Results 1 to 30 of 331

Thread: Backroom Errata

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Backroom Errata

    So I was skimming into coalition transgressions during the occupation of Iraq, and ended up looking at Fallujah, 2004. One incident that caught my eye was a war crimes accusation by a correspondent that a Marine had executed a wounded, unarmed Iraqi on the ground.

    On one hand, this op-ed suggests that this was a regrettable event but not a crime because the soldier made a rapid, though poor, decision under the pressure of the moment.

    On the other, the embedded correspondent described the scene thus:

    Code:
    Platoon takes fire from mosque. Platoon assaults and takes mosque, killing 10 and wounding 5. Dead are bagged and wounded processed for extraction to the rear. Platoon moves on for the day. 
    Night passes. In the morning, the platoon is informed that fire is coming from the same mosque. Platoon backtracks and investigates the mosque. 
    Dead are all still there, and the same wounded as well - but one of the five is now dead, and some of the rest have fresh, bleeding, wounds. 
    One of the Marines voices suspicion that one of the wounded is feigning death. Marine walks up to the insurgent, shoots him once, and walks away.
    For the relevant footage of the incident, watch the last minute of the Part 1 in this link. Tell me how you see it (@spmetla), because to the untrained eye what that looks like is exactly how one would imagine a war crime against POWs transpiring. Measured, deliberate, and not an "instinctual" act in the heat of combat.

    Ultimately a military investigation found no wrongdoing to pursue in the incident (apparently the same soldier shot 2 other of the wounded there as well).

    Sources tell NBC News the decision was based on the fact the Marines had been warned that the enemy would feign death and booby-trap bodies as a tactic to lure Marines to their deaths. The sources said the corporal apparently feared for his life when he fired the shots.
    Does that really hold up if these guys were known to have been incapacitated and secured previously, by the same unit in the same building? At the very least, where were the MPs or medics to take them away the day before?

    But the investigation is not over. At least one other Marine remains under investigation for shooting the fourth unarmed insurgent in that same mosque.
    I can't find anything for that investigation, but damn. 5 men captured, all dead on site within a day.

    I recall from one WW2 documentary the rationalization of a German infantryman for killing a Soviet soldier during Barbarossa. German forces were advancing, and the subject came upon a Russian, whom he ordered to raise his hands. The Russian, paralyzed with fear, made no response, so after a period the German shot him and moved forward. As described that seems understandable; it could be risky to personally disarm an enemy combatant and to guard them while waiting for backup, or lead them to the rear alone. The Fallujah incident is more difficult to understand.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  2. #2
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    That case even got attention here. Nobody was eager to take a position. I am not very eager to do that either, glad I don't have to

  3. #3
    Horse Archer Senior Member Sarmatian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Novi Sad, Serbia
    Posts
    4,315

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    It's a war crime, plain and simple. There's absolutely no ambiguity.

    Of course his life was in danger, he was a soldier in a war. That isn't a blank check to shoot unarmed people, combatants or civilians.

  4. #4
    master of the pwniverse Member Fragony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The EUSSR
    Posts
    30,680

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Ya technically it is really as simple as that, I still find it hard though, I have never been in situations like that I don't find it all that straightforward
    Last edited by Fragony; 09-10-2017 at 15:11.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Without further information, I suspect the investigation found no wrong-doing because the soldiers who shot the captured insurgents were technically following ROE for the battle to "check" dead bodies or apparently dead bodies.

    In other words, if you assume that there were numerous incidents like this one during the battle, and the letter of doctrine allowed it, then this group of soldiers could absolutely not be court-martialed without implicating dozens or hundreds of others, potentially up to the staff. Price of justice too high to pay this time.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  6. #6
    Praefectus Fabrum Senior Member Anime BlackJack Champion, Flash Poker Champion, Word Up Champion, Shape Game Champion, Snake Shooter Champion, Fishwater Challenge Champion, Rocket Racer MX Champion, Jukebox Hero Champion, My House Is Bigger Than Your House Champion, Funky Pong Champion, Cutie Quake Champion, Fling The Cow Champion, Tiger Punch Champion, Virus Champion, Solitaire Champion, Worm Race Champion, Rope Walker Champion, Penguin Pass Champion, Skate Park Champion, Watch Out Champion, Lawn Pac Champion, Weapons Of Mass Destruction Champion, Skate Boarder Champion, Lane Bowling Champion, Bugz Champion, Makai Grand Prix 2 Champion, White Van Man Champion, Parachute Panic Champion, BlackJack Champion, Stans Ski Jumping Champion, Smaugs Treasure Champion, Sofa Longjump Champion Seamus Fermanagh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Latibulm mali regis in muris.
    Posts
    11,450

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Without further information, I suspect the investigation found no wrong-doing because the soldiers who shot the captured insurgents were technically following ROE for the battle to "check" dead bodies or apparently dead bodies.

    In other words, if you assume that there were numerous incidents like this one during the battle, and the letter of doctrine allowed it, then this group of soldiers could absolutely not be court-martialed without implicating dozens or hundreds of others, potentially up to the staff. Price of justice too high to pay this time.
    Probably a fair assessment of the mind of the decision makers in this instance. People feigning casualty status in order to conduct an attack from surprise tend to make ALL of the opposing soldiers leery of any questionable circumstance and leave them prone to committing war crimes. That has happened to US forces in the past, where fear/frustration become pervasive and encourage behavior that is out of line.
    "The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman

    "The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken

  7. #7
    Coffee farmer extraordinaire Member spmetla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Kona, Hawaii
    Posts
    2,985

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    Without further information, I suspect the investigation found no wrong-doing because the soldiers who shot the captured insurgents were technically following ROE for the battle to "check" dead bodies or apparently dead bodies.

