many of you on here disagree with me. That is ok. But I cannot change my stance on this. I believe these men should be punished harshly, with a dishonorable discharge, and a loss of their VA benefits. Honorable discharges and VA benefits should be reserved for those who served honorably, not who brought shame on the service.

I apologize for the long post. But I feel that the length was necessitated due to the message.

 

Woody you are correct I do not agree. A dishonorable discharge is too harsh. I admit that you seem to have high standards and for that I salute you, and while these men's conduct was certainly unbecoming even disgusting and there is no defense for what they did it does not rise to the level of a dishonorable discharge wrecking the rest of their lives.
If these men should be given dishonorable discharges then so should have been Jessica Lynch for her posing partially nude while in the service and even on post. Her actions were also unbecoming and disgusting as she sold herself for money.
You say this is a war crime. If that be the case then let's execute them and really make a statement to the world. If there had been no pictures and this dealt with in private there would never be any call for a dishonorable discharge. Reprimand yes, losing rank, yes, removed from combat, absolutely, but not a dishonorable discharge. This is political and nothing less.
While I thank you for your service I will say that your own experiences make my point as to why I hold that no one who has seen combat as you have should ever be on a civilian police force. While someone as yourself may be an exception because of your Christian background and never go off the stakes are just too high to take the chance and have someone who is being detained beaten or someone who is innocent killed because of some flashback.

 

My friends. I like to think that us believers are better than the world, only in that we have Christ righteousness in us. If these men have repented of their acts then not only should we forgive them but that we should cease in chastising them.

 

The men involve should be charged under whatever article of the UCMJ is applicable, tried, and if found guilty, punished accordingly.

End of outrage. Theirs, and that of a judgemental public.

 

Thanks Sapper...

...even though I feel your opinion is too harsh; I TOTALLY respect it, as you are a member of the armed forces in this generation, and I am sure that the military has changed quite a bit since Nam.

As I have said before, I commend you and your willingness to give your life, if need be, for this nation. And as I look around, there are many people and many groups of people I would not be willing to die for, but I'm not God, nor am I Jesus, and I'm sure He too looked around and said what I said above, but He knew that His sacrifice was for forgiveness of our sins.

I have PTSS too. Not from the military, but rather from discrimination and harassment while on my last job. I've been told, like you, that it would go away, but twelve years later, it remains, and there are certain triggers that set it off, and I am trying my best to avoid people and situations that could set it off. However, there are still unknown events and people who innocently, or purposely say something that triggers the PTSS, and I have the dreams and subsequent troubled days that follow the dreams.

I promise you this. If I come across a remedy that solves and heals this Syndrome, I'll share it with you immediately, and I would hope you reciprocate should you come across the answers.

I do not know that it is like to take a life, but I can totally empathize with your reaction, and offer you my sincere prayers. PTSS is not something others can see, feel or touch. It is real to the person it entrenches, and it is a ruthless spirit. Maybe PTSS was Paul's thorn. Maybe it was a family member. I know he wasn't married, but had he been married; his thorn could well have been his mother-in-law!

As I said above. I respect your input and opinion on the poor conduct of these Marines, and while I may believe it is too harsh; I respect your right as a board member to have, hold and express that opinion without attacking you, head-on!

God bless, and as always, "be safe!"