US troops suspected of raping Iraq teenager: mayor

Sorrrrrrryyyyyyyy ....

Ollie Garchy said:
I have no faith in the ability of academics in this case. How can they possibly determine who will snap and who will not? Sure, they can give us mountains of "data" and countless studies. But, I am not convinced that they have even scratched the surface. The battlefield remains a tough environment to study. The human mind is even more difficult. The two together are just daunting.
Click to expand...
I also have NO confidence in academia ... they live in their little ivory towers and have NO grasp of the real world. They believe that these theories that they have formulated are the be-all and the end-all and one size fits everyone.

SORRRRRRRYYYYYYYY - it's is nice to think that you can take the human psyche and wrap it in paper and tie it with a pretty ribbon and every answer is contained within it's interior. Just ain't so ... even the civilian world has many permutations that just don't fit the mold.

When you step onto the battlefield, you are stepping into a whole new world that bears little or no resemblance to the halls of academia. The little boxes and restrictions that are contained in the research papers (along with their results), just don't fit into the puzzle that is combat.

The pressures that affect the combat soldier range from the absolute pits of depression ... to the absolute high that is spurred on by fear. How any one can possibly say how a person will act under every possible combination is beyond me.

The human mind can NOT grasp the number of possible combinations, so there is absolutely NO WAY that any expert can tell how an individual is going to react in combat.
 
People can't prove 100% that atoms exists because they've never been seen in real life. It's all theories and you can't become angry over theories. I bet you if anything the psychological evaluations and combat data has improved the lives of people serving in the armed forces because understanding the stress soldiers go through can lead to figuring out what to do about it.

Of course you can't figure out what an individual is going though, but that' not the point. You have to study what the group is going through and adjust for that, it's completely pointless to work on one person at a time. Academics is never perfect, there was at one time a belief that race determined ability as being scientifically accepted, we have gone past that. It's all an improvement and as the old saying goes, you can't stop progress.
 
WarMachine said:
People can't prove 100% that atoms exists because they've never been seen in real life. It's all theories and you can't become angry over theories. I bet you if anything the psychological evaluations and combat data has improved the lives of people serving in the armed forces because understanding the stress soldiers go through can lead to figuring out what to do about it.

Of course you can't figure out what an individual is going though, but that' not the point. You have to study what the group is going through and adjust for that, it's completely pointless to work on one person at a time. Academics is never perfect, there was at one time a belief that race determined ability as being scientifically accepted, we have gone past that. It's all an improvement and as the old saying goes, you can't stop progress.
Click to expand...

Things have improved. In WWI or WWII, soldiers exhibiting battle exhaustion or bizarre behaviour were imprisoned, sent to penal organizations or executed. Battle exhaustion was classified as cowardice. The non-German west even recognized the problem as some kind of mental illness during WWII. Hence Patton's slapping of an American soldier in Africa -- he didn't believe the "shrinks". The Germans just put their troops up against the wall. The number of German executions was incredibly high.

In terms of the US army, however, I am sure that battle exhaustion or fatigue is going to be an important factor by this point. Remember Mai Lai and Vietnam.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ronald_L._Haeberle
 
The whole problem revolves around fighting an enemy that dresses in civilian clothes then after killing a few of the troops will discard their weapons and fade back into a civilian population again. Once this has happened to you a few times you are inclined to get a bit sh*tty about it and lash out at people you may considerer that are harbouring the terrorist. Oh yes we all know that it is not right, but before you comment on it just ask your self I have I been in that situation, and if have haven't then how can you comment on it.
 
In his book, "Beyond The Band of Brothers", which Dick Winters wrote from his memoirs, he spoke of finding the "killers" in each platoon and rifle squad. He said that these were the men to whom cold blooded killing came easy in the heat of battle. Some men would crawl in a hole or run but these men would just start methodically killing. These men were always put in a position of leading patrols or skirmishes.

Now, these guys may have been classified as abnormal by today's psychiactric profession because they also took no prisoners unless a close watch was kept on them. But, as far as the brass was concerned, they were indispensable in the unit and most lived through the war. So, is this the best kind of soldier, a killer who gets the job done without even giving
death a second thought?
 
LeEnfield said:
The whole problem revolves around fighting an enemy that dresses in civilian clothes then after killing a few of the troops will discard their weapons and fade back into a civilian population again. Once this has happened to you a few times you are inclined to get a bit sh*tty about it and lash out at people you may considerer that are harbouring the terrorist. Oh yes we all know that it is not right, but before you comment on it just ask your self I have I been in that situation, and if have haven't then how can you comment on it.
Click to expand...

Missileer said:
In his book, "Beyond The Band of Brothers", which Dick Winters wrote from his memoirs, he spoke of finding the "killers" in each platoon and rifle squad. He said that these were the men to whom cold blooded killing came easy in the heat of battle. Some men would crawl in a hole or run but these men would just start methodically killing. These men were always put in a position of leading patrols or skirmishes.

Now, these guys may have been classified as abnormal by today's psychiactric profession because they also took no prisoners unless a close watch was kept on them. But, as far as the brass was concerned, they were indispensable in the unit and most lived through the war. So, is this the best kind of soldier, a killer who gets the job done without even giving
death a second thought?
Click to expand...

Both of these comments hit the problem right on the nose.

I would like to point out, however, that there might be a world of difference between shooting soldiers or guerillas or civilians and raping a kid. From what I understand, rape is a method of demonstrating power or some kind of vengeance.

I don't even know if war crimes are a product of battle exhaustion. I am inclined to think so. That is why I suggested some kind of vacation therapy. On the other hand, I do not know how long Americans are stationed in Iraq or the real nature of the fighting.

Does anyone else think there could be a coorelation between the crimes mentioned in this thread and battle exhaustion?
 
Ollie Garchy said:
Both of these comments hit the problem right on the nose.

I would like to point out, however, that there might be a world of difference between shooting soldiers or guerillas or civilians and raping a kid. From what I understand, rape is a method of demonstrating power or some kind of vengeance.

I don't even know if war crimes are a product of battle exhaustion. I am inclined to think so. That is why I suggested some kind of vacation therapy. On the other hand, I do not know how long Americans are stationed in Iraq or the real nature of the fighting.

Does anyone else think there could be a coorelation between the crimes mentioned in this thread and battle exhaustion?
Click to expand...

I believe it would be an over simplification to blame this rape on battle exhaustion ... if this were the case then Vietnam would have been buried under stories of thousands of cases of rape of young Vietnamese girls ... all of us were constantly exhausted from almost continuous combat stress before that damn war was over with and it never happened. So - don't try to trivialize the charges against these individuals by excusing it as battlefield exhaustion ... that is so much bull. These individuals already had a predilection for this type of criminal activity.
 
Chief Bones said:
I believe it would be an over simplification to blame this rape on battle exhaustion ... if this were the case then Vietnam would have been buried under stories of thousands of cases of rape of young Vietnamese girls ... all of us were constantly exhausted from almost continuous combat stress before that damn war was over with and it never happened. So - don't try to trivialize the charges against these individuals by excusing it as battlefield exhaustion ... that is so much bull. These individuals already had a predilection for this type of criminal activity.
Click to expand...

trial12.JPG


--My Lai burning

Sorry for the overtone of trivialization. None was meant. I am simply trying to understand the behaviour in terms of context. In any case, it is not possible to trivialize crimes of this nature. To argue that American troops are unlike other soldiers and do not rape is in any case incorrect and in itself white washing.

The problem is that these crimes are often trivialized. Stalin referred to wartime rape as "soldiers having a bit of fun". In reference to the mass-rape of over 3 million German women by the Red Army between 1945-1947 (and many more Polish, Hungarian, etc. women), historians have often used a tone that is even worse. Some historians use words like retribution or justice. I would rather explain the problem of rape (Congo, Rwanda, WWII, etc) in terms of war, because I cannot accept that hundreds of thousands or even millions of men are criminally predisposed to this sort of thing or commandos of justice. If I am wrong...OMG.

In terms of Vietnam, sorry if I have to burst your bubble. A few minutes of googling demonstrates that the incidents of rape were probably high. Like everyone else on this planet, you will want to see hard evidence in terms of documents and incidents recorded. The problem is that these assertions are speculative in nature. Why?

1. Rapes not reported: "In fact, very few American GIs were "nailed" for rape in Vietnam. Despite the fact that it is a crime according to international law, prohibited under the Geneva Convention and punishable by death or imprisonment under Article 120 of the American Uniform Code of Military Justice, acts of rape were rarely reported and seldom convicted during the Vietnam war. The number of rape cases tried did not nearly reflect the rampancy of rape in Vietnam. The conviction rates were low and the sentences extremely light".

2. Cover ups: "For four months the Peers Panel interviewed 398 witnesses, ranging from General Koster to the GIs of Charlie Company. Over 20,000 pages of testimony were taken. The Peers Report criticized the actions of both officers and enlisted men. The report recommended action against dozens of men for rape, murder, or participation in the cover-up".

3. Official recognition of rape in the Peers Report: "A part of the crimes visited on the inhabitants of Son My Village included individual and group acts Of murder, rape, sodomy, maiming, and assault on noncombatants and the mistreatment and killing of detainees. They further included the killing of livestock, destruction of crops, closing of wells, and the burning of dwellings within several subhamlets".

http://www3.iath.virginia.edu/sixties/HTML_docs/Texts/Scholarly/Stuldreher_Rape.html

http://www.now.org/nnt/fall-99/viewpoint.html

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/findings.html

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mylai/Myl_intro.html
 
I guess my experiences in Vietnam didn't follow the pattern you have painted with your data. None of my fellow soldiers ever participated in any of the actions that you have described. I am not finding fault with your data ... I am just stating that it was NOT my experience to see large numbers of rape charges being brought against the troops.

96 continuous days under combat conditions would definitely fall under the heading of combat exhaustion ... and ... NOT ONE SINGLE INCIDENT OF MURDER, RAPE, SODOMY, MAIMING, ASSAULT on noncombatants (or) MISTREATMENT and KILLING of detainees DID I EVER WITNESS. I did witness the dismemberment of our own soldiers at the hands of the Cong.

Can I understand soldiers doing these things out of revenge ... YES I CAN. When the dismembered body is the body of your best friend, revenge is never very far from your mind.
 
Back in the 1950's a National Serviceman could often spend his whole two years on active service with out any form of leave. Once they had finished there training period they were shipped out to places like Malaya and would be out in the jungles most of the time with the odd break back at camp. If Battle Field exhaustion is the cause of it then why was there not more rapes and murders on Allied side during WW2. I have known men that were in almost constant action for six years, yet they never flipped.
 
LeEnfield said:
Back in the 1950's a National Serviceman could often spend his whole two years on active service with out any form of leave. Once they had finished there training period they were shipped out to places like Malaya and would be out in the jungles most of the time with the odd break back at camp. If Battle Field exhaustion is the cause of it then why was there not more rapes and murders on Allied side during WW2. I have known men that were in almost constant action for six years, yet they never flipped.
Click to expand...

This doesn't surprise me. About the Brits, that is. Although I have never looked at the problem in a systematic way, the older generation has favourable memories of the British. Nor have I ever bumped into any real evidence of such things. Personally, I would hypothesize that the British officer corps kept the men under control.

This is not true of many Americans. My own reading of "greatest generation" has demonstrated thousands of rapes. I went through the OMGUS records and there were many cases in only one of the regional commands. The reports came in on a daily basis between 1945 and 1946. Sort of natural when you demonize an enemy. Lots of killing, too. Only when black soldiers were involved -- since they appear as the main culprits according to the US records -- did the authorities start handing out severe punishments.

I also know that French African troops employed systematic rape in occupied Germany after WWI. Things got so bad that the American government started an inquiry and complained officially to the French government...probably because white women were being raped by North Africans. Probably true of WWII, too.

Chief Bones, I believe you. There are many problems regarding historical data. It is wrong to suggest that a few thousand cases are representative of the whole. The US Army is NOT the Red Army. Never was. Never will be. And, I am in no way suggesting that the Americans used systematic rape as a policy in WWII or Vietnam. The French did after WWI, but that is a completely different ballgame. The Russians...well...the word "Russian" is enough for that debate. I actually saw interviews with Russian veterans where they gloated over raping dozens of women and children. Man...what do you say to that?

The problem in Iraq, as is mentioned in this thread, is that a few tv reports and everyone is screaming. I am getting the impression, however, that the problem is more severe than just a few cases. This would also fit the historical pattern.

Conclusion: The Brits are doing something right. I don't know what it is. I don't even know if it is true. But if it is true, we sure as hell better find out what it is.

[What about German WWII rapes? I know very little of this subject. It is rarely mentioned in the literature.]

[Last thing. I am going to erode my whole hypothesis...I just remembered that the majority of rapes in WWII were committed by follow-up troops and not frontline soldiers. This was even true of the Red Army. There goes the battle exhaustion theory.]
 
Views on Rape & All Of My Myths are Dying Fast:

[We obviously have to question our beliefs every single day. This is what a quick search pulled from the net.]

A// Theories on Rape:

The Feminist Approach: "When trying to find out the reasons for rape, one comes upon a host of myths and ideologies. The most popular and probably most effective myth is that rape has something to do with an irrepressible male sexual drive which, if not restrained, will regrettably but inevitably have its way. In actual fact there are good reasons to assume that rape neither has very much to do with nature nor with sexuality. Rather, it is an extreme act of violence perpetrated by sexual means. This is illustrated by numerous studies on rape conducted mainly in the United States, but recently also in German-speaking countries (e.g. Heinrichs, 1986; Feldmann, 1992). These studies show that rape is not primarily a sexually motivated act, but an act of aggression. In other words: Rape is not an aggressive expression of sexuality, but a sexual expression of aggression. In the perpetrator's psyche, it does not fulfill sexual functions, but is a manifestation of anger, violence and domination of a woman. The purpose is to degrade, humiliate and subjugate her".

Antony Beevor & the Male Perspective: "Even if the feminist definition of rape purely as an act of violence proves to be simplistic, there is no justification for male complacency. If anything, the events of 1945 reveal how thin the veneer of civilisation can be when there is little fear of retribution. It also suggests a much darker side to male sexuality than we might care to admit".

B// WWII Examples of Rape:

British WWII Rape: "The rapists did not all wear a red star. John Dos Passos, writing in LIFE magazine for January 7, 1946, quotes a "red-faced major" as saying that "Lust, liquor and loot are the soldier's pay." A serviceman wrote to TIME magazine for November 12, 1945 "Many a sane American family would recoil in horror if they knew how 'Our Boys' conduct themselves, with such complete callousness in human relationships over here." An army sergeant wrote "Our own Army and the British Army ...have done their share of looting and raping... This offensive attitude among our troops is not at all general, but the percentage is large enough to have given our Army a pretty black name, and we too are considered an army of rapists."

German WWII Rape: "Soldiers of Nazi Germany also committed rape on a massive scale. It is furthermore known that the Wehrmacht ran brothels where women were forcibly made to work (Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg 1946; testimony of Jan. 31, 1946, Vol. 6:404ff; Vol. 7:456f; see also Hilberg 1961:126ff; Brownmiller 1978:55ff). In the Eastern territories the Wehrmacht used to brand the bodies of captured partisan women - and other women as well - with the words "***** for Hitler's troops" and to use them accordingly". [Note: I don't believe the Wehrmacht brothel bit because I generally question the objectivity of IMT material. The other stuff sounds more than plausible].

http://www.wilpf.int.ch/publications/1992ruthseifert.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,707835,00.html

[Sorry guys. I apologize for having posted a link to an article written by right wing freaks. I was working "on the fly" yesterday and did not notice some of the language. I am going to check the newspaper reference and try to find better sources. Again, sorry. But this was the link: http://128.241.238.86/american-dissident-voices/adv043094.html
 
Last edited:
As far as the Russian troops went, Stalin promised pardons to hardened criminals if they fought Germany. They were already murderers and rapists to begin with. After Germany fell and the troops returned home, they were gathered up and reincarcerated into gulags.
 
Maybe it was the type of combat environment. Europe for instance during the war was fairly civilized and the civilians weren't a hassle for the allies who fought an indentifiable enemy in conventional combat. They knew who the enemy was and they didn't take aggression out on innocents, but i'd assume there would be some exceptions there too.

Vietnam and Iraq however are the kind of REMOVED places that can really beat down a soldier. Who is the enemy, why do the people here have problems dealing with us, why is there mixed support at home for what we're doing, etc. Usually these factors and the environment can put a strain on your average soldier, let alone the ones who shouldn't be out there in the first place because of psychological problems.

Like i said before, the military's conduct record in iraq is pretty good, but these things are bound to happen, you can explain it but can't really justify it is the point.

mod edit: Either use :cen: instead of foul language or find a better way of saying something.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top