US war crimes in Haditha

[Ace42X]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/5039420.stm

[HAL 9000]

This is so terrible - I am amazed by the lack of media coverage of this. Could an American let me know how much coverage this is getting in the states, because I think this is huge and it seems almost an afterthought in the way it is covered in the UK.

Still at least the troops are going to get 'ethical training' now. Im sorry but if you cant see that shooting a baby in the face with a rifle is unethical then you are most likely beyond the help of training.

I cant believe this shit, this is beyond words .

[D_Raay]

It has actually received quite a fair bit of coverage. Of course there is the spin of attacking the messenger rather than the act (as O'Reilly has been doing).

[enree erzweglle]

"But a report filed by Iraqi police accused US troops of rounding up and deliberately shooting 11 people in the house, including five children and four women, before blowing up the building.

The video tape obtained by the BBC shows a number of dead adults and children at the site with what our world affairs editor John Simpson says were clearly gunshot wounds."
It makes me physically sick to even think about this. :(

[FunkyHiFi]

Yes this is receiving regular coverage here.

[fucktopgirl]

that does not surprise me!

sick minds are they!

[Schmeltz]

Im sorry but if you cant see that shooting a baby in the face with a rifle is unethical then you are most likely beyond the help of training.


No, it means your training has worked perfectly. What else do we expect from people who have been psychologically reconstructed to ignore both their basic instincts and moral upbringing, and re-engineered to believe that violence is a legitimate way to deal with high-pressure situations? I don't think this is the first time something like this has happened in Bush's Iraq, and I don't think it will be the last. And what really sickens me is the thought that the rabid power-hungry ideologues who created this situation and continue to spin it as some kind of glorious achievement really and actually do believe that incidents like these are simply minor setbacks in their program of progress and beneficence, instead of realizing that they have loosed an appalling, degraded anarchy upon the world and left the rest of us to clean it up.

History, I hope, will wreak a terrible vengeance on these people and their programs of exploitation and destruction. So long as our children learn these lessons, we will glean something positive from the experience. In the meantime, bite the pillow: it's going to get worse before it gets better.

[Bango]

No, it means your training has worked perfectly. What else do we expect from people who have been psychologically reconstructed to ignore both their basic instincts and moral upbringing, and re-engineered to believe that violence is a legitimate way to deal with high-pressure situations? I don't think this is the first time something like this has happened in Bush's Iraq, and I don't think it will be the last. And what really sickens me is the thought that the rabid power-hungry ideologues who created this situation and continue to spin it as some kind of glorious achievement really and actually do believe that incidents like these are simply minor setbacks in their program of progress and beneficence, instead of realizing that they have loosed an appalling, degraded anarchy upon the world and left the rest of us to clean it up.

History, I hope, will wreak a terrible vengeance on these people and their programs of exploitation and destruction. So long as our children learn these lessons, we will glean something positive from the experience. In the meantime, bite the pillow: it's going to get worse before it gets better.

I'd like for you to point out to me where in their training they are taught to murder innocent civilians? They're taught to react violently to people who are threatenng their lives, not these civilians who were not threatening them.

So just show me where they're taught this, then you win.

[SobaViolence]

Schmeltz was alluding that the result of their dehumanizing trainning is psychopathic, brainless, monstrocities.

[Schmeltz]

Soba has it right. Soldiers aren't trained to kill civilians, but the perpetration of atrocities by soldiers is a consequence - maybe even a logical consequence - of the training they receive. It happened at Mai Lai, it happened at Haditha. These men weren't specifically trained to perform this disgusting behaviour, but the training they underwent, in which they were brutalized and psychologically accustomed to performing violence on "legitimate" targets, made it easier for them to do these things. Broadly, it would seem that once a human who has been taught that violence is wrong is then retaught that violence is a legitimate reaction to high-intensity situations, they are much more likely to resort to this violence even when it has no legitimate target. End result: poor children in a Third World shithole being gunned down by the most sophisticated military machine in history.

And, by the way, I'm not trying to "win" anything. I'm just expressing an idea. That's the point of conversation.

