OT - US Soldier kills 16 Civilians in Afghanistan

[Cdnwolf]

For the second time in five months, a U.S. soldier from a Washington military base is accused of committing atrocities against civilians in Afghanistan.

The unidentified soldier, an Army staff sergeant, is accused of firing on civilians, killing 16, in a house-to-house shooting rampage in two villages on Sunday, according to officials from NATO's International Security Assistance Force.

[TicToc]

Have you been to Afghanistan. There is no such thing as "house to house". At best it is small Qualat to small Qualat. For those who don't know imagine a Qualat as a small version of the Alamo. I am not surprised that this event happened, but please refrain from the inflammatory way in which you spread the headline news.

[ArmySGT.]

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j218/ArmySGT_photos/Makes%20me%20laugh/Insults/goonwithyourdrama.jpg

[Fusilier]

Have you been to Afghanistan. There is no such thing as "house to house". At best it is small Qualat to small Qualat. For those who don't know imagine a Qualat as a small version of the Alamo. I am not surprised that this event happened, but please refrain from the inflammatory way in which you spread the headline news.

Oh for fuck sake man...

It's hardly something to get worked up about when it is very clear that he cut and pasted the information straight from the press release and which the terminology has no bearing on it whatsoever anyway.

[TicToc]

Worked up is a bit of an exaggeration. Would you prefer that I say "I'd appreciate it if you read fully, assimilated, and then decided to pass along to the online masses only information what was simply presenting facts rather than attempting to incite an emotional response with a simple sentence regardless of it's inherent inaccuracies?"

Because if you would prefer I can go back an edit it to read as such.

[Fusilier]

Worked up is a bit of an exaggeration. Would you prefer that I say "I'd appreciate it if you read fully, assimilated, and then decided to pass along to the online masses only information what was simply presenting facts rather than attempting to incite an emotional response with a simple sentence regardless of it's inherent inaccuracies?"

Because if you would prefer I can go back an edit it to read as such.

Perhaps you should edit your comment. He passed on the information EXACTLY as it was presented. If you have a problem with the post you ought to take it up with ISAF media relations.

http://img39.imageshack.us/img39/9558/gyjyj.jpg

[TicToc]

Well posted, you sure got me. Gee willickers, you sure got straight to the point and intent of the message I had. Your great internet wit and intellect has subdued my request for reason and fairness. You are absolutely right I had a problem with direct quotation rather than the quoting of inflammatory speech regardless of its origin. Well won better man.

[Fusilier]

Well posted, you sure got me. Gee willickers, you sure got straight to the point and intent of the message I had. Your great internet wit and intellect has subdued my request for reason and fairness. You are absolutely right I had a problem with direct quotation rather than the quoting of inflammatory speech regardless of its origin. Well won better man.

Says the guy who's first post to the forum is to accuse the OP of making an inflammatory post when all he did was copy and paste the very same thing everyone is already reading in the news.

[TicToc]

Ok troll, you win. This beyond a waste of time for me to spend on you. Simply said I prefer that facts rather than emotion is presented. That being I am done.

[copeab]

Who gives a damn if it's house to-house, qualat-to-qualat or craphole-to-craphole. Sixteen people -- nine of them children -- are dead and it appears a US soldier did it for no justifiable reason and US soldiers not involved in the shooting will die in retaliation as a result.

[Fusilier]

I prefer that facts rather than emotion is presented.

What emotion? The OP simply cut and pasted from the news. He didn't add anything from his own thoughts on the matter so there is absolutely no emotion included in the post.

[ArmySGT.]

All aboard!

Now seating First Class Passengers foooooooooooooorrrrrrrr the

" I hate Americans train" now seating "I hate Americans"!

Boarding passes please! Form a queue Canadians! Britons! Australians! New Zealanders!

No pushing! Thank you!

http://i81.photobucket.com/albums/j218/ArmySGT_photos/Makes%20me%20laugh/Insults/imagephp-2.gif

[Webstral]

We should bear in mind that this latest horrible incident carries with it a significant emotional content. Rightly or wrongly, anyone who is serving or who has served in Afghanistan is likely to have a strong response to having this kind of event spread on a non-media website. I won’t say whether this response is reasonable, but I will say that it is completely understandable. With that in mind, I’m going to ask everyone to let these sorts of things go and not engage in the sort of one-upmanship that characterizes so much of the Internet.

I haven’t been to Afghanistan. What I’ve seen in video and heard from other vets suggests that there are certain physical similarities between a compound in rural Afghanistan and a compound in rural Iraq. I can see how the press might not make distinctions. Even if the reporter knew the difference between a house and a qualat, an editor Stateside is unlikely to let a Afghan word describing something outside the experience of the average American make it into print or onto a screen. From the standpoint of media management, news has to sell, not confuse.

Nine children… This is one of those moments during which I lose my articulation. Nothing short of profanity seems adequate to express my reaction. Nine. Children. Yes, American soldiers will die. I have a morbid curiosity regarding the soldier’s background. How many tours has he served? Did he just get served with divorce papers? What else is going on in his home life? Has his unit been hard-hit of late? Did his best friend just die? What motivated him to sign the death warrant for 16 Afghans and a yet-to-be-determined number of American troops?

[Badbru]

I must admit I was pretty sadened by this when I heard about it. My initial reaction was oh christ what next, why don't we just start air striking mosques. Burning Korans, now shooting up the civvies, it seems to me the
hearts and minds campaign has just been set back to zero.

Australian forces lost several troops in a string of incidents late last year. It seemed you couldn't turn the news on without hearing of another. This naturally reignited the debate about pulling out but I believed some of the things I'd been reading about successes on the ground and that we should stay the course. Now however, I'm really discouraged by the effects these few incidents have, and will likely have, on the course of the continuing effort.

It just feels like a massive setback.

[Targan]

Holy crap. We have more posts today than for most of the previous week but the first thread I open up to read is this one and BAM! Where to begin?

For starters, welcome to the forums, TicToc. An unfortunate start to your time with us here but let's make a fresh start, eh? How about you go to the "Introducing myself" thread (http://forum.juhlin.com/showthread.php?t=2698) and tell us a bit about yourself. I take it you've spent some time in Afghanistan? We value combat experience here, I for one would be interested in your input on military matters.

The moderators here prefer to keep only a light hand on conversations and generally that's fine as posters here tend to show respect for one another. If you have a serious problem with something someone has posted perhaps you might consider contacting the poster personally in a private message? Or contact a moderator and we'll take a look at the situation. Jumping feet-first into verbal combat mode in open forum isn't generally very constructive.

