It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Troops fail to understand rules of war

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Troops in MOST cases do not FAIL to understand the rules of war. What is happening is your asking 18,19, 20 and even up to 25 year old KIDS to go off to WAR. Your asking KIDS in that age bracket to leave their families, leave their homes, leave their friends, sacrifice their lives and limbs for their country. Your asking them to miss holidays, birthdays, anniversaries, births of their children and so on. These guys (and some gals) are getting letters from their wives, husbands, girlfriends, boyfriends, etc... telling them they have cheated on them or moved on to a new relationship because of their absence. They are missing out on their favorite sitcoms and movies, sporting events and so on.

Their lives consist of CONSTANT danger, CONSTANT desicion making that can and usually does take the lives of other people, CONSTANT visuals of death of friends and fellow soldiers, not to mention the death they see inflicted by insurgents on children and other innocent civilians. They are now CONSTANTLY questioning their cause. And MOST important, they are CONSTANTLY hearing NEGATIVE feedback from their own countrymen. So why the F, do you think they are on edge and quite possibly making wrong desicions at times.

Sure we sign that dotted line and understand that WAR is always a possiblity. But for people to actually think you can take all the things I mentioned above, set them to the side or switch it off and stay professional for the lenghts of time out government has asked of them, your nuts.

90%, or maybe alittle more of the US population DOES NOT, or WILL NOT, serve in the military...therefore will NEVER understand the sacrifices and strain these soldiers endure. So for that you do not have the right to judge them and their actions. Are some things they do outright unlawful and cruel...yes...should they be punished for those actions...depending on the situation..yes...but before we start pointing fingers and demanding they be treated like criminals remember this:

Crime happens EVERYDAY in THIS country and we give all these scumbags the chance to prove their innocence. We allow them to use excuses such as mental state, drunk, high on drugs etc...

Women kill their own babies daily because their to lazy to wanna raise them and to irresponsible to not get knocked up. Men beat their wives/gf's to death out of rage because their actually sissy's and can't beat up anyone else. We have become a soft country towards crime and the people who commit them. Funny thing is these people commit them and have not even come CLOSE to the stress and sacrifice of our soldiers.

So bottom line is....if we want to be soft and allow for excuses...lets do it to those who deserve it. THE SOLDIER....sure punish him...but understand him and his situation first.




posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by shadow_soldier1975
Troops in MOST cases do not FAIL to understand the rules of war. What is happening is your asking 18,19, 20 and even up to 25 year old KIDS to go off to WAR.


They did that in world war two as well. not many horror stories of the dungeons maintained in US prisoner camps back then.

If kids could act like men 60 years ago, why not today?



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 04:56 PM
link   


Obey or die, that's the way it's always been.


Then perhaps we ought to be glad things have changed, eh?

"Exterminating the enemy population" is no longer an acceptable strategy.
It's a good way to guarantee you'll get nuked.

Something to think about...

[edit on 9/4/07 by xmotex]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 04:59 PM
link   
reply to post by dr_strangecraft
 



for the most part i think i get the gist of your post but for the rest i think youre just being snippy.

youve seen full metal jacket yes? would you call where the kid with attitude beat the unarmed villager to death with his shotty acceptably cautious?

i wouldnt myself but thats just me.

yes there are rules of conduct, rules of engagement and rules of war. and your average soldier from private to general is going to follow them.

but not everyone does. just like not everyone drives the speed limit or pays their taxes, some soldiers break the law. they are criminals and should be held over for court martial.

HOWEVER, i guess the point i was going for and apparently failed at was that there are going to be times when a strung out private is going to feel like he's in danger and has to make a decision. he MAY make the wrong one and in THAT case i dont think he's necessarily a war criminal.

so, to clarify...guy with gun and attitude rolling up on some guy and capping him, beating him or raping his daughter=war criminal

private at checkpoint who caps a civillian who he felt may have been a threat but wasnt=not necessarily a criminal. there could have been mitigating circumstances. maybe the guy wasnt compliant fast enough. maybe the guy was acting in a manner that said private felt was overtly threatening but may have been percieved by someone else as benign. hell maybe the guy was deaf and didnt hear the command to stop and kept on coming. the thing is that there are many in this world willing to crucify that soldier for reacting to a situation and drawing clear black and white lines and there are gray areas. does every cop that shoots an unarmed civillian go to jail? of course not, why should soldiers in a combat zone be vilified more than that cop for making the same mistake?

all i was trying to say. i guess i failed and i apologize for the confusion.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
They did that in world war two as well. not many horror stories of the dungeons maintained in US prisoner camps back then.

If kids could act like men 60 years ago, why not today?


Good point...and easy to answer. In those days even the enemy had somewhat of a respect for battle. They did not use kids as shields or strap bombs to themseleves to blow up the town square because of some far fetched belief or cause. They did not run into churches/mosques and say haha you cant shoot me only to then shoot out from the windows or play dead then blow up our boys.

Men back in WWII were just that MEN...not cowards. So our forces COULD play by or at the most bend a few rules and still be victorious. Times have changed, our enemy has changed, the countries support has changed, and to me...THE MOST IMPORTANT aspect is the politicians in DC have changed. They are not veterans or even working men like they used to be. Most of them are silver spoon fed rich Aholes who go to IVY League colleges and never have to experiance the cruel nature of WAR or life as a NORMAL citizen. So they implement and write up things that back out boys into corners...and as you can see firsthand.....it's not working.

Also back in WWII if there were suicide bombers blowing up kids, or insurgents using churches and lying about it, or just doing all the crap that they do today...the mentality of our troops and our country as a whole were simple: NO SYMPATHY FOR THE SCUM...JUST DO WHAT YOU NEED TO TO WIN AND GET HOME ALIVE!!!!

[edit on 4/9/07 by shadow_soldier1975]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 05:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
Then perhaps we ought to be glad things have changed, eh?


In a way, Yes. I'm not trying to defend war here or glorify it. What I'm trying to express that it has alwasy been a brutal, nasty, vicious affair. Trying to pretend otherwise by establishing all sorts of high-minded moral standards and then been shocked when they are violated is unreasonable.


Originally posted by xmotex
"Exterminating the enemy population" is no longer an acceptable strategy.
It's a good way to guarantee you'll get nuked.
Something to think about...
[edit on 9/4/07 by xmotex]


In truth, what is the difference between Hulagu massacring 100,00 people in Baghdad by sword or us doing it with a nuke? It just took a little longer. The end result is still the same.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 06:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by shadow_soldier1975

Good point...and easy to answer. In those days even the enemy had somewhat of a respect for battle.

Men back in WWII were just that MEN...not cowards.



Bataan Death March

"comfort women"

Downed airman from the Doolittle raid, executed publicly in Tokyo, in uniform.

SS-run p.ow. camps for 'extracting' info from US and UK pilots

Communist re-education camps for US p.o.w.'s in North Korea

The Hannoi Hilton


Americans have always been the focus of enemy attention when it comes to torture. Almost universally, our enemies have seen us as "soft," and vulnerable to those kind of techniques.

But something has changed, hasn't it? And not just in our enemies. In us. Maybe we've gotten tired of treating others better than our own p.o.w.'s could expect. Maybe we are secretly afreaid, that we have gotten soft. Perhaps we're trying to prove to ourselves, even more than to our enemies, that we are still capable of whatever is needed to achieve victory. Maybe those things happened back then, but were covered up by universal agreement between soldiers, officers, and the media.

Maybe we believe that we are fighting an enemy who would mistake mercy and fairness for weakness.

Maybe it was the pictures of the american bodies hanging from that bridge in Baghdad.


As far as being "snippy," my point about the rules of war is that they must be simple enough, and enforced enough, that the average soldier knows what the limit is, and is afraid of transgressing it.

To press the analogy of civilians who exceed the speed limit: They do this because the rules are contradictary, a detriment to getting work done, and unevenly enforced, and are seen as inherently unfair.

maybe that's a problem with the currrent rules of engagement.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 10:13 PM
link   
Plain and simple, we that sign up for military service have a responsability to the people of this country, every time that we put the uniform here or abroad we represent the United States of America, the moral, the values, the freedom, all the things that we hold dear here we represent abroad. We should be held to higher standards and rightly so.

The day that we start acting like the people we try to defeat then I will say they already defeated us and there is no more purpose on fighting.

I sign up to represent what this country stands for, not to do what my enemy do.

Every soldier, airmen, marine and sailor are train on what is a war crime, if you decide to break one of those laws no matter what the condition then to me you have lost your honor and are no better than the people we are fighting. I rather die with honor than rott in jail.

A criminal is a criminal plain and simple.