[enree erzweglle]

Soba has it right. Soldiers aren't trained to kill civilians, but the perpetration of atrocities by soldiers is a consequence - maybe even a logical consequence - of the training they receive. It happened at Mai Lai, it happened at Haditha. These men weren't specifically trained to perform this disgusting behaviour, but the training they underwent, in which they were brutalized and psychologically accustomed to performing violence on "legitimate" targets, made it easier for them to do these things. Broadly, it would seem that once a human who has been taught that violence is wrong is then retaught that violence is a legitimate reaction to high-intensity situations, they are much more likely to resort to this violence even when it has no legitimate target. End result: poor children in a Third World shithole being gunned down by the most sophisticated military machine in history.The idea, yes, is to dehumanize both the soldier and the target so that it's easier for the former to get rid of the latter. And it's kind of hard on the Dehumanizing Trainers to be selective about what constitutes a human. A human is a human is a human and so the lines get blurred and people who "shouldn't" die wind up dying.

When my kid told me that he was joining the ROTC (he's in boot camp basic training right now) it hit me incredibly hard because I'm about as opposed to that mentality as you can get. And so was he, so I thought.

The news settled in layers, lots and lots of layers. Didn't have a lot of time to react to it all either--the recruiters are fond of imposing false deadlines to get kids to sign up before they have a chance to think about what they're doing, to be influenced in their decisions by people like me.

Anyway, about his news, ultimately, what settled with me is what you're describing--the idea that my kid is off somewhere, learning how to KILL people. It's that little sentence fragment that I keep thinking about: learning how to kill people. Learning how to kill people. It buzzes in my head I think even when I don't realize it. How do you teach that. How do you learn it. I've dedicated my life and my time with him to so much the opposite that it's the most challenging thing I think I've ever had to face, knowing that my kid is off somewhere, learning how to kill people.

[Schmeltz]

Well, just remember that the vast majority of soldiers who are put through this process are able to reconcile it with themselves and perform their duties honourably and with a view to safeguarding and protecting civilians rather than terrorizing and murdering them. The best weaponry your son carries is his balanced upbringing and the knowledge that his mom cares about him, and if he's called to exercise his new skills that, more than his gun or his buddies, is probably what will get him through it.

The ultimate blame, of course, does not rest with the kids who want to serve their country or need a career path, but with the power dons who exploit the honesty and abilities of those younger and poorer to serve the same "strategic interests" that the wealthy have been promoting for our entire history: power, wealth, and more power, and more wealth. The children of Haditha were killed by Marines only in the immediate sense; indirectly, Dick Cheney is the guy who signed the papers who called up the troops who pulled the triggers that shot the bullets that killed those people. They're the ones who ought to hang for perpetrating their grotesque power charades on the world.

[enree erzweglle]

Well, just remember that the vast majority of soldiers who are put through this process are able to reconcile it with themselves and perform their duties honourably and with a view to safeguarding and protecting civilians rather than terrorizing and murdering them. The best weaponry your son carries is his balanced upbringing and the knowledge that his mom cares about him, and if he's called to exercise his new skills that, more than his gun or his buddies, is probably what will get him through it.

The ultimate blame, of course, does not rest with the kids who want to serve their country or need a career path, but with the power dons who exploit the honesty and abilities of those younger and poorer to serve the same "strategic interests" that the wealthy have been promoting for our entire history: power, wealth, and more power, and more wealth. The children of Haditha were killed by Marines only in the immediate sense; indirectly, Dick Cheney is the guy who signed the papers who called up the troops who pulled the triggers that shot the bullets that killed those people. They're the ones who ought to hang for perpetrating their grotesque power charades on the world.That's a very, very kind and sweet post and reminder of what's important. Very eloquent. Thanks so much for that. I know why he wants to do what he's doing and I understand his need to serve and help--he's talked about that with me lots in the past few months. Hopefully, he will find and keep the balance that you describe and yeah, I do care a lot for him. Funny that. :)

[Schmeltz]

:)

[Ace42X]

I'd like for you to point out to me where in their training they are taught to murder innocent civilians? They're taught to react violently to people who are threatenng their lives, not these civilians who were not threatening them.