Just a reminder, if you post something here that has been cut and pasted from another published source it really needs attribution. In this case Fusilier seems to have found the source of the OP's post. So the original author is the person you probably should be upset with, TT, not the OP. Really the OP's only mistake was not to cite the source of his posted quote. Off-topic threads are welcome and old hands here usually put OT at the start of the thread title to make it clear that it isn't part of the general T2K and gaming discussion.

I'm a bit confused by your "I hate Americans train" comment, ArmySGT. I'm hoping it was intended as tongue-in-cheek. The comments in this thread preceding that weren't particularly anti-American IMO. I'm guessing most or all of the members here would be anti-shooting civilians though. I gotta tell you man, for me personally, if I hated Americans in general I wouldn't be a moderator here.

Other than that, I agree with the posts by Webstral and Badbru. The mass shooting of women and children anywhere in the world is a very sad event.

[Mahatatain]

I have a morbid curiosity regarding the soldier’s background. How many tours has he served? Did he just get served with divorce papers? What else is going on in his home life? Has his unit been hard-hit of late? Did his best friend just die? What motivated him to sign the death warrant for 16 Afghans and a yet-to-be-determined number of American troops?
From reading things on the BBC website (which is quoting the AP news agency for much of this) and watching news reports on the BBC I believe that the soldier:
- is a 38yr old staff sergeant
- is a married father of "at least" two
- was working alongside special forces as force protection ("where part of his role was to guard the base for special forces, which would have enabled him to come and go more easily")
- had not had special forces training
- had served three tours of duty in Iraq
- was deployed to Afghanistan for the first time in December
- has served in the army for 11 years

There are also what the BBC calls "some reports" saying that some time before the killings, the soldier suffered a nervous breakdown. That sounds like a much poorer source of information though.

BTW I'm British and I don't hate Americans. I'm not overly keen on soldiers (of any nationality) who indiscriminately kill civilians (or on insurgents who kill our soldiers and their own civilians) but if it subsequently turns out that this soldier has had some form of nervous breakdown then you have to question the decision to send him to Afghanistan.

[kota1342000]

Burning Korans, now shooting up the civvies, it seems to me the
hearts and minds campaign has just been set back to zero.

Agreed Bad.
So....how do we fix this mess? Personally I think we have run out of military options, and Id prefer that we see how fast we can get ISAF the hell out of country. We don't need to see ow many more of our troops we can get wounded and killed for a country that doesn't want us around.

[Raellus]

I am not sure how decrying an unlawful killing (i.e. war crime) equates to hating America/Americans. I am an American. Should I be defending or justifying this obvious war crime? Would that be the right, proper, patriotic thing to do? I don't think so. I think the patriotic thing to do here is to make sure that something like this doesn't happen again. That requires an intellectually honest assessment of what happened. You can't solve a problem unless you acknowledge that it exists. It's not easy. I don't want to believe that a fellow American did something like this but it's pretty darn clear that one did. That said, I think that 99% of our service men and women are good, decent, brave, hard working individuals and I am not going to let this relatively isolated incident color my perception of our armed forces in general.

I really don't understand why some of my fellow Americans are, at best, minimizing the heinousness of this incident, or, at worst, defending it. This behavior certainly doesn't help others' perception of what Americans are like. Defending an act like this makes us look like the barbarians.

I don't like where this discussion is going. It's unfortunate that most of our forum's traffic is dedicated to these sorts of "debates". I'm considering discussing with my fellow moderators the possibility of banning these types of controversial OT threads. As an American, I value my freedom of speech. On the other hand, the raison de etre of this forum is discussing T2K and that does not appear to be happening in threads like these. If anything, we're chasing off current and potential members.

Please don't make us lock this thread.

[Medic]

I must admit I was pretty sadened by this when I heard about it. My initial reaction was oh christ what next, why don't we just start air striking mosques. Burning Korans, now shooting up the civvies, it seems to me the hearts and minds campaign has just been set back to zero.

I don't think it has gone to zero. It has gone beyond that on to the negative side and rather far at that.

Airstriking mosques wouldn't really be much of an upgrade from some earlier FUBARs, there has been like airstriking a wedding and so on. The problem is, there is more harm than good that the U.S. troops can do in the country. I'd rather compare the situation to that at Vietnam - young men under pressure but still with enough time on their hands to get bored occasionally and with both booze and narcotic substances available to them if they really want them. Add automatic weapons and we have a pickle you don't want to swallow. Nationality of the troops doesn't matter, nor the 'main religion' of the troops as long as it is different from the local 'main religion' or the troops and locals don't have a mutual political agenda.

The problem is, ISAF is trying to change things that have been there for centuries already, bringing modern age to a place that feels it has no use for it. I am not saying the Talibans are right, not even from this/my point of view, but you can not force a society with completely different norms to adopt your own just by saying they should. There is no changing a person who doesn't want to change - even the Finnish history proves that as most Finns baptised during the Northern Crusade took the baptism at swordpoint, then washed it off at the nearby pond. And as with the Finns by that time, the people were baptised more than once, as the first ones to baptise them moved on, then next lot baptised them again or killed them as heathens even if they had accepted Christian religion. :rolleyes:

If nothing else, this whole thing combined with the other recent happenings is more than enough evidence, the ISAF troops are really coming to the end of the road and though there could be a lot of things to do to stabilize the country, the possibilities to do so are slipping between the fingers.

And before someone comes to shoot me down, no, I have not served in Afghanistan but I come from a nation that has a force in there - I happen to know a number of those who have actually served there (and some are serving there at the moment). I am not a professional soldier, but I have served in the military and still continue to serve as an active reservist. Do I fully understand the things that are happening to the servicemen and women in Afghanistan? No, I can not claim that. Can I say, I understand the psychological intricacies that affect the troops there and that affect the local population in relation to the ISAF troops? I think, I have the general idea.

And no, this is not an anti-U.S. rant. The thing is, U.S. is the largest single participant in the operation, so most of this has to do with them. The psychological problems of the servicemen, who have served in ISAF or similar operations are nothing new in Finland either and the FDF (Finnish Defence Forces) have stepped up to actually do something about the matter, albeit still rather slowly. Also, if I criticize the U.S. actions, were they the product of one person (in which case I do not actually criticize the nation but the person who committed them), a group of people (servicemen or not) or the general policy, it is only my opinion and deductions from what I have gathered from various sources. And, a recent hot topic in Finland - if a politician is criticized in public, he can not really complain because it was him/herself who took up the public podium in the first place. From there we can deduce that if U.S. takes the podium, then it must also accept the criticism from others. Is the criticism always constructive? No, but you can not expect that - there's too many pinheads running around the internet and in public. :p

[simonmark6]

I'm British and I love Americans...though I couldn't eat a whole one.