    In other words, if you assume that there were numerous incidents like this one during the battle, and the letter of doctrine allowed it, then this group of soldiers could absolutely not be court-martialed without implicating dozens or hundreds of others, potentially up to the staff. Price of justice too high to pay this time.
    When I went through basic training (Ft. Benning 2002-3) I was taught that up to the point of search and capture it was fine to to engage uniformed or identified enemies with force. Once take into care and custody after search then Soldiers are obligated to safeguard said prisoner.

    This incident in particular now that I re-read it a bit older and wiser I see this as being a warcrime. When I first read this I was gearing up for my first deployment to Iraq and was not too sympathetic in attitude. That being said given the heat of the moment after combat not all people come down from that high quickly. It is difficult to switch into caring for someone that moments before in a different situation was trying to kill you.
    One of the odd things about war and one of the attractions to it for many young men is that it simplifies things to us versus them. The value of live of those that aren't with 'us' degrades substantially, especially if we assume that the innocents are such and actually suppor our enemies.

    It's one of the reasons that prisoners need to be safeguarded and sped to the rear; because the capturing Soldiers generally don't want to care for their enemy, especially from one that will more likely than not offer no kindness as stipulated in the Geneva Conventions.

    This incident in particular though, If I were forced to decide in my current position and rank as an officer I would prosecute the Marine if he were mine. The prisoners were in our care and needed to be safeguarded.
    When I was enlisted though and shared the mentality of those on the line I would side with the Marine in his callous and deadly attitude toward the enemy and the civilians that support him (actively or passively). The US military had told civilians to evacuate because they would attack which is one of the reasons that civilians were treated harshly in that battle, because they were assumed to support the enemy even if it was passively.

    War is hell and the man's death is tragic. It shames me now that that such incidents happen but at the same time I can understand the Marines' actions. At the end of the day though debating how just the man's death is or not is tragic due to the war and situation in general, there's no clear cut answers when it comes to killing. We try to regulate war through uniforms, conventions, weapons bans but it is still killing on a massive scale to help ones side.
    One of the tragedies (and strategies) of all insurgencies is that due to the lack of a uniformed enemy the formal military or police will always be extremely doubtful of the innocence of any civilian which results in a lot of civilians being killed by association with the enemy without regard of the civilian's circumstance.

    Even though I would try the marine and see this as a warcrime I still don't mind the verdict too much which is not too comforting for my own analysis of my consistency in such moral dilemmas or how callus I've become to the plight of such civilians in the crossfire.
    Last edited by spmetla; 09-11-2017 at 10:47.

    "Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them?"
    -Abraham Lincoln


    Four stage strategy from Yes, Minister:
    Stage one we say nothing is going to happen.
    Stage two, we say something may be about to happen, but we should do nothing about it.
    Stage three, we say that maybe we should do something about it, but there's nothing we can do.
    Stage four, we say maybe there was something we could have done, but it's too late now.

    Members thankful for this post (4):



  8. #8
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    It's a war crime, plain and simple. There's absolutely no ambiguity.

    Of course his life was in danger, he was a soldier in a war. That isn't a blank check to shoot unarmed people, combatants or civilians.
    Nothing was said about the Soviet soldier being armed or unarmed. That is if you meant this very episode.
    Last edited by Gilrandir; 09-11-2017 at 17:04.
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  9. #9
    Iron Fist Senior Member Husar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    15,617

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Nothing was said about the Soviet soldier being armed or unarmed. That is if you meant this very episode.


    Soviet soldiers hiding in a mosque in Iraq in 2004?
    Do you come from a parallel universe?


    "Topic is tired and needs a nap." - Tosa Inu

  10. #10
    Member Member Gilrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Ukraine
    Posts
    4,010

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Quote Originally Posted by Husar View Post


    Soviet soldiers hiding in a mosque in Iraq in 2004?
    Do you come from a parallel universe?
    #1

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    .....
    I recall from one WW2 documentary the rationalization of a German infantryman for killing a Soviet soldier during Barbarossa. German forces were advancing, and the subject came upon a Russian, whom he ordered to raise his hands. The Russian, paralyzed with fear, made no response, so after a period the German shot him and moved forward. As described that seems understandable; it could be risky to personally disarm an enemy combatant and to guard them while waiting for backup, or lead them to the rear alone. The Fallujah incident is more difficult to understand.
    # 3
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarmatian View Post
    It's a war crime, plain and simple. There's absolutely no ambiguity.

    Of course his life was in danger, he was a soldier in a war. That isn't a blank check to shoot unarmed people, combatants or civilians.
    Mine:
    Quote Originally Posted by Gilrandir View Post
    Nothing was said about the Soviet soldier being armed or unarmed. That is if you meant this very episode.
    Conclusion: try to be more reasonable before lashing about like you did. In your defense: you don't normally. A bad day?
    Quote Originally Posted by Suraknar View Post
    The article exists for a reason yes, I did not write it...

  11. #11

    Default Re: Backroom Errata

    Need to think a bit on the bigger point. My understanding of Athenian jurors comes from the apology. Juries could not deliver a sentence, but would vote between the options provided by the opposing sides once the defendant was found guilty.


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO