It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Is This a Step Toward Genocide?

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 10:32 AM

Four U.S. soldiers accused of murdering suspected insurgents during a raid in Iraq said they were under orders to "kill all military age males," according to sworn statements obtained by The Associated Press.

The soldiers first took some of the men into custody because they were using two women and a toddler as human shields. They shot three of the men after the women and child were safe and say the men attacked them.

"The ROE (rule of engagement) was to kill all military age males on Objective Murray," Staff Sgt. Raymond L. Girouard told investigators, referring to the target by its code name.

That target, an island on a canal in the northern Salahuddin province, was believed to be an al-Qaida training camp. The soldiers said officers in their chain of command gave them the order and explained that special forces had tried before to target the island and had come under fire from insurgents.


Is this an isolated incident, or the tip of an iceberg coming into view? Were these orders, according to sworn statements from the accused, meant to be applied only to "Objective Murray", or are they SOP for operations against suspected AQ and insurgent strongholds?

What this article is talking about is summary execution of POWs. Is this the new face of the US Military? Have we sunk so low, become so barbaric, that we are no better than the thugs we are fighting in an attempt to "liberate" the Iraqi people?

May God help us all if this turns out to be true and anything more than an isolated incident.

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 10:36 AM
i think it just shows us that america is not whiter than white, as some americans would let us believe. interesting if true though. wars a tough business

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 03:13 PM
I think this is just the tip of the iceberg. A lot of new stories of raped and murdered civilians begin to surface. Not necessarily the fault of military officials giving the greenlight for murder, but for allowing rednecks and former sociopaths to join the military.

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 05:52 PM
'Rednecks' are part of the problem? How do you figure 'rednecks' being allowed to join the military is part of the problem?

And wouldn't a 'former sociopath' be reformed and no longer a threat to commit conscienceless acts? Or does joining the military automatically make them revert to their former behaviors?

I get the impression from your post that you are blaming this incident on a lack of command and control, and poor recruitment and training tactics in the military. I personally think those are the least of our problems.

It may be more the "us versus them" mentality fostered by our current government, and the way war devalues the sanctity of human life that are at the root of this incident.

Whatever is behind this situation, if these soldiers are telling the truth, these tactics must not be allowed to become the status quo, or we as a country are in danger of losing much more than the war in Iraq.

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 06:21 PM
Responsibilty rests on the heads of the leaders. Enough of this blaming the sheep for the action of the shepperd crap. That sense of reasoning sounds like brainwashing put out by elitists for idiots to regurgitate.

The more we lose this insane war the more likely we are to be held accountable for the damage we have caused. So we either win and cheat at all costs or prepare to swing from the end of a ropes.

Me thinks DC is hoping there is no such thing as divine justice...

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 06:54 PM
I completely agree that the marionette cannot be held responsible for what happens when the puppet masters pull the strings.

The days of deceit fostered by the puppet masters of deception are numbered and few. The audience is losing the suspension of disbelief and the machinations of the puppeteers behind the stage curtain are becoming obvious to all.

"and the temple veil was rent in two, giving all access to the sacred place where divine knowledge dwells"

Thank you Jesus.

[edit on 22-7-2006 by Icarus Rising]

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 07:23 PM

I completely agree that the marionette cannot be held responsible for what happens when the puppet masters pull the strings.

According to the UCMJ, it's illegal to obey an illegal order.

Trouble is, unless you're a lawyer, it gets kind of hard to be sure what a "legal" order is.

But the Nuremberg trials pretty much established legally that "I was merely following orders" is not a defense when being tried for war crimes.

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 09:50 PM

According to the UCMJ, it's illegal to obey an illegal order.

Yes, but the rank and file of the average soldier did not write the UCMJ. That stip is obviously designed as a CYA manuever for the brass, who, after indoctrinating obedience to the chain of command into every recruit at boot camp, turn around and point the finger of blame at the same individuals when they follow orders that result in war crimes and atrocities.

It is beyond hypocritical; its hypocriminal.

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 10:15 PM
I wonder if these soldiers are expressing their orders accurately. It is not illegal for the rules of engagement to say that military aged males on the target sight can be presumed hostile.

It IS illegal to kill prisoners though.

"Kill all military age males" implicitly orders that no prisoners be taken and those who surrender be shot.

"Assume military age males are hostile" is legitimate, and authorizes only the killing of those who resist.

The actual nature of the order needs to be verified, however if this order was really to take no prisoners it was illegal and both the men who gave the order and the troops who followed it need to be used as examples, and the consequences need to go as high as can even remotely be justified. I was shocked and appalled when Brigadier General Karpinski was demoted.

If the Taguba Report is accurate, then Karpinski was the original source of all of the abuses at Abu Ghraib and therefore should have been tried on every count that anyone else was charged with and done time.

If Karpinski's claims are true, she isn't exhonerated at all but General Sanchez and the SECDEF need to go down too.

It is VITAL to any free society that the military be tighly disciplined. It must remain a noble organization that serves that nation's interests. When the chain of command, which, lest we forget, leads back to the executive branch which is in turn answerable to the other two branches of government and by proxy to the American people, breaks down in such a way that illegal orders are obeyed rather than being reported to a higher authority, the conditions upon which a coup is predicated are encouraged. That is doubly true when the professionalism of the military is degraded by tollerance for personal enjoyment of killing and violence.