Well maybe if I was really hungry.

That was facile but my sympathies go out to both the dead of the tragedy and the soldier involved. If he was driven to this by stress or a breakdown of some sort he is a victim too.

[95th Rifleman]

In general the Americans do seem to have a distinct lack of common sense when it comes to hearts and minds. the Koran thing for instance, if you are gonna burn a coutry's holy book then burn them to ash and bury them in a pit, don't half burn them and dump them in an accessable rubbish tip!

Now as to this incident, it's a damned mess. However, despite the inflammatory nonesense at the start of this thread, it'll take a complete idiot to equate the actions of one man and turn them into a derogatory put down of an an entire nation's military.

What is really going to matter is how this situation is handled, unfortunately the chap in question will not be tried for a warcrime, it's not how the American system does things. He'll be tried for murder and either face life in prison or life in a mental hospital. The best pr job would be to hand him over to the Afghans for trial and execution, but no American president could autorise that and stay in office, especialy in an election year.

If we are going to have these, potentialy flammable, OT threads perhaps we need it's own section. Better yet, best leave them out entirely, it has nothing to do with T2K and will invariably cause tension and bad blood.

[ArmySGT.]

I'm a bit confused by your "I hate Americans train" comment, ArmySGT. I'm hoping it was intended as tongue-in-cheek. The comments in this thread preceding that weren't particularly anti-American IMO. I'm guessing most or all of the members here would be anti-shooting civilians though. I gotta tell you man, for me personally, if I hated Americans in general I wouldn't be a moderator here.

Come around for what should be something fun............ Nah. I get threads like this usually started by the same handful of people. Ones that seldom participate in the game discussions. Usually with the same recurring theme.

Americans, you did this wrong.
Americans, you can't do that right.
Americans, look what you did today!

Once again we won all the battles in Afghanistan, and we are losing the War on the floor of Congress.

Are the Politicians that are manipulating the Rules of Engagement on a day to day basis going to accept some responsibility? Not a chance.

Are Soldiers Angry. The sure as hell are..........

To go through the all that, for your fellow Soldiers to get killed, and then everything becomes for nothing as a matter of political expediency.

Then some sanctimonious ass wants to remind you; how it all could have been done better, if the ones running things were not American.

Right now, I am asking myself what I am doing here.

[Fusilier]

I get threads like this usually started by the same handful of people. Ones that seldom participate in the game discussions. Usually with the same recurring theme.

Sorry, but I don't follow this vague accusation. The person who started this particular thread has 86 posts created. After looking over the topics, I wasn't able to identify any that were blaming the US for anything. There was one about bible quotes on weapons sold to NZ, but the subject matter contained only news quotes and no personal opinion given. Does that count?

Do you consider news reports anti-<insert country>? Because there is also a news report about how a Canadian Colonel was a serial killer... and I don't know if that ought to be considered anti-Canadian.

Perhaps you could be more specific on the posting trends. Who are these handful of people that usually start threads with an anti-american theme?

I'm not looking for an argument here, but I feel that if you are going to be making public accusations, especially ones that I (being a non-American) might fall under, you should provide something a little more solid. I think that is only fair.



Once again we won all the battles in Afghanistan, and we are losing the War on the floor of Congress.

This reminds me of a story about a Colonel visiting Vietnam in 1990. He made a statement that basically said "the US never lost on the battlefield".

The Vietnamese general simply replied, "Yes, but that's irrelevant."

A good point that seems to have been missed then, and is possibly being missed again today in another country, is that firepower doesn't necessarily win wars. You can win all the battles you want, but in the end sometimes that is irrelevant.

[Legbreaker]

I'd like to point out that this thread isn't really all that OT at all. Think about it in T2K terms. How many troops on all sides are likely to carry out such war crimes when the world has completely gone to pot and there's little to no civilisation, or hope, left?

What we see occasionally in the news IRL is just a small taste of what's likely in T2K.

Doesn't make it any less distasteful, but we're fooling ourselves if we think everyone's going to maintain a solid grasp on reality and morales after the nukes fly.

[Fusilier]

That's a reasonable assessment. I would agree with it.

[weswood]

I'd like to point out that this thread isn't really all that OT at all. Think about it in T2K terms. How many troops on all sides are likely to carry out such war crimes when the world has completely gone to pot and there's little to no civilisation, or hope, left?

What we see occasionally in the news IRL is just a small taste of what's likely in T2K.

Doesn't make it any less distasteful, but we're fooling ourselves if we think everyone's going to maintain a solid grasp on reality and morales after the nukes fly.

I'm with you on this. I believe the majority of humanity has a "Me first" attitude and would rape, rob & murder if there were no or little consequence.

And just to throw a little levity on such a serious subject, I was watching "Doomsday Preppers". They were critiquing an old hippy- leftover flower child type, and told him he needs to practice at least twice a week with whatever weapons he has. He replied "Well, whoever comes here with a weapon will just have to deal with his concience, I'll deal with mine."

[copeab]

There have been some reports that the soldier had suffered a "traumatic brain injury" but was cleared for redeployment to Afghanistan.

I would not be terribly surprised, if true, that he likely was not fit for duty but cleared anyway. Further, I think the most likely result of a courtsmartial, given the political consequences, is a conviction and death sentence. This is regardless of whether or not there is any merit to any head injury.

Color me cynical.

[StainlessSteelCynic]

There have been some reports that the soldier had suffered a "traumatic brain injury" but was cleared for redeployment to Afghanistan.

I would not be terribly surprised, if true, that he likely was not fit for duty but cleared anyway. Further, I think the most likely result of a courtsmartial, given the political consequences, is a conviction and death sentence. This is regardless of whether or not there is any merit to any head injury.

Color me cynical.
It's also been reported that he set fire to some of the bodies. That won't do him any favours in the court regardless of whatever mental issues he may have been having.

[Targan]

Right now, I am asking myself what I am doing here.

You go ahead and do that, ArmySGT. I guess if we don't see you posting here anymore we'll know what answer you came up with. In the mean time, if you want to get my hackles up you just go on making unjustified accusations about your fellow forum members. Really helpful.

[B.T.]

It does'nt matter, if the person in A'stan was committing (mass) murder, a war crime, or if he was running amok. He killed 16 civilians. I can really see no excuse for it.
If the person was suffering from some kind of stress syndrom or a mental illness, this still does not excuse the deed. Maybe such a fact will effect his punishment, but still ... this will not bring back the dead.