So just show me where they're taught this, then you win.

Their combat training is designed to condition instant and instinctual violent responses to stimuli. Much as a dog can be made to respond to a bell sub-consciously (reflexively) by drooling in anticipation of food, soldiers are conditioned to retaliate automatically and instinctively to any perceived threat.

Likewise, they are operantly conditioned to perform violent tasks, with a combination of both positive and negative reinforcement. They are rewarded for "kill shots" on the target range, and for reacting aggresively to threats.

However, because both these systems work *entirely* subconsciously, it is simply not possible for the soldiers to apply conscious descriminatory procedures. They get rewards for making shots on the target-range, and for being lethal and effective at killing. At no point in their long and formal training do they randomly get hit around the head and shouted at saying "that was a little girl you killed, now drop and give me twenty," and even if they did, it would need to be as often as they are rewarded for the other actions.

When they react violently, it is because they have been conditioned to, not because of a series of conscious decisions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operant_conditioning
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning

From "The psychological cost of learning to kill in war and society":

The twentieth century, with its bloody world wars, revolutions, and genocides accounting for hundreds of millions dead, would seem to prove that human beings are incredibly vicious predators and that killing is as natural as eating. But Lieutenant Colonel Dave Grossman, a psychologist and U.S. Army Ranger, demonstrates this is not the case. The good news, according to Grossman - drawing on dozens of interviews, first-person reports, and historic studies of combat, ranging from Frederick the Great's battles in the eighteenth century through Vietnam - is that the vast majority of soldiers are loath to kill. In World War II, for instance, only 15 to 25 percent of combat infantry were willing to fire their rifles. The provocative news is that modern armies, using Pavlovian and operant conditioning, have learned how to overcome this reluctance. In Korea about 50 percent of combat infantry were willing to shoot, and in Vietnam the figure rose to over 90 percent.


From http://www.killology.com/art_onkilling_overcoming.htm
This kind of powerful operant conditioning is the only technique which will reliably influence the primitive, midbrain processing of a frightened human being. (...)I was told by my boss, Col. Johnston Beach, that the military’s marksmanship training program, with its pop-up targets and intricate reinforcement schedule, was identified by B. F. Skinner, during a visit to West Point, as an “almost perfect example of operant conditioning.”

Modern military training over-rides natural biological imperatives that all non-psychopaths have. By influencing reactions on a subliminal level, you can alter wider more conscious behaviour. Someone who is programmed to expect a reward from killing is less likely to descriminate against their inclination.

[Warrior]

in a simple way ; soldiers are totally fucked!

[ericlee]

At no point in their long and formal training do they randomly get hit around the head and shouted at saying "that was a little girl you killed, now drop and give me twenty," and even if they did, it would need to be as often as they are rewarded for the other actions.


Just to clear this up a little. At one point in every soldier's military career, it's mandatory to attend the National Training Center (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Irwin) which is a whole month long block of hitting people in the head and shouting, "that was a little girl you killed." As a matter of fact, here's a job application (http://seeker.dice.com/jobsearch/servlet/JobSearch?op=101&dockey=xml/f/d/fd58096205cef8d0e3f2ba8ddd74e133@activejobs0&c=1&source=1) to be one of the "innocent people" on the battlefield.

Now, since there's such a high demand for soldiers to be deployed to Iraq and they may not have time to attend at the National Training Center, they do have similar training routines provided in basic training.

As far as medals go in N.T.C, there's an a.a.r conducted after the block of training at Fort Irwin where the soldiers will be recongized for thier actions and after the troops leave the training area to get back to their units, they will have a ceremony conducted in which medals such as the A.A.M or higher are issued to individual soldiers.

There is also a major training course in Fort Polk Louisiana called the JRTC (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/facility/fort-polk.htm) which also has civilians on the battlefield.

