Marines burning insugents

[TMF]

Well, we've only had photography for what, 150 years? I mean before that we didn't pose for pictures with our enemies skulls, we just strapped them onto our armor to strike fear into the heart of the next one we met. :D

Right. Warfare certainly has changed in regard to the rules we place on it. Or maybe it hasn't... maybe we just thought we could change it to make killing each other more civil.

I've had thoughts on it before, and I guess my opinions on it are that you can still respect and enemy that you hate so long as that enemy holds the same respect for you. It's difficult to look at a fallen enemy and have empathy and sorrow if that enemy was an evil little bastard. Having fought countless different factions with similar and contrary beliefs and objectives I've come into contact with both honorable and evil enemy. For the evil ones I don't have any moral objection polishing their bones and decorating my humvee with them. My only ethical issue would be what doing such things says about our legitimacy and professionalism in respect to the mission we're claiming we're there for. If we're there to kill everything we see, I guess skulls and femurs wouldn't be inappropriate. However, when we say we're there to provide security so they can achieve self rule and stability, then perhaps hearts and minds aren't just targets.

Honestly, I've always had a hard time having hatred for the guys I fought. The only bad guys I had hatred for were specific personalities who engaged in intentional attacks on civilians. Those people I didn't consider to be legitimate combatants and I don't believe they deserved to be respected, dead or alive. Like many others who have fought, I've lost several friends to the enemy. I don't have hate for the enemy for that. When we pick up a rifle and engage in combat we're making a pact with the enemy that we're gonna try and kill each other to the best of our ability in order to stay alive and achieve our goals. Maybe if we were invaded by China I might go all out hatred and wear a skull chain like Predator, but perhaps that's how some of them brown folks look at us when we shock and awe them into democracy.

[E4 No More]

The high road sounds just like the PC crowd that tries to civilize war. War is uncivilized, and is won by the deadliest people involved. Psychology is part of war too - although I suspect this incident is exactly an exercise in battlefield hygiene.

[TMF]

The high road sounds just like the PC crowd that tries to civilize war. War is uncivilized, and is won by the deadliest people involved.

Well, you must consider the mission. There is more to war than just killing. If killing won wars then we'd own Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. Killing is certainly a strategy to eliminate the enemy's ability to secure an area and make war against you, but the overall strategy isn't dominated by attrition alone; especially when the enemy doesn't need to be as big as an army. They just need to be big enough to get on CNN. The only real victories the enemy has had against us in that war is in the media. When we engage in the type of stuff they do we are no longer the good guys. That doesn't make them the good guys either, as we come to expect that kind of stuff from them. But how do we make ourselves out to be bringers of peace and respect to a foreign culture if we do things disrespectful to that culture?

The answer here is not to get involved at all because atrocities will happen in war on both sides no matter what you do to mitigate it. That is a fact. But we did get involved under the pretense of removing an evil dictator and bringing peace and democracy to the people of Iraq, so we need to own it when we do something jacked up. Not that I think these Marines absolutely did anything wrong, just speaking in generalities in regard to your post. Edited January 15, 2014 by TMF

[JayC]

Just a point, these insurgents are most definitely enemy combatants under the Geneva Conventions which our country is a signatory of....  Even if they're committing war crimes and violating the Geneva Conventions, we're still obligated to follow those rules when dealing with captured enemies, and the dead.

 

Even if they aren't covered, we need to be respectful enough of the dead...  It's the right and human thing to do...  This isn't even a close call, every service member knows not to desecrate the enemy dead under any circumstance.

 

bersaguy, after hearing some of the stories my dad told me about Vietnam, we had to give some guidelines for American soldiers(no one please don't try to correct me on this term saying that it only applies to "Army", look up the definition of soldier, THEN get back with me) to follow. Lots of war crimes committed in that conflict by modern standards. Not saying that we should have to tiptoe through the daisies just to request permission for engagement BUT at the same time, we can't just hand em a weapon and say, "accomplish your objective, whatever else you do we don't care.", there does have to be a line drawn somewhere. That being SAID, these are not conventional enemy combatants, the do not represent a specific country, AND only use terror to achieve their means which thereby excludes their "ill-treatment"; as they do not follow any doctrines of war and would rather wipe their ass with the documents made at the Geneva Convention. I must say though that the righteous side in me doesn't wish for us to reduce ourselves to their level but rather maintain our current rules of engagement but they really try to make it hard for us to be the better person when we watch those savages eat the hearts out of their enemies and behead harmless nuns and priests.