The last thing this country needs is a fractured military command structure that at any point doesn't lead back to civilian government, spotted by sadistic/authoritarian cliques. When something is wrong, whether it's prisoner abuse, an order to kill indiscriminately, or a coup plot, it is the duty of any soldier in the know, from division to brigade to batallion to company to platoon to squad level, to blow go as high up the chain as need be to report. Bet your hat that if I got that order, I'd refuse it. I'd request mast as high as I needed if I had to go stand in front of the Commandant himself, and if that didn't work I'd send letters to my congressman and the SCOTUS, and that's how it needs to be, because there is nothing more dangerous to a nation than having an army, either its own or someone else's, within its borders and not subject to the laws and constitution.

posted on Jul, 22 2006 @ 10:34 PM
Well said. I am not obviating the individual responsibility of any rank and file soldier, just pointing out the hypocrisy of the chain of command in hanging them out to dry when illegal orders cause things to go awry.

We all need to be, first and foremost, morally motivated, law abiding citizens. The proper example needs to be set at the top of the chain of command, and followed throughout.

That's why we call them leaders, and yes, they must be held accountable, as well as those following the orders, for the outcome of those edicts.

posted on Jul, 23 2006 @ 12:03 PM
Well spoken, Icarius.

Its crap like this that tells me there is a dangerous, near incurable moral rot within the ranks of the military. Trust me, none of this would be going on on the scale it is if officers were fullfilling their duties and doing their jobs. The lack of morale, discipline, and decent behavior is a flashing red light that the officers are failing their subordinates.

After all, its the officer's responsibility to ensure the mission is carried out effectively, and that military bearing, professionalism, discipline, and morale are maintained to a high standard.

If this was just one incident, Id not worry. But this is one of many troubling and disturbing incidents involving violation of Geneva conventions and immoral, illegal, and sick conduct by enlisted men.

The enlisted men reflect the competency and ethics of the commanding officers. When the enlisted ranks are showing decay, you can rest assure the officer ranks are rotting to the core.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:25 AM
Generally speaking, I have nothing bad to say about the US military, but if any of this is true, notice I say if...than the people responsible for the acts should be, must be held accountable. The uniform code of military justise does not allow for mistreatment of civilians in any fashion, muchless rape or any other atrocity you care to mention. The penalties if found guilty are severe, the death penalty being the most severe.

I have my doubts as to whether or not it is an epidemic amongst the soldiers. To say that they are indoctrinated to this level of behaviour in bootcamp is just plain wrong...if not an outright liable.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by seagull]

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 05:01 PM

To say that they are indoctrinated to this level of behaviour in bootcamp is just plain wrong...if not an outright liable.

If you read the relevant post carefully, it says,

indoctrinating obedience to the chain of command into every recruit at boot camp

That means soldiers are trained, first and foremost, to follow orders. They are told that the success of the entire mission depends on each individual soldier following orders and doing his part without hesitation in the great unknowable plan put in place by their superior officers. Don't ask questions, don't wonder why, just do as you are told immediately.

It isn't libel to say that.

posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 05:18 PM
This is CERTAINLY not part of bootcamp indoctrination. I might know a thing or two about this. I sometimes miss boot camp. There are several parts I'd like to do again, though I'm not denying that it sucked a lot too.

The USMC (moreso than any other branch I hear) does emphasize intensity and ferocity. You spend 3 months learning a lot of things that besides preparing you to function in the Marine Corps, make you a bit intimidating and a little rough. The rules are, however, absolute. The slightest integrity violation can earn you a WORLD of hurt.

The willingness to do things like this is not institutional. In my experience though, once Marines get outside the rigidly controlled world of bootcamp, the formation of cliques becomes a lot stronger and the people who had problems before they ever joined begin to manifest and spread those problems. Abused children can make very good Marines. I've known several and they tended to be very strong, very demanding, not very mature, but very charismatic. People tried to be like them and impress them, not the least of the resons being that these individuals tended to rough other Marines up when they saw fit.

The minute leadership disolves, the baggage that individuals bring into the force with them begins to show itself. So in short, it's not part of military culture or indoctrination. It's a consequence of leadership turning a blind eye for one reason or another.

posted on Sep, 2 2006 @ 08:41 PM

Lt. Col. James P. Daniel Jr. concluded that the slayings were premeditated and warranted the death sentence based on evidence he heard at an August hearing. The case will now be forwarded to Army officials, who will decide whether Daniel's recommendation should be followed.

The soldiers, all from the Fort Campbell, Ky.-based 101st Airborne Division's 187th Infantry Regiment, are accused of killing three Iraqi men taken from a house May 9 on a marshy island outside Samarra, about 60 miles north of Baghdad.

Prosecutors argue the soldiers conspired to kill the men and then altered the scene to fit their story. They contend Girouard stabbed Hunsaker as part of the killing plot.


It looks like the Army is getting ready to throw the book at these guys, and prosecutors are claiming the killings were premeditated and perpetrated solely by the soldiers charged in the incident. The civilian attorney for one of the defendants disagrees.

Paul Bergrin, Clagett's civilian attorney, said he was surprised that Daniel recommended the case be taken to trial at all.

"I'm extremely disappointed and disheartened," Bergrin said Saturday. "They are being used as pawns in the war on terror. They followed the rules of engagement. They were confronted with violence by a known al-Qaida training camp member."

[edit on 2-9-2006 by Icarus Rising]

top topics


log in