[kaiser soze]

there is only one problem...the soldiers know the civilians in training ( either in the flesh or cardboard ) are there for training, not to mention U.S. citizens

but in the real world and after many or lengthy tours....the lines between enemy and innocent blurs

they need to have constant sensitivity training in the warzone

these soldiers should have known better. They could have EASILY taken their frustration out on more insurgents for their buddies death, but they found a soft and readily killable target

(n) :(

[ericlee]

Even if all is said and done and if the soldiers get convicted, who's to say what really happened.

Nobody could tell the story better than the people who were there.

Many things could have been the result of this horrible outcome.

Sadly enough, it could have been an act of martyrdom which goes more routes than a suicide bomber. Setting a family up to get killed which of course makes us look bad means alot to them. They know the media and they know the media would rather cover things that are terrible doings rather than heroric.

It could have been just the simple fact that yeah, there's some fragged out jarheads out there doing shit that they know shouldn't happen and yes, there is a vast amount of soldiers like such in that war.

I will mention again, no, we shouldn't be there. Damn, we even have a dipshit leader who is getting a hint that what he has creative was a bad idea but it's too late to turn back now, he's dug himself in such a deep mess that I can forsee at least 20 years so have it semi cleaned up.

Now as far as comments like, "soldiers are totally fucked up" or have "sick minds." Only the soldiers that would intentionally kill innocent families as such, if they are really guilty can fall right into these catagories.

There are some good people in the military who raise families and serve an important purpose in life and no, I'm not totally fucked up nor do I have a sick mind.

[Ace42X]

Just to clear this up a little. At one point in every soldier's military career, it's mandatory to attend the National Training Center (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Irwin) which is a whole month long block of hitting people in the head and shouting, "that was a little girl you killed." As a matter of fact, here's a job application (http://seeker.dice.com/jobsearch/servlet/JobSearch?op=101&dockey=xml/f/d/fd58096205cef8d0e3f2ba8ddd74e133@activejobs0&c=1&source=1) to be one of the "innocent people" on the battlefield.

Now, since there's such a high demand for soldiers to be deployed to Iraq and they may not have time to attend at the National Training Center, they do have similar training routines provided in basic training.

That's interesting, and certainly helps mitigate the case of soldiers, but the problem with conditioning is that it is persistant. Just as trained dogs do not "lose" their training when treats are not readily available on the job, and just as gamblers don't "lose" the gambling bug as soon as they start losing (when the reinforcement for the gambling, winning, is removed), it would require a *lot* more intense conditioning to "unprogram" a soldier.

I'll read up on the NTC training procedure and see how close to "counter conditioning" it comes to.

[ericlee]

That's interesting, and certainly helps mitigate the case of soldiers, but the problem with conditioning is that it is persistant. Just as trained dogs do not "lose" their training when treats are not readily available on the job, and just as gamblers don't "lose" the gambling bug as soon as they start losing (when the reinforcement for the gambling, winning, is removed), it would require a *lot* more intense conditioning to "unprogram" a soldier.

I'll read up on the NTC training procedure and see how close to "counter conditioning" it comes to.

There is a plentifull amount of unprogramming a soldier If it's necessary. After the completion of thier term in the military or if they are returning from a combat enviroment, they are required to take a psychological evaluation in which they can determine what therapeutic steps should be taken if necessary.

NTC and JRTC are both pre combat training courses so no, you will not see any counter conditioning if you research them but, there is an outprocessing procedure for every single soldier to ensure they will be capable to functionally return to the public and work/live as a civilian.

While I sit here and read dog in reference to a soldier which is done twice by you just makes me think that your value of human life is no different than that of these jarheads that killed innocent people. If they are proven guilty.

[D_Raay]

If they are proven guilty.

Photographs of dead bodies, blood , and American shell casings don't lie. If they are proven innocent, something isn't right.

[D_Raay]

The ultimate blame, of course, does not rest with the kids who want to serve their country or need a career path, but with the power dons who exploit the honesty and abilities of those younger and poorer to serve the same "strategic interests" that the wealthy have been promoting for our entire history: power, wealth, and more power, and more wealth. The children of Haditha were killed by Marines only in the immediate sense; indirectly, Dick Cheney is the guy who signed the papers who called up the troops who pulled the triggers that shot the bullets that killed those people. They're the ones who ought to hang for perpetrating their grotesque power charades on the world.

Exactly.

[ericlee]

Photographs of dead bodies, blood , and American shell casings don't lie. If they are proven innocent, something isn't right.

yeah, for sure the physical evidence is there but as far as the whole story behind what lead to these events will never be clear.

One side of the conflict's story will collide with the other and issues like these are so sensitive that noone will ever be able to know what actually happened.

I'm quite disgusted myself and I'm not taking either side, it's just that I've got difficulties believing anything put out by the media.

It could very possibly be that these marines have neglected thier training and released all of their aggression in this disgusting manner. Being that I was in the military, I could undoubtly tell you that no matter how vigerous the training is back in garrison is not complete enough for them to endure the real situations. That kind of training is aquired during their duration of their deployment in the actual harsh combat enviroments.

Believe me, I do realize that there's a huge void in evaulation upon all the soldiers out there and right now with the war going on like it is, the basic requirements for being a soldier have taken a drastic decrease and it's pretty much narrowed down to if you got a pulse and you're breathing, here take a gun and fight a war. I've been out of the army for going on 5 years now and I can notice the drop in standards which can cause these things to happen.

[Ace42X]

While I sit here and read dog in reference to a soldier which is done twice by you just makes me think that your value of human life is no different than that of these jarheads that killed innocent people. If they are proven guilty.

I use dogs because they are the animal Pavlov used to illustrate the phenomenon of classical conditioning. I could equally have said Chicken, Pig, Pidgeon, Sheep, or Cat. The procedure is the same and works in the same way.

It isn't about value judgements, it is about simple scientific fact.

And, I didn't so much mean "on leaving the army." I am sure the US army has learned their lesson after the problem with 'Nam vets, and are more careful on setting their soldiers free back home. It is what is going on over there that is the issue.

[FunkyHiFi]

yeah, for sure the physical evidence is there but as far as the whole story behind what lead to these events will never be clear.
I agree.

it's just that I've got difficulties believing anything put out by the media.
Same here.

And I know this may seem like I'm playing with words, but to me, soldiers are trained to defend themselves & their country - i.e. they are not trained to be "violent". Because despite what the politically-correct crowd thinks, there are truly bad people out there, people who do not respond to hugs or verbal pleadings of "please be nice".

To be clear here: I didn't vote for Bush and I do not think we should have gone over there.

BTW: I have problems with any information source - Wikipedia in this case - that can edited by anyone. These days, it pays to be a bit paranoid.

[ericlee]

soldiers are trained to defend themselves & their country.

I could totally agree with you here. Situation is at this moment though, we aren't defending our country. I have a very ignorant political view on things and I'm not going to lie but, I've got a very strong actual fact point of view. Especially since my career was a full time soldier for 8 years and most likely, the rest of my life, my careers will involve military relations somehow. We're pushing our culture and trying to shove it in the face of a culture who's had their standards set way before us and they do it in a prestige manner.

Being that I was a fellow soldier and have been there, all I can do is think how they think. If some foreign country decides to drop bombs on my soil for no apparent reason, then damn right. I'm going to defend the country in which I was raised upon.

they are not trained to be "violent".

I was trained to be one violent, one shot-one kill, mofo. On the other hand, along with that kind of training, there is extensive training on who to place that first shot and how to determine whether it's a good decision prior to pulling the trigger. In the "haze of war", adrenaline will override any conscience thoughts. This is natural.

To be clear here: I didn't vote for Bush and I do not think we should have gone over there.

This is exactly how the majority of the soldiers feel who are pre-enlisted Bush feel and want to make a career out of the military feel. What can they do now? It's kind of like an inmate who's a constant offender. Repeating violations because it's the only way of life that he's known of. Except the military is one of the best decisions for a person to make because of all the benefits.

Still, I've been there. I know what happens there and even if the marines are proven INNOCENT, I will never know what actually happened there.

[kaiser soze]

I agree.


Same here.

And I know this may seem like I'm playing with words, but to me, soldiers are trained to defend themselves & their country - i.e. they are not trained to be "violent". Because despite what the politically-correct crowd thinks, there are truly bad people out there, people who do not respond to hugs or verbal pleadings of "please be nice".