 

[TMF]

Just a point, these insurgents are most definitely enemy combatants under the Geneva Conventions which our country is a signatory of....  Even if they're committing war crimes and violating the Geneva Conventions, we're still obligated to follow those rules when dealing with captured enemies, and the dead.
 
Even if they aren't covered, we need to be respectful enough of the dead...  It's the right and human thing to do...  This isn't even a close call, every service member knows not to desecrate the enemy dead under any circumstance.

Well that's the thing, are we certain they "desecrated" the dead? It comes down to intent. If the PL said, "hey Boot, get some mogas. We're gonna have a Hadji BBQ", I'd say you're right. But if the intent was combat hygiene they did nothing wrong.

Just because burning them denies them the proper Islamic burial rights doesn't mean it's a crime if the circumstances dictated otherwise.

[tnguy]

I don't really see that the responsibility to respect the dead goes beyond treating them with basic dignity. Don't mutilate, don't desecrate, don't put in funny poses and that's about it. Observing the enemy's religious leanings doesn't come into things (and how would you know anyway? "Scuse me Mr Dead-person, did you observe the Muslim faith and, if so, which particular sect?"). Burning in-and-of itself wouldn't count. Taking pictures? Probably in poor taste but forgivable in my book. Roasting marshmallows? Way out of order.

 

I'm with TMF that this is part of the reason you avoid getting into these kind of situations in the first place if you have any sense.

Edited January 15, 2014 by tnguy

[JayC]

I agree burning them for hygiene purposes is perfectly legal...  playing with the skulls after the fact... not so much...  Being stupid enough to take pictures of your buddies burning the dead, or playing with skulls...  completely stupid.  

 

If some officer of NCO gave this order (for hygiene purposes), it should have come with the added instruction not to take pictures or video tape.

 

Well that's the thing, are we certain they "desecrated" the dead? It comes down to intent. If the PL said, "hey Boot, get some mogas. We're gonna have a Hadji BBQ", I'd say you're right. But if the intent was combat hygiene they did nothing wrong.

Just because burning them denies them the proper Islamic burial rights doesn't mean it's a crime if the circumstances dictated otherwise.

 

[TMF]

I agree burning them for hygiene purposes is perfectly legal...  playing with the skulls after the fact... not so much...  Being stupid enough to take pictures of your buddies burning the dead, or playing with skulls...  completely stupid.  
 

I'm with you, but I also remember what it was like to be 18. If I found myself in such a situation at that age I can't say I wouldn't have been getting some skull photos too. I'm not saying that makes it okay, I'm just saying that I understand. I thank God that they didnt have Facebook, MySpace or YouTube when I was that age.

[JayC]

I'm with you, but I also remember what it was like to be 18. If I found myself in such a situation at that age I can't say I wouldn't have been getting some skull photos too. I'm not saying that makes it okay, I'm just saying that I understand. I thank God that they didnt have Facebook, MySpace or YouTube when I was that age.

One would hope that somebody in charge would recognize the possible poor judgement of young soldiers in those types of situations and not leave them alone to make poor choices.

Honestly if I had caught an airman playing with a skull on the battle field, he would have been sent to the rear as quick as possible for an eval... If they have such piss poor judgement to think that playing with body parts is acceptable behavior they are either nuts or too immature to be on the battlefield. Edited January 15, 2014 by JayC

[whitewolf001]

Yeah, but the metric system is also world wide, but we don't tolerate that nonsense here. The term "Soldier" is capitalized when referring to a member of the US Army, BTW.

Now, if you'll please award me Grammar Ahole of the Thread I'll be on my way.

TOUCHÉ...

 

http://youtu.be/Q3BZ8hK82gw?t=2s

Edited January 15, 2014 by whitewolf001

[TMF]

TOUCHÉ[/size]...
 
http://youtu.be/Q3BZ8hK82gw?t=2s

And I think we're the only ones in the world who don't use Celsius. 'Merica!

[DaveTN]

War should be hell. It should be disgusting, violent and brutal. People should understand that innocent civilians and children will die. Our enemies should understand that we will use devastating weapons on them. The only mercy shown will be to those that surrender.

If they are enemy combatants I don’t care if they burn them alive or what they do with the bodies. I also don’t care what country an enemy combatant was born in.