From my personal point of view it does not matter, that he is American. This kind of crime would have been just as horrible, if it had been done by an Australian, a Brit, a Finn, or a German.


But what is (more than) a little irritating for me is: Why are we discussing Anti-Americanism here, again? (By the way, ArmySgt: Where are the non-British-speaking Europeans in your list?)

Maybe Raellus is right: It might be a good thing to close these kind of O/T threads. War crimes, "Stupid U.S. Marines" and U.S. military singles with children are discussed controversial and do not, necessarily, have a benefit to the game Twilight 2000! Raellus legitimately talked about the chance, to chase "current and potential members".

On the other hand: Legbreaker sums up the situation very well, when he says, the things happening in real life are just a small taste of what's likely in the T2k universe! And he's absolutely on spot here!

Maybe 95thRifleman's approach is something to be considered: An own section for "potentialy flammable threads". This could be a section, where not all members automatically have access. One would have to be invited, or ask for "entrance". But this is time costly. And I have nor clue, how difficult this is, from the technical side. It would certainly mean more work for at least one of the mods. So: A better way seems to be avoiding getting to personal.

Normally I do not participate on threads like this. Why? I'm German. Whenever you talk about such things, you're dancing on thin ice, if you're German. Some "wise guy" usually mentiones the war crimes of the Nazis, and that's the end to a lot of discussions.

We should be able, to debate certain problems/issues/individual cases without bashing everyone, who's opinion differs.

I joined the board, to discuss T2k. If O/T threads help, I'm looking forward to them. But, please, let's keep it friendly and objective! And avoid the obviously "flammable" issues. This is the T2k forum, not the "Whereabouts of the U.S. armed forces" board!

[Targan]

From my personal point of view it does not matter, that he is American. This kind of crime would have been just as horrible, if it had been done by an Australian, a Brit, a Finn, or a German.
Ain't that the truth.

Normally I do not participate on threads like this. Why? I'm German. Whenever you talk about such things, you're dancing on thin ice, if you're German. Some "wise guy" usually mentiones the war crimes of the Nazis, and that's the end to a lot of discussions.
I feel sorry for young Germans (and Japanese for that matter) when it comes to discussing WWII. Every German I've spoken to who is my age or younger has expressed horror and disgust at what the Nazis did. I'm sure there were many Germans at the time, among those who knew what was happening, who were shocked and disgusted too. Young Japanese are a slightly different case. In my experience, most young Japanese people seem to know very little about what their military did during WWII.

[95th Rifleman]

Normally I do not participate on threads like this. Why? I'm German. Whenever you talk about such things, you're dancing on thin ice, if you're German. Some "wise guy" usually mentiones the war crimes of the Nazis, and that's the end to a lot of discussions.


This attitude always annoys me. Sure the Nazis commited many, many warcrimes, yet the war ended 67 years ago! People living in Gerany today had nothing to do with it and are now welcomed members of westerrn society with an honourable and skilled military that has assisted the UN and NATO in conflicts across the world. The RAF and Luftwaffe flew together over the skies of the the former Yugoslavia in missions to save civilians.

Also Germany was not alone in the war crime's business, Russians raped and murdered their way across Europe to Berlin, my own country was guilty of turning German cities into burned out necropoli with the specific intention of killing civilians.

None of this means that a German ddoes not have the right to speak his mind on a topic regarding inhumane acts commited in modern times, or any time for that matter. It's time folks stopped putting an entire guilt trip on a nation for actons commited 60 years ago. The same goes with the Americans and slavery, the British and colonialism and all the other bullshit that gets dredged up in internet flame wars.

[Fusilier]

Some "wise guy" usually mentiones the war crimes of the Nazis, and that's the end to a lot of discussions.

It's called Godwin's Law and is related to argumentum ad Hitlerum (which is an ad hominem attack). In a debate, the person who first invokes Hitler has usually already lost his argument.

It's been found to be used in just about any topic of debate.

[95th Rifleman]

Come around for what should be something fun............ Nah. I get threads like this usually started by the same handful of people. Ones that seldom participate in the game discussions. Usually with the same recurring theme.

Americans, you did this wrong.
Americans, you can't do that right.
Americans, look what you did today!

Once again we won all the battles in Afghanistan, and we are losing the War on the floor of Congress.

Are the Politicians that are manipulating the Rules of Engagement on a day to day basis going to accept some responsibility? Not a chance.

Are Soldiers Angry. The sure as hell are..........

To go through the all that, for your fellow Soldiers to get killed, and then everything becomes for nothing as a matter of political expediency.

Then some sanctimonious ass wants to remind you; how it all could have been done better, if the ones running things were not American.

Right now, I am asking myself what I am doing here.

1) You are coming across very much as a troll trying to turn this, so far very civilised, thread into a flame war.

2) I find it strange that the ONLY person going on about anti-americanism is in fact an American. All the non-Americans participating in this thread are doing so ina rational, non-offensive manner.

During the American war of indepence, the Americans lost most of their battles against the British and yet still won the war. This theme is common in many wars in which one nation pursues military aims in another nation far from their home soil against a country in which they do not have support from the natives. Then again if politicians ever studied history before starting a war w'd be living in a blissful state of world peace right now.

[Medic]

ArmySGT, while I understand the frustration of the soldiers' better than one might realize, I can only say it does in no way give them the right to go on a booze-induced rampage, killing civilians who they should be protecting and working with. If, what has now happened, happens, they have failed the civilians, themselves and pulled the service of theirs down in the same disgrace they have fallen in to. There is, never was and never will be any justification for such action regardless of the soldiers nationality, branch of service, political or religious belief, personal grievances or losses of his unit. Such act can only be seen as a war crime and a crime against humanity. No one can change that fact, there is no explanation that can turn things around the other way.

If you refer to my comments about the U.S. troops having pulled some rather stupid tricks, you must understand, the world is far more transparent nowadays than it was a couple decades ago. U.S. military and political leadership has taken an active role in global politics and while some of it is commendable, some of it is seen as bullying by other nations. You are not the only nation with democracy. And now, I will ceased the discussion about anti-American notions, while I hope we can all intelligently discuss the matters like this. As said earlier, they are not completely off-topic.

[TicToc]

Gentlemen, allow me to apologize for inciting this issue to begin with. It was not my intent. So that I may explain. I have been in the military for 13 years. I have deployed 3 times in the last 4 years, two of those have been to OEF. I control air strikes from forward locations (forward usually being in that muddy/dusty/hot/cold/wet hole right next to my Infantry brothers.) I am not special, I am not unique, I am however tired of what I see as bashing. The post that I made originally in this thread was my first. I have however been reading the site for weeks and it is no less than the third such thread. Please do not misunderstand my intent. everyone has the right to say and do as they please and I had/have no intention of fighting that. I do however feel that it is my place and my right to correct inaccuracies, especially where they will or may lead to a misunderstanding of the situation as a whole, or if it is purposefully inflammatory. If the intent was to bring up war crimes in the T2K world, or what psychological stress can push men to do than I would understand that and take no issue with it. That however is not how I perceived the threads intent. Regardless, in my typical tactless way I attempted to make a correction that would have been better left alone and if not left alone handled in a more polite fashion.

As for my feelings on the situation. I haven't followed it closely so I am not sure of the exact details, or if the exact details are even clear yet. What I can say is that events like this should not happen, but the reality is that they will happen. Without citing the specific background of the Soldier in question, you cannot expect men to deploy, come home train, deploy, come home only to go back into what they know is going to be pre-deployment training, to see they comrades and brothers killed by weapons that he cannot defend against or engage an enemy that he cannot see. When he does see his enemy that enemy is dressed as a civilian, is surrounded be non combatants, and will use those innocent people to his advantage by putting them in harms way to save his own life. He is fighting an enemy without that is without honor, that murders and maims his own people in reprisal and for political gain. Please do not misunderstand, this is not a sob story or a pity part for servicemen. Nor is it an excuse for an atrocity. That being said war is a terrible thing and it does terrible things to people (especially when they are not cared for properly). So long as human engage in the art or armed conflict men will commit crimes and atrocities while engaged in that conflict. Not an excusal, a matter of understanding the human condition under those circumstances.

[Webstral]

I’m not going to weigh in on creating a separate category for OT threads regarding current military events. I doubt my ability to be neutral, so I’m going to recuse myself.

There are times when I feel like we vets are bit too sensitive to seeing our deeds and misdeeds discussed openly. We’re often resentful that much criticism and judgment are heaped upon us by people who are safe and snug in their living rooms, free to enjoy the blessings of plenty and liberty with no other contribution than a grudging payment of taxes. We’re annoyed that the people of nation we serve claim not to like the war but otherwise sit on their hands when it comes to putting pressure on elected officials in any meaningful way. We’re vexed by the often inept strategic leadership, both military and civilian. We’re outraged that the media focuses almost exclusively on negative press. It’s bad enough that every misdeed undoes ten good deeds in-theater; when the media reports only (or very nearly so) on misdeed and misfortunes, the whole world gets the impression that American soldiers are ignorant, raging thugs and that American policy is based on a Roman model. We reach a point at which the mere mention of misdeeds evokes a strong negative reaction in part least because the public in general cannot contextualize said misdeeds.

We have to remember that we swore to uphold the Constitution, which means that we swore to uphold free speech that will often make us unhappy. I strongly dislike the idea that openly racist organizations and individuals can spill their bile such that my children will be exposed to it. In my heart, I feel there’s something wrong when Neo-Nazis have the right to assemble, march, and speak publicly. However, I accept that a free society must tolerate much which disgusts us.

We veterans have to choose how we’re going to wage the never-ending struggle of free speech. Whenever we react with negative emotion, we reinforce certain stereotypes about us. The citizens who are least able to contextualize bad press about us are the ones who need most to be impressed that we are, by and large, an organization of dedicated professionals upholding American ideals to the best of our ability under very trying circumstances. Just as our parent society struggles with criminal behaviors, so our armed forces struggle with behaviors that are responses to the unique stressors of the job we do. Our civilians need to understand this; and we need to be the teachers in this regard.

In our digital age in which there are no more safe havens from the eye of the camera, our every misdeed is going to be reported on. The press is going to run with these stories because they sell copy. The American people soak them up because that’s human nature; for the same reason that gladiatorial events, public hangings, and all manner of cruel spectacles have attracted crowds, the ugly side of war will attract far, far more attention than the operations that go the way they are supposed to. We want good outcomes, but we can’t turn our eyes away from bad ones. We military professionals either can rail against this reality or we can work with it the same way we should adjust our approach to a changing battlefield.

Note: I say "we", but I'm not part of the organization anymore. I'm not even on the IRR roster. Anyone who tells me that I don't have any skin in the game anymore is right. I'm not ever going to deploy to Afghanistan. So my remarks have to be contextualized as those of a well-informed outsider.

[Medic]

Very well said, Webstral.

One of the problems is the press as it, while doing good work on some things, tends to go for scandal journalism on the others. There's a saying, the millions of flies can't be wrong - crap must taste good. It is exactly why the journalists write their scandalous articles. They sell because people want to read them. Journalism is no longer about only delivering news and information - it is that and making a good sale so the owners of the magazine or newspaper get more money. With those, the pressure on the press increases and they have to come up with new ways to sell.

One of those, used at least in Finland and Sweden by the tabloid press is making up an outrageous headline that has very little in common with the actual story. If it was any other product than news they are selling, the consumer rights officials would cry out about wrongful advertising.

[weswood]

Thank you for the apology for coming on strong. It shows you're not just trolling for a reaction.

I agree with you that sometimes it seems America gets picked on by the media, but you have to admit lately the U.S military has been making some bonehead mistakes. This sergeant going berserk, the dumbass Marines with the SS signal on thier flag, and pissing on the bodies of thier enemy.

I'm not slamming the military, I myself am a former Marine and an Army brat. I was around or in the military from before I was born until my late 20's. Most of the members on this forum are former or current military of various countries. I'm not sure how many have combat experience, I don't. We have ALL done something stupid at one time or another, but there's a difference between stupid and illegal. Yes, I know using the Nazi SS symbols isn't illegal, but to associate the Marine Corps with a bunch of murdering hooligans? For that is what the SS will always be seen as.

This is one of the best forums I've ever been a member of, even if some of us are a little hardheaded. Welcome to the group, I'm sure you'll make valuable contributions.

[95th Rifleman]

I’m not going to weigh in on creating a separate category for OT threads regarding current military events. I doubt my ability to be neutral, so I’m going to recuse myself.

There are times when I feel like we vets are bit too sensitive to seeing our deeds and misdeeds discussed openly. We’re often resentful that much criticism and judgment are heaped upon us by people who are safe and snug in their living rooms, free to enjoy the blessings of plenty and liberty with no other contribution than a grudging payment of taxes. We’re annoyed that the people of nation we serve claim not to like the war but otherwise sit on their hands when it comes to putting pressure on elected officials in any meaningful way. We’re vexed by the often inept strategic leadership, both military and civilian. We’re outraged that the media focuses almost exclusively on negative press. It’s bad enough that every misdeed undoes ten good deeds in-theater; when the media reports only (or very nearly so) on misdeed and misfortunes, the whole world gets the impression that American soldiers are ignorant, raging thugs and that American policy is based on a Roman model. We reach a point at which the mere mention of misdeeds evokes a strong negative reaction in part least because the public in general cannot contextualize said misdeeds.

We have to remember that we swore to uphold the Constitution, which means that we swore to uphold free speech that will often make us unhappy. I strongly dislike the idea that openly racist organizations and individuals can spill their bile such that my children will be exposed to it. In my heart, I feel there’s something wrong when Neo-Nazis have the right to assemble, march, and speak publicly. However, I accept that a free society must tolerate much which disgusts us.

We veterans have to choose how we’re going to wage the never-ending struggle of free speech. Whenever we react with negative emotion, we reinforce certain stereotypes about us. The citizens who are least able to contextualize bad press about us are the ones who need most to be impressed that we are, by and large, an organization of dedicated professionals upholding American ideals to the best of our ability under very trying circumstances. Just as our parent society struggles with criminal behaviors, so our armed forces struggle with behaviors that are responses to the unique stressors of the job we do. Our civilians need to understand this; and we need to be the teachers in this regard.

In our digital age in which there are no more safe havens from the eye of the camera, our every misdeed is going to be reported on. The press is going to run with these stories because they sell copy. The American people soak them up because that’s human nature; for the same reason that gladiatorial events, public hangings, and all manner of cruel spectacles have attracted crowds, the ugly side of war will attract far, far more attention than the operations that go the way they are supposed to. We want good outcomes, but we can’t turn our eyes away from bad ones. We military professionals either can rail against this reality or we can work with it the same way we should adjust our approach to a changing battlefield.

Note: I say "we", but I'm not part of the organization anymore. I'm not even on the IRR roster. Anyone who tells me that I don't have any skin in the game anymore is right. I'm not ever going to deploy to Afghanistan. So my remarks have to be contextualized as those of a well-informed outsider.

Well said.

Now I'dlike to add a civilian's perspective. I grew up on RAF bases, my father was a sergeant and all i wanted to do was follow his footsteps. As soon as I recieved my GCSE results after leaving school at 16, I walked straight into a careers office, while the aptitude test and my school grades showed I was perfectly able and suited to following an RAF career I was turned down because I had a history of epilepsy as a teenager. Admitedly I was devastated, however I was still determined to do something so I joined NAAFI, if I couldn't serve then I'd damn well serve the services and enjoyed a ten year career with that company till and I still work for ESS their successor.

I have someting of a unique perspective, wile I am a civilian I have lived and worked my entire life on military bases. I was part of RAFWA (Royal Air Force Wargaming association) while working at RAF Marham and that's, iornicly enough, how I was introduced to Twilight 2k.

One thing I have observed is a certain arrogance in many military and ex-military personel, many do seem to feel that anyone who has not served has no right to criticise or comment on those who do. I argue against this attitude, we live in a democracy and military service is a choice. Most of us choose not to serve the military, some of us (like myself) find that choice denied to them in the first place, yet we are all still citizens 9or in the case of the UK, subjects) with the same rights to free speech and expression.

In many cases people of other nations judge us by our military and by our military actions, we resent it when we are judged harshly because of the actions of a minority within our military. I have been insulted and slagged off by Americans who feel some of the more shameful events from Northern Ireland's history represents the thoughts and feelings of my entire nation.

Whether we like it or not, whether veterans like it or not, what our military does today is how the entire world (however wrongly) will judge us and we have a right as citizens and subjects of our respective nations to demand the highest standards from our military personel. Now in the case of both my own country and that of America, new Zealand, Australia and all the other western nations, our militaries continue to exhibit the highest of standards and do us all proud. When things go wrong, when our soldiers drop the ball and exhibit behaviour and morals that are wrong and in some case repugnant, we have the right to feel outraged.

The biggest fault lies in the media, as webstral mentioned, they are so very good at giving full coverage to a soldier's misdeeds yet publishing stories about the good our soldiers do (both British and American) seems so very difficult. The public are left with a very one-sided view of things and it can come across badly.

That being said, we civilians have every right to criticise our military, every right to criticise our government's strategy and our military's tactics. However we civilians have a moral obligation to do so respectfully and to understand that the average fighting soldier is not responsible for the bigger picture. I hope that we will NEVER again see the disgraceful way American Vietnam vets where treated, I feel proud that in my own country we are very good at focussing our ire against the government and senior officers rather than at our soldiers.

[kota1342000]

Normally I do not participate on threads like this. Why? I'm German. Whenever you talk about such things, you're dancing on thin ice, if you're German. Some "wise guy" usually mentiones the war crimes of the Nazis, and that's the end to a lot of discussions.

BT, this is going to be highly subjective on my part, you gave me quite a bit to think about this week by writing this, and I was at a loss on what to say. But I think I may be able to scratch the surface by saying that many countries (including my own of course) have committed serious atrocities, and Germany during the 1930s and early 1940s is definitely not alone. The difference here is how each nation handles the legacy. For instance, in the United States any mention of treatment of the Indian Tribes that inhabited North America before we expanded (or we can go farther back too), and the treatment and slavery of Black people is branded as "reverse racism". Makes people not want to talk about it here, and its a form of bullying. For years in the Soviet Union, talking about Stalin's purges could get you shot in the back of the neck. Targan has already mentioned that Japanese know little of their nation's actions during the Second World War, and I think that's a symptom of the subject matter being left out of history texts.

But BT, Germany seems to me to be one of the cases where the people remember what happened and use the lessons to keep it from ever happening again. Most Germans that Ive spoken with tend to acknowledge the past of their nation and admit that it was a huge wrong turn in the road. But Germany today is one of the most respected members of the EU, and has provided assistance and help all over the international community in many different ways. My own personal experience comes from German companies' contributions to hazmat emergency response technology.

So IMHO, the way Germany views and handles the parts of their ugly history today is the standard that the rest of us should be trying to meet.



1) You are coming across very much as a troll trying to turn this, so far very civilised, thread into a flame war.

2) I find it strange that the ONLY person going on about anti-americanism is in fact an American. All the non-Americans participating in this thread are doing so ina rational, non-offensive manner.

During the American war of indepence, the Americans lost most of their battles against the British and yet still won the war. This theme is common in many wars in which one nation pursues military aims in another nation far from their home soil against a country in which they do not have support from the natives. Then again if politicians ever studied history before starting a war w'd be living in a blissful state of world peace right now.

First, VERY interesting you bring up us in this context, though these days I think the media has much more to do with how warfare turns out. But the American War isn't what people normally think of or discuss very much when talking about fourth gen warfare. Well played.

And second, I agree about you comments about the so called "anti-american" message. We have a lot of Americans that are on the side of being thin-skinned, thick-headed, and believe they have a monopoly on having been shot at or picking up pieces of friends. Its embarrassing. I was on the verge of losing my temper and wishing I had never read this thread until Webstral sent that last post and calmed me down. So thanks much Web.
But Legbreaker is right about this kind of subject not being off topic, its highly relevant to a military or post-apocalyptic game. I tend to lean towards story more than rules and modifiers, so this kind of situation can be instructive at the least. Its what separates table top roleplaying from computer games and adds complications. Not to mention Im a vet as well and I take a personal interest in what happens over there for several reasons. And hats off to Cdnwolf for having the courage to bring it up.

I'm British and I love Americans...though I couldn't eat a whole one.

Well maybe if I was really hungry.

You need to find a good butcher that knows how to cut us up Simon. LOL :D

[Medic]

TicToc, I tip my proverbial hat at you or rather outright salute you for the actual balls it takes to apologize on a public internet forum. I respect such an integrity and wish to return the apology on my behalf for any words of mine that could have been misunderstood.

The original topic of the thread is not a simple issue in any way - it is very complex. As said, very little is known of what actually happened and even though there are some people who most certainly know exactly what took place, most of us are left only to speculate from the little information we can find on various sources. Most of, if not all the information available comes from the press that, as I stated earlier, has the responsibility to provide the owners of their magazines with income by broadcasting news. Boring news don't sell well, which leads to the degrading of the journalistic ethics.

People are entitled to information about what their nation's and its servants' deeds both at home and abroad. However, the good deeds are far seldom reported than the bad, which creates both an inbalance of information and the problem of misinformation that springs from speculation. Of course, that is their right, guaranteed by the right of free speech, most nations respect nowadays. Free speech comes with the unfortunate aspect of people just saying what they think, true or false, right or wrong. Sometimes things are also understood, either by accident or deliberately.

While I'm far from being a moderator here, I wish we all can discuss even these difficult matters without causing any ill feelings between the fine members of this forum, even though I believe there will always be someone who will find some statement distasteful or annoying.

[TicToc]

So perhaps we can use this tragedy to brainstorm. What are some incidence that you can imagine happening in the T2K world and how do you see different parties reacting.

Idea 1:
Western soldiers making a living currently as laborers (guards, hiding, ect ect) in a small eastern European village. What is left of a Russian Infantry Battalion is in cantonment nearby. One day a small groups of liquored up rooskies get the idea to graft some goods from the locals. The the grizzled old Russian sergeant is shaking down the locals two younger troops wander off to look for valuables/women/booze. In their attempt to procure said loot a fight ensues. The two drunk soldiers win. Drunk and angry with the world they begin to move from house to house killing any villager they can find. The Russian sergeant and the rest of his men respond. When they arrive at the scene they forcibly stop the murderous individuals, dragging them off back to the cantonment area before more damage is caused. In their wake however there are 11 dead villages mostly women and children as well a a good number of killed livestock. As the characters and other men run in from working the fields, patrolling, ect ect they see what has happened.

What happens next? Where as a character do you go from there?

[Medic]

So perhaps we can use this tragedy to brainstorm. What are some incidence that you can imagine happening in the T2K world and how do you see different parties reacting.

I believe, this would be a good idea, but I suppose doing it in a new thread would be better - it would get more replies than the off-topic thread, I believe.

[TicToc]

Medic, Good point Ill re-post the question in a new tread.

[Webstral]

TicToc, I salute you for having the intestinal fortitude and integrity to apologize to perfect strangers. Well done.

[Cdnwolf]

(Sticking head up from foxhole)... Is it safe to come out???

[B.T.]

Wow, what a thread!

@ TicToc:
I think, it was a good thing to apologize. Well done!
So, welcome to the board!

@ all Vets:
In a way, I'm a vet myself. I was "only" a conscript and I have no combat experience. But I can understand the bad feelings towards people, who only criticize (and often in an unfair way!) the military, not seeing the good sides. This certainly sucks.
I had a lot of arguments with people, because I defended the military. Especially in the end of the cold war period, a lot of Germans forgot about the necessary of alert forces. The current situation in the U.S. seems to be similar.
But I think, we can assume, that the vast majority of the board-members have a more positive attitude towards the military in general.

@ those, who reacted to my last post:
Thanks, gents, for your encouragement and support. This means a lot to me!

@ CdnWolf:
I'm fine with that.
BTW: Did you ever read Medic's sig? :D

[pmulcahy11b]

Am I the only one who thinks that the soldier should be turned over to the Afghanis for trial?

[Targan]

Am I the only one who thinks that the soldier should be turned over to the Afghanis for trial?

I think that would be the right thing to do but US is generally totally opposed to handing over its citizens (and especially soldiers) for trial by other countries, isn't it? And the last few US governments have publicly expressed support for non-US criminals to be tried by the International Criminal Court but have refused to allow US citizens to fall under its jurisdiction.

[Eddie]

I think that would be the right thing to do but US is generally totally opposed to handing over its citizens (and especially soldiers) for trial by other countries, isn't it? And the last few US governments have publicly expressed support for non-US criminals to be tried by the International Criminal Court but have refused to allow US citizens to fall under its jurisdiction.

Not totally. There have been a number of cases where US citizen have been tried by a foreign nation. When the possibility of capital punishment is present we tend to get a little more territorial until the State Department weighs in and forces our hand one direction or the other.

[Fusilier]

Over 2,500 Americans end up in foreign prisons every year and very few get an early released (sometimes they split their time between both countries if they are lucky). The rare exception is when capital punishment is involved as Eddie mentioned. I've been to a Thai prison visit and have seen Americans who've been locked up in there for many years (almost ten at the time).

Although these people are subject to the laws and penal system of the host country, and basically forfeit whatever rights they had in the US, it seems to be a rarity for a service member to not be immediately repatriated. It does appear to be a double standard... although I don't know if that is an accurate term for it.

[Medic]

I think that would be the right thing to do but US is generally totally opposed to handing over its citizens (and especially soldiers) for trial by other countries, isn't it? And the last few US governments have publicly expressed support for non-US criminals to be tried by the International Criminal Court but have refused to allow US citizens to fall under its jurisdiction.

The U.S. actually asked for the British to hand over the young man, who had kept a link site, from where people could find links to pirated movies. The guy had not provided the movies himself, only the links to those hosted by others and yet he is probably going to be transported to U.S. for trial. If it had been a U.S. citizen and the British had wanted him for the same, it would have become far more complicated as the agreement between the two is unbalanced - for the U.S., only a suspicion is enough while the Brits would need evidence to actually have any chance of getting an U.S. citizen for trial. And no, this is not a rant about U.S. citizens. Just an example of double standards that are going to get more and more common, especially with the SOPA/PIPA.

[simonmark6]

As a Brit, I blame our side for the inequality rather than the Americans. We signed up to it and we knew that once a law was in place to would be used in a way other than in the spirit. UK Councils have used anti-terrorist legislation to put surveillence on people who dump rubbish, we couldn't expect anyone else not to do the same.

[95th Rifleman]

The US has always been very wary of war crimes issues. They are reluctant to allow their servicemen to stand trial in any other forum than an American court.

Part of it is a reputation thing as the US government has always been keen to be seen as the "good guys", having a soldier in the Hague on trial for warcrimes is not a good image. Better to have that same soldier on the lesser charge of murder in an American court.

This is not being anti-American, it's just a fact.

[Medic]

The US has always been very wary of war crimes issues. They are reluctant to allow their servicemen to stand trial in any other forum than an American court.

Part of it is a reputation thing as the US government has always been keen to be seen as the "good guys", having a soldier in the Hague on trial for warcrimes is not a good image. Better to have that same soldier on the lesser charge of murder in an American court.

This is not being anti-American, it's just a fact.

Yes, having a soldier stand trial at Hague for warcrimes is not good for the national image, but I wonder if they realize, it's not pretty good for the image either not to hand the guy over to Hague, when the case is pretty clear?

[95th Rifleman]

Yes, having a soldier stand trial at Hague for warcrimes is not good for the national image, but I wonder if they realize, it's not pretty good for the image either not to hand the guy over to Hague, when the case is pretty clear?

There are allot of factors in this, many of them poltical. The president that allows a US soldier to stand before the Hague tribunal is the president that loses his next election. The "good guy" idea has been ingrained in the American national consciousness since WW2 and was reinforced during the cold war when America was considered the bastion of the free world defending good against the evils of communism.

This is the heart of the reason why many Americans react so extremely to percieved "anti-Americanism", the concept that America may not be the good guys goes against everything the average American has been taught from a very early age.

In Europe we long ago lost any pretence that we are somehow better than everyone else. During the colonial era we Europeans had a similar self-rightous, self image. We where the civilised world freeing priitive peoples from the shackles of their barbaric cultures and religions, we belived that we where genuinely doing these people a favour by taking over their country.

The horrors of two world wars and the realisation that we can be so easily sink to the worst depths of human nature rather destroyed this self-image and gave rise to the fall of colonialism in the decades following WW2.

So we have this situation where a minority of American soldiers prove that yes, they are actualy human and suffer from the same human failings everyone else is prone to. Non-Americans, some who feel umbrage at the high moral and ethical horse America has rode since the end of WW2 point to these events, often going over the top to make their example using offensive and patronising language. In response Americans react in a sometimes extreme fashion to defend what they see as their rightful position as the god guys, feeling that the rest of the world owes them a debt of gratitude. Any fellow Brit who has had to sit through an arrogant, often ignorant, lecture from an American about how "they saved our arse in two world wars" can sympathise with this point.

It's a cultural issue one that stems from the cold war and will take many, many years to resolve itself.

[Eddie]

Yes, having a soldier stand trial at Hague for warcrimes is not good for the national image, but I wonder if they realize, it's not pretty good for the image either not to hand the guy over to Hague, when the case is pretty clear?

It's more a case of preventing the precedent from being established than being worried about our national image. Contrary to the statement that we see ourselves as the good guys, those of us who are not lemmings know that Bad Things happen in war and much of it goes unreported. We also know that there are many nations that are just itching to take out the last 70+ years of US foreign policy on the first one of us they can slice off of the herd. So it's more of a preventive measure to keep the flood gates in place.

[Targan]

Any fellow Brit who has had to sit through an arrogant, often ignorant, lecture from an American about how "they saved our arse in two world wars" can sympathise with this point.

Ah, then I'm sure you can appreciate how sick I and other Australians are of being told "you'd be speaking Japanese if we hadn't come and saved you". As I recall I've even had to put up with that patronising crap on this very forum, a few years ago.

[Webstral]

Given that it’s an election year, I would put the odds that an American soldier would be sent to the Hague for a war crimes trial somewhere south of zero. I’m not defending the practice. I’m being realistic about outcomes.

As for whether “we” (I wasn’t involved) saved the UK, Australia, France, or anyone else during WW1 or WW2, it would be interesting to see what would have happened in an alternate reality in which the Japanese did not bomb Pearl Harbor or in which Hitler did not take leave of his senses and declare war on the US. Would the UK and the USSR have been able to defeat Nazi Germany without American aid? This is open question, not a question meant to imply that the answer is no. Nor is the question meant to imply that y’all ought to sit and listen to speeches about how we saved you, because most Americans alive today had nothing to do with it, regardless of the relative importance of American involvement.

I’m less concerned with the self-righteousness than the willingness to act under that assumption. The self-righteous who sit on their hands are annoying but innocuous. The self-righteous who have the power and motivation to act are a problem. The combination of self-righteousness, perceived national interest, and perceived might is a very dangerous combination.

The latest horror perpetrated by Americans in uniform will inspire a new round of CYA from brigade downward; but the problem isn’t a brigade or division or even corps problem. Iraq and Afghanistan reflect poor strategy. Our poor strategy is an outgrowth of our hubris, the parochialism of much of our leadership, and frankly our failure to develop good human intelligence or pay much heed to the HUMINT we have. I remain convinced that the plan for victory in Afghanistan should have come out of the Special Forces community and that had our leadership been willing to pay the monetary and political price for a sufficient effort for victory we would be much further along. We weren’t willing to take steps that matched the realities on the ground in Afghanistan, though; and we weren’t willing to make any genuine commitments or sacrifices as a nation or in terms of political costs to get the job done as it needed to be done. So here we are more than a decade later still trying to wedge our square peg into a round hole.