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Bunch]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 10:27 PM
link   
I have never seen anything like this.you have to pull a handbook out before you can shoot..the problem has ben reporters embedded looking for that pullitzer..A commander in chief that puts his own men on trial for fighting, for appeasance and show that we are a just nation So much for morale boosting. Wars were meant to be fought not televised and run by public opinion polls.The Brit Redcoats did that honorable Thing in combat, and, even vitriolic public opinion home, they lost the war for the colonies., not to mention a lot of their men to insurgent hit and run tactics just as we see today. After a win..ok then maybe we have the luxury to ask could we have done it differently but while its on , it should be relentless and ruthless to subdue this enemy and future ones that are already learning from our hesitation and lack of resolve, especially from the top.

In Germany right after the war we had teanms of British and American, hit squads that went out looking for known Nazis fomenting trouble..it was a capture take no prisoner operation..no trial, no geneva convention, no ACLU and New York times. Its what it took to keep that peace and victory secured...

Gentleman wars cause a lot more causualties and they obviously last a lot longer, as this is..already longer than wwii and will most certainly never end in victory, until we let the soldiers wage it as it must be waged.





[edit on 4-9-2007 by Sys_Config]

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Sys_Config]



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
Plain and simple, we that sign up for military service have a responsability to the people of this country, every time that we put the uniform here or abroad we represent the United States of America, the moral, the values, the freedom, all the things that we hold dear here we represent abroad. We should be held to higher standards and rightly so.

The day that we start acting like the people we try to defeat then I will say they already defeated us and there is no more purpose on fighting.

I sign up to represent what this country stands for, not to do what my enemy do.

Every soldier, airmen, marine and sailor are train on what is a war crime, if you decide to break one of those laws no matter what the condition then to me you have lost your honor and are no better than the people we are fighting. I rather die with honor than rott in jail.

A criminal is a criminal plain and simple.

[edit on 4-9-2007 by Bunch]


your obviously NOT a soldier in a combat arms position. I have been to combat twice. Kosovo & Iraq as a soldier and back to Iraq with Blackwater in the private sector. If this was a hollywood movie I would agree...but don't go treading in here like you have any idea. Whats your MOS son? And the rather die with honor than jail...you havent even been shot at to make such a stupid statement. Be in a position where a bullet hits you or your about to die and trust me...your knight in shining armor attitude WILL be gone!



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 10:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sys_Config
I have never seen anything like this.you have to pull a handbook out before you can shoot..the problem has ben reporters embedded looking for that pullitzer..A commander in chief that puts his own men on trial for fighting, for appeasance and show that we are a just nation So much for morale boosting. Wars were meant to be fought not televised and run by public opinion polls.The Brit Redcoats did that honorable Thing in combat, and, even vitriolic public opinion home, they lost the war for the colonies., not to mention a lot of their men to insurgent hit and run tactics just as we see today. win..ok then maybe we have the luxury to ask could we have done it differently but while its on on it should be relentless and ruthless to subdue this enemy and future ones that are already learning from our hesitation and lack of resolve, especially from the top.



I agree that fighting a war with minute by minute reports by the media is not good. Just think about WWII if everything was under the camera. It also doesn't help that the media has a separate agenda than us winning. The vast majority of troops over there deal with death day in and day out, but still find time to build schools and treat the locals with respect and tolerance. I can tell you our troops have a more moderate view of the people of the Middle East than people back home do. So what if there are a few bad apples…very few…we find them and punish them, end of story.

BTW Sys_Config rules are to protect non-combatants and to prevent mistreatment of combatants. No one in uniform would complain about them for we know they are the right thing to do, and so they are not an issue.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 11:23 PM
link   
War is an ugly business,

For years we (WWII victors), have tried to put a civilized face on the art of war,
rules, courts, etc.

We, (the US) gained our independence by breaking the so called rules of war at the time, we gained our independence from guerilla attacks and outside the box strategies to gain victory. These tactics were considered unfair.

Why should it be different for others fighting a superior force?

Our non-uniform wearing leaders, (post WW II), tried to reintroduce civilized rules to make war fall under rules.

War has no rules, what happens in war is ugly, horrific, and something undesireable by any human living.

The oaths that our soldiers take at the reception station and train under are great for morale and public opinion, but they are trained to fight another armed & uniformed fighting force, an organized military.

That is not what our troops, nor the UK, Aussie, Canadien, et al forces are facing.

The enemy is unknown, and the rules placed upon our troops, puts them in danger, it happened in Vietnam, and it's happening again, whether or not you agree with those in DC, we have our people in harms way, sacrificing for us, with their hands somewhat tied behind their back, because of rules that only they have to abide.