To be clear here: I didn't vote for Bush and I do not think we should have gone over there.

BTW: I have problems with any information source - Wikipedia in this case - that can edited by anyone. These days, it pays to be a bit paranoid.

I guess the memo about Abu Grahib and Guantanamo didn't get to your desk

There are more than enough sadistic, violent people who join the military because they WANT to kill...."protecting" is just what they have to call it

[D_Raay]

Back to what Schmeltz said, the blame here lies squarely at the feet of the Bush crowd. Just like Abu Ghraib, I don't expect them to actually absorb any of it even though they are clearly accountable for this mess that is Iraq.

The fact these soldiers are about to potentially lose the rest of their lives over this while this crowd remains free and indignant has me as mad as I can possibly get.

[ericlee]

Back to what Schmeltz said, the blame here lies squarely at the feet of the Bush crowd. Just like Abu Ghraib, I don't expect them to actually absorb any of it even though they are clearly accountable for this mess that is Iraq.

The fact these soldiers are about to potentially lose the rest of their lives over this while this crowd remains free and indignant has me as mad as I can possibly get.


and still I have to state, upon the guidance of what the media is here for us to read.

Who are reading about and where are these resources coming from.

If you haven't actually been there in the predicimant then which judgement are you getting your advice from?

[D_Raay]

and still I have to state, upon the guidance of what the media is here for us to read.

Who are reading about and where are these resources coming from.

If you haven't actually been there in the predicimant then which judgement are you getting your advice from?
Well it has been my experience that the media has been very easy on this administration even in the face of downright deception.

Some further research from some completely unbiased and legitimate sources shows this to be much worse than it is being portayed as. I mean that in the sense that they must report this the way it is; that being, as one US general described it "ugly", they report but don't fully portray the outrage this has caused , especially amongst Iraqis themselves.

The prime minister of Iraq himself had some words that had to be reported and were very harsh and critical of the US military, but the media allowed it to be spun. Not exactly the way to deal with such a sensitive matter, and not at all what a responsible media would do.

[D_Raay]

The soldiers in the Ishaqi incident were cleared and here of some photographs of the bodies...

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Graphic_photographs_show_bodies_of_civilians_0602. html

Again I do not blame the soldiers. I spend a good portion of my time trying to get them home and safe.

[FunkyHiFi]

The following is from this article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060528/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_killing_crisis), dated May 28:

Some analysts, however, say the killings of civilians also reflect frustration among young troops fighting a difficult war with no end in sight. They say these young fighters have been thrust into an alien culture for repeated tours in a war whose strategy many of them do not understand.

"What we're seeing more of now, and these incidents will increase monthly, is the end result of fuzzy, imprecise national direction combined with situational ethics at the highest levels of this government," said retired Air Force Col. Mike Turner, a former planner at the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
"situational ethics": a.k.a. the greedy/ignorant/selfish/arrogant people running this country right now?

As far as violence is concerned: when I was wrestling back in college, about once a week someone would ask me how could I participate in such a violent sport. Violent? Er, not really. Wrestling - real wrestling, not the fake shit on TV - consists of a series of actions designed to put your opponent on his back. Actions that cause injuries on purpose are not allowed, though accidental injuries do occur, mostly just pulled muscles and minor cuts (and yes, there are a few a-holes that wrestle seemingly just so they can inflict pain on others). Our trainer told us that the football and (surprisingly) the soccer teams had many more serious injuries than us wrestlers. Watch some high-level college wrestling here (http://www.wrestlingreportvideo.com/video/Mat_Town_2005/); the 197lb match is a cool one. Violence is a relative thing I guess.

[fucktopgirl]

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0607-02.htm

"The Pentagon has responded to allegations of a massacre at Haditha by withdrawing the concerned soldiers from Iraq and investigating them for criminal misconduct. Authorities also say they will launch a new round of "ethical training" for American troops before they are sent overseas"


Ethical training,hum yea that will fix the problem.HOw about not sending more soldiers and finished this stupid war!