Our troops shouldn’t have to die because our politicians have decided that we won’t use the weapons that can devastate our enemy. (While they sit safely at home)

Make war something no one wants.

[TMF]

One would hope that somebody in charge would recognize the possible poor judgement of young soldiers in those types of situations and not leave them alone to make poor choices.
Honestly if I had caught an airman playing with a skull on the battle field, he would have been sent to the rear as quick as possible for an eval... If they have such piss poor judgement to think that playing with body parts is acceptable behavior they are either nuts or too immature to be on the battlefield.

Yeah, that's why they have leaders to keep an eye on lower enlisted. Of course, in that environment you had very extreme circumstances. I'm sure most 18-20 year olds are too immature to be in a combat zone without supervision, but that's why there are NCOs.

As for the disrespect of corpses and posing with body parts, I think that is a part of war in those extreme circumstances. I mean, it's hard for me to put it in context by simply typing of the Internet. Obviously, if you walked into a Joe's barracks room and he's playing with a human head he is obviously a psychopath. But when you have an 18 year old who has been killing people for days and has seen many brethren in his company killed and severely wounded things get a little blurry. In that environment it's hard for young people to value the life or body of the enemy when he's in constant contact.

I recall a mission where two of my Iraqi counterparts were killed. When we finally got to the last bad guy and killed him, after exchanging fire and getting frags thrown at us, the Iraqis took out their anger on his body. I didn't feel the emotions they were having but I can empathize. Combat is very intense and we expect a lot out of our guys to act appropriately in all situations, but sometimes they don't. When they don't I think we need to consider the totality of the circumstances before passing judgement. Edited January 16, 2014 by TMF

[Chucktshoes]

[quote name="DaveTN" post="1095845" timestamp="1389831702"]War should be hell. It should be disgusting, violent and brutal. People should understand that innocent civilians and children will die. Our enemies should understand that we will use devastating weapons on them. The only mercy shown will be to those that surrender. If they are enemy combatants I don’t care if they burn them alive or what they do with the bodies. I also don’t care what country an enemy combatant was born in. Our troops shouldn’t have to die because our politicians have decided that we won’t use the weapons that can devastate our enemy. (While they sit safely at home) Make war something no one wants.[/quote] This x eleventy bajillion. Somehow we have gotten it into our heads that there is such an animal as "civilized warfare" and that is a load of crap. War is organized killing writ large. There is nothing civilized about that and there shouldn't be because the idea that we can wage a "civilized" war allows us to justify waging wars for all sorts of reasons other than self defense from an existential threat. A friend of mine says it best, "You can't fight a war with fucking lawyers."

[Raoul]

TMZ as the source? Pardon me for being dubious.

[TMF]

This x eleventy bajillion.

Somehow we have gotten it into our heads that there is such an animal as "civilized warfare" and that is a load of crap. War is organized killing writ large. There is nothing civilized about that and there shouldn't be because the idea that we can wage a "civilized" war allows us to justify waging wars for all sorts of reasons other than self defense from an existential threat. A friend of mine says it best, "You can't fight a war with ####ing lawyers."

Problem is we haven't been engaging in war. We've been engaging in nation building and everyone starts shooting at us. There's no military in the world better at crushing foreign armies than the US military. We can't win hearts and minds by killing everyone. It's maddening that we keep doing this. When we go in we need to have clear cut goals that are reasonable. Crush the enemy and leave. Warmongers send us there then the bleeding hearts won't let us leave. It makes no sense.

[Chucktshoes]

[quote name="TMF" post="1095876" timestamp="1389834256"]Problem is we haven't been engaging in war. We've been engaging in nation building and everyone starts shooting at us. There's no military in the world better at crushing foreign armies than the US military. We can't win hearts and minds by killing everyone. It's maddening that we keep doing this. When we go in we need to have clear cut goals that are reasonable. Crush the enemy and leave. Warmongers send us there then the bleeding hearts won't let us leave. It makes no sense.[/quote] Agreed. "Nation building" is a far more cruel, inhumane and terrible thing than war for it entails not only crushing a nation or people group's ability to wage war but also their spiritual identity. It crushes their ability to choose their own path and substitutes our choices for their own. When we attempt to build a new nation from the ashes of a defeated one, we attempt to remake it in our own image while forgetting that our national identity wasn't given to is by outsiders. It was built over generations by our own people. Sorry, I'm ranting again aren't i?