The rules of war as stated by the US and the Geneva convention are null and void. They have been, who has followed these rules besides the US and those fighting with us? Do these rules make it more acceptable when our side wins? Does it make us more righteous? does it make our fight more just? Some would make you think that it is more honorable to fight and die for a country that stands for these rules.

War is ugly,

You can't hide the ugliness of war by depending on rules that cost the lives of our country's youth.

I am not saying that our troops should be killing and destroying everything in sight, nor should they be able to.

Their training should prevent this, but they should be able to defend themselves and take out targets without the fear of retribution because of an oath which doesn't apply in this type of war.

How many soldiers have we lost already playing by rules the enemy uses against us as a weakness.
If we are fighting a war, damn the media, damn the politics, damn everything, win the war...

....I wonder if our leaders want this to end,

it seems there are plenty who are making billions on the blood of our brave.



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by shadow_soldier1975
 


Before you start denigrating my military service something that I will not allow you to do, I will tell you that my previous post speak for itself and that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

I would have taken my time and answer your questions, but your attitude just threw me off and I know when to debate and when not. This time I choose not.

Thanks for your service brother!



posted on Sep, 4 2007 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
Bataan Death March

"comfort women"

Downed airman from the Doolittle raid, executed publicly in Tokyo, in uniform.
...

But something has changed, hasn't it?


Quite.

First off, for what it`s worth, the executions of the Doolittle airmen occurred in Shanghai, at a cemetery.

All of the details of the incident are available in the transcripts of the Shanghai War Crimes Tribunal, one of thousands of post-war tribunals. Nearly 2,000 officers were executed for their crimes, including those listed above. Thousands more were imprisoned.

Interesting to note that these trials occurred despite the Japanese not being party to the Geneva Conventions.

I posit that what has changed is a lot more difficult to accept: The USA views the actions of it`s soldiers as being simply above reproach. A Japanese or German officer who was shown to have allowed abuse of citizens in prison would have been tried and likely executed.

In the post war years, the Germans and Japanese were both taken to task for abuse of citizens engaged in resistance of their occupation.

I`m sure most here would laugh at the very idea of American officers being tried in an Iraqi court for the same.

What`s changed?



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 02:11 AM
link   
This is about 22 individual cases of war crimes being committed. This is not about civilians being accidently killed in fire fights, soldiers shooting at suspected suicide bombers that turned out were not, or other such incidents. This is about US soldiers targeting individual people on purpose, that are not combatants or who are detainees. This is for all the posters that seem like they didnt read the article.


The articles gives examples such as



The killings include the drowning of a man soldiers pushed from a bridge into the Tigris River as punishment for breaking curfew

and


the suffocation during interrogation of a former Iraqi general believed to be helping insurgents. In the suffocation, soldiers covered the man’s head with a sleeping bag, then wrapped his neck with an electrical cord for a “stress position” they insisted was an approved technique.

and


Other killings included: A man shot after a search of his home near Balad uncovered illegal weapons and anti-American literature. Immediately after the shooting, according to testimony, Sgt. 1st Class George Diaz, who was convicted of unpremeditated murder, said, “I’m going to hell for this.” Diaz also was convicted of mistreating a teenage detainee when he forced the youth to hold a smoke grenade with the pin pulled as Diaz questioned him at gunpoint.

and


A suspected insurgent in Iraq by Staff Sgt. Shane Werst, who said the man appeared to be reaching for a weapon. Werst was acquitted of murder despite acknowledging he had fired and then planted a chrome Iraqi pistol on the suspect to make his claim of self defense more believable.


I am sure the incident about that entire Iraqi family being murdered is included in these 22 cases.

Incidents like these happen in every war and by ever nation. Also, a US soldier is just a person. No matter what training they may have received, no matter what they were made to read, no matter what they have been told what is right and what is wrong, they are people. Somethimes bad apples make their way into situations like these and these soldiers have their own view of right and wrong. Basic training does not make people holy and infallible.

The difference between the US and many past nations is that it is not standard operating procedure or even acceptable to kill non-combatants whether they are civilian, enemy soldier POW, or just a suspect detainee. The fact these are being publicly announced and looked into says a lot about the US military and our government. (despite other actions both may have done in the past.)

[edit on 5/9/07 by Pfeil]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunch
Before you start denigrating my military service something that I will not allow you to do, I will tell you that my previous post speak for itself and that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.

I would have taken my time and answer your questions, but your attitude just threw me off and I know when to debate and when not. This time I choose not.

Thanks for your service brother!