[E4 No More]

Well, you must consider the mission. There is more to war than just killing. If killing won wars then we'd own Vietnam, Korea, Iraq and Afghanistan. Killing is certainly a strategy to eliminate the enemy's ability to secure an area and make war against you, but the overall strategy isn't dominated by attrition alone; especially when the enemy doesn't need to be as big as an army. They just need to be big enough to get on CNN. The only real victories the enemy has had against us in that war is in the media. When we engage in the type of stuff they do we are no longer the good guys. That doesn't make them the good guys either, as we come to expect that kind of stuff from them. But how do we make ourselves out to be bringers of peace and respect to a foreign culture if we do things disrespectful to that culture?
The answer here is not to get involved at all because atrocities will happen in war on both sides no matter what you do to mitigate it. That is a fact. But we did get involved under the pretense of removing an evil dictator and bringing peace and democracy to the people of Iraq, so we need to own it when we do something jacked up. Not that I think these Marines absolutely did anything wrong, just speaking in generalities in regard to your post.

I disagree. Wars are won by crushing the will of the enemy to fight. No pacification has ever worked to my knowledge.

[tnguy]

Make war something no one wants.

 

That would require putting politicians on the front-lines.

[Chucktshoes]

[quote name="tnguy" post="1095958" timestamp="1389840090"]That would require putting politicians on the front-lines.[/quote] I heartily endorse this plan. When can we send the entirety of the elected and appointed Washington political class to...where is it they want to get involved next? Syria? Iran? You know what, I don't care where the plane is headed, I just want to know when it is leaving so I can be there to wish them bon voyage and no damn returns.

[tnguy]

Yep. Let's load them up with the hairdressers and telephone sanitizers.

[LagerHead]

Not sure if it was directed at me but, in case it was I took the high road after I said I could care less about them pissing, burning, whatever, just don't film ####. Despite me taking the OATH, yes that included to abide by the Geneva Convention, I've only had rehearsals and never got to fire my weapon in anger in the 6,yrs, 8 months, and 11 days I served (5yrs of those as a grunt).
 
I can't tell you how I would feel if I lost a brother in combat, but I'm sure I would experience the will to seek revenge, being pissed, and ready to kill a mofo over it, but I still have other brothers to look after and I would hate myself even more if I did something stupid to cause harm to brothers. 
 
We are better than that and I'm sure there's probably a bigger story to this that the media is not showing. I mean after all, we, veterans and active duty personnel are killer and psycho paths according to the media and DHS, right?

It was not directed at you in particular. It was directed at anyone who says this is ok, but would be, or have been pissed at similar situations in Iraq, Somalia, etc.

As far as the overpowering smell theory, I kind of doubt that simply cleaning up a smell is worthy of pictures. How about not leaving bodies to rot in an area where you live? I'm not saying it's not possible, because I'm sure it is; I just don't buy it. Regardless, we would never accept the same excuse if the same happened to one of our fallen, of that I am sure.

The point is, we as Americans like to tout how we never colonize a defeated enemy's country. We are taught in basic training that we are the ones who don't do the unthinkable things that are done to our servicemen. So when I see people taking joy in seeing this kind of thing done to the enemy, no matter how despicable that enemy might be, I have to cry foul. We ARE better than that, period.

[Grunt67]

Doesn't bother me. Now, the Casey Anthony clothes auction ad afterward......that is disturbing.

[Daniel]

Perhaps in America but then to argue your point, "fag" in America isn't the same "fag" in England either. While it may be slang and military jargon the definition hasn't changed since its conception. My point was that I was using a generalized term that is accepted world wide, not just here. ;)

 

"A soldier is one who fights as part of an organized land-based armed force; if that force is for hire the person is generally termed a mercenary soldier, or mercenary. The majority of cognates of the word "soldier" that exist in other languages have a meaning that embraces both commissioned and non-commissioned officers in national land forces."

 

Marines arent a land-based armed force. Just sayin'.

[Daniel]

War should be hell. It should be disgusting, violent and brutal. People should understand that innocent civilians and children will die. Our enemies should understand that we will use devastating weapons on them. The only mercy shown will be to those that surrender.

If they are enemy combatants I don’t care if they burn them alive or what they do with the bodies. I also don’t care what country an enemy combatant was born in.

Our troops shouldn’t have to die because our politicians have decided that we won’t use the weapons that can devastate our enemy. (While they sit safely at home)

Make war something no one wants.

 

I agree. Total War or no war. IMO.