For one I'm not degrading your service to your country...i'm degrading your attitude towards soldiers in combat. Your little rant about how we should ALWAYS be professional and ALWAYS do things within the rules is enough for me to know you NEVER have seen combat. Rules are gone man. When your staring down the barrel of another weapon in the hands of an enemy you are NOT worried about UCMJ, GC, ROE's, etc...your worried about staying alive and keeping your boys alive at any and all costs. Its that simple.

Don't get me wrong there are some actions that need to be investigated and punished...but WAY to many are real mistakes, or situations were soldiers had no choice...but thanks to the media and our wonderful society, we jump to conclusions.

Oh and if my ATTITUDE threw you off enough to get upset and not answer a simple question...how do you think you would react in a combat zone getting fired at! What happen to your stedfast ALWAYS act a certain way BS!



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by shadow_soldier1975
 


Rules are rules and they are in place for a reason, to hold people accountable for their actions.

Mistakes are made during the heat of the battle, collateral damage is expected they are investigated, mistakes are made and are investigated, crimes are perpetrated and they are investigated and people punish they way it should be.

That is the purpose of this thread, read the tittle please, I'm not going to engage you on how many IED's I encounter, how many bullets were shot at my convoy, neither I going to judge you or other on how they react to battle as each individual react different despite all the training we receive, that's why we have rules in place, if not I will say we could have won Iraq a long time ago. Let's nuke the place and be done with it.

And if your attitude throw me off is because you are trying to judge me for no reason, you infer that I had not been in combat because of what I say and think, welcome to ATS, deny ignorance.

[edit on 5-9-2007 by Bunch]



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 11:45 AM
link   
What is this High School, or some kind of sporting event....son this is WAR...not some outlined day of classes and a field trip, or a football game, where if you don't follow every rule your punished or called on it. Typical regular Army BS and over half the reason why over 3000 fellow servicmen are dead. You follow those rules all you want....as it has proven time and time again those rules get our guys killed, when our guys should be killing the enemy. You DO NOT fight an enemy through rules...if that were the case AMERICA itself would not exsist...this land would be under British control. Thanks to men who think OUTSIDE the box and don't play pattycakes we took it from them.

This isnt CSI where anytime something goes wrong they should be sending in investigators. And I read the title....the title is simple...but reality is not. And if you think rules got me through Kosovo, Iraq, and Iraq as a private contractor your wrong....Rules under the guidlines of our Regular Army would of gotten me and other men killed. Just the way it is doing today......

Don't forget...those RULES are written by NON Military, NON combat people. They are written by guys who THINK they know, and who consider you expendable for the price of what? politics and $500 plate dinners for deplomacy....give me a break. I signed that line to kill my enemy...and do it however it needed to be done so my family, my country, and myself could be safe....screw the guy sitting there saying how i did it was wrong while he puts on his $300 tie and $5000 suit.....I'll be more than happy to hand him my M4 and he can do it himself...by the rules he is trying to enforce on us.....oh yeah thats right...he would never go!



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 12:47 PM
link   
My ex-husband, who served in Vietnam, told me that when he went through boot camp, he was inundated with the Geneva Convention rules. They read them everyday and had to carry them with them at all times.
My young friend, who went thru boot camp 2 years ago, tells me that he doesn't rememeber them being read even once.

It's how we are training our soldiers now that is the problem. That, and the fact that our soldiers can't distinguish the "good" guys from the "bad" guys in Iraq. How are they supposed to tell the difference between them? It all comes down to the fact that we shouldn't even be in Iraq in the first place. We toppled Saddam, now it's time to leave, they don't want us there.

It starts at the top, if they aren't enforcing the Geneva Convention rules, nor even teaching them, how are the soldiers supposed to know the rules of war?

I'm not saying I support these 22 guys, because I don't. I'm just saying that today's soldiers aren't trained like they used to be and I think that's a big part of the problem.



posted on Sep, 5 2007 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by shadow_soldier1975
 


Look, im not as narrow minded as you think I am. I know where you coming from and I respect your view . All im saying is that me personally I will not kill an unarmed person, use my position of authority to denigrate a human being as in Abu-Ghraib, I will not use my position to rape and murder a 14 year old girl and kill her familiy in the process.

Each combat situation is different, each mission is different, may be you went through something that I did not experience, so for you to me to argue the could have, would have, should have of battle gets us no where.

And yes I do think some of this laws we need to get rid off, because are getting us kill out there.

Take care bud and be safe! God Bless!!!

[edit on 5-9-2007 by Bunch]



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join