This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Warped Mission of the American Military: "Out-Terrorize the Terrorists"
A number of American soldiers are blowing the whistle on the American
military practice of indiscriminately killing Iraq civilians - by
randomly firing bullets in a 360 degree circle - anytime that an
improvised explosive device hits a U.S. soldier.
As Truthout notes:
Both
[specialists Ethan McCord and Josh Stieber] say they saw their mission
as a plan to "out-terrorize the terrorists," in order to make the
general populace more afraid of the Americans than they were of
insurgent groups.
In the interview with [Constitutional lawyer Scott] Horton, Horton pressed Stieber:
"... a fellow veteran of yours from the same battalion has said that
you guys had a standard operating procedure, SOP, that said - and I
guess this is a reaction to some EFP attacks on y'all's Humvees and
stuff that killed some guys - that from now on if a roadside bomb goes
off, IED goes off, everyone who survives the attack get out and fire in
all directions at anybody who happens to be nearby ... that this was
actually an order from above. Is that correct? Can you, you know,
verify that?Stieber answered:
"Yeah,
it was an order that came from Kauzlarich himself, and it had the
philosophy that, you know, as Finkel does describe in the book, that we
were under pretty constant threat, and what he leaves out is the
response to that threat. But the philosophy was that if each time one
of these roadside bombs went off where you don't know who set it ...
the way we were told to respond was to open fire on anyone in the area,
with the philosophy that that would intimidate them, to be proactive
in stopping people from making these bombs ..."
Terrorism is defined as:
The use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
So McCord and Stieber are correct: this constitutes terrorism by American forces in Iraq.
Of course, America's institutionalized policy of torture (see this and this) is also terrorism. As I pointed out last year:
An article today in Der Spiegel describes a study on the use of torture over the last couple of thousand years:
A
new book, ["Extreme Violence in the Visuals and Texts of Antiquity"]
by Martin Zimmerman, a professor of ancient history in Munich, looks at
current research into the kinds of violence that inspired "loathing,
dread, horror and disgust."In the ancient Far East, where there
were large states peopled by many different ethnicities, leaders
demonstrated their might by inventing ingenious new tortures and
agonizing methods of execution -- as a way to keep the population obedient...The issue of state-sanctioned torture to achieve political goals is still a current one.
The study reinforces what I wrote last year:
Listen to the testimony to Congress by a representative of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services:
Indeed, this is a well-known tactic for brutal regimes. Take Zimbabwe, for example:
"Victims
and eyewitnesses told Human Rights Watch that [Zimbabwe’s brutal
regime] has set up detention centers . . . to round up and instill fear
in suspected political opponents."Torture is a form of terrorism, plain and simple.
As the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services director told Congress:
"... torture is the deliberate mental and physical damage caused by governments to individuals to ... terrorize society."
And the U.S. policy of assassinating people all over the world (including Americans) - without trial - is a form of terrorism as well.
Unfortunately, this is nothing new. As the former director of the National Security Agency said:
By
any measure the US has long used terrorism. In ‘78-79 the Senate was
trying to pass a law against international terrorism - in every version
they produced, the lawyers said the US would be in violation.
(the audio is here).
And as Truthout points out, the 360 degree firing on innocent bystanders is most definitely a war crime:
High-level
orders to kill civilians in the context of retaliation for attacks on
forces have already been successfully prosecuted as a war crime. In
1944, German SS Obersturmbannführer Herbert Kappler ordered the
execution of civilians in the ratio of ten to one for every German
soldier killed in a March 1944 attack by Italian partisans. Kappler was
sentenced to life in prison. The executions took place in the Caves of
Ardeatine in Italy, and were made into the subject of a movie starring
Richard Burton. None of the lower-ranking soldiers who actually
carried the order out were prosecuted.
***
The
attack which spurred the World War II German commander's retaliatory
executions, intended as collective punishment for not informing on
partisans, was an IED planted in a garbage container. Kappler's rank
was the equivalent of a lieutenant colonel.
The ironic thing is that top conservative and liberal terrorism experts say that torture and other war crimes increase terrorism and reduce national security.
And terrorism is bad for the economy as well.
- advertisements -
Nothing new under the Sun.
Not a surprise. The surprise is that some people are surprised. Not a surprise with the usual lot of condoners.
The famous Western values. Never better destroyed by Westerners themselves who have been the primary threat to them.
I see: Destroy the village to save the village. You've come such a long way in forty years.
When we declare war
on a concept we kill our
chances of winning
- by randomly firing bullets in a 360 degree circle - anytime that an improvised explosive device hits a U.S. soldier.
I can't say that I blame them. What do you think you would do if an IED blew your truck up and killed the guy sitting next to you? They're probably exploiting a loophole in their rules of engagement under one of the few circumstances where they are actually allowed to use their weapons without first consulting a lawyer.
Regardless of whether we should be engaged in Iraq or any other conflict (and any real abuses of innocents notwithstanding) current U.S. rules of engagement at the foot soldier level do not appear to be compatible with victory - always the most desirable outcome once the fighting actually starts.
It's unrealistic to expect the kind of casualty precision that we apparently think is now mandatory when fighting the enemy. The bottom line is that rubble don't make trouble. Show me a successful military campaign and I'll show you a fighting force that adhered more to that kind of philosophy and less to the sort we've now adopted.
It's probably no coincidence that the more we embed lawyers at the combat battalion level, expect soldiers to perform social services and otherwise demand the impossible the more that these kinds of unsavory, secretive and officially unsanctioned military practices come to light.
Thanks for the article GW. Do you have a more financial oriented topic in your inventory? The last sentence linked to what perhaps should have been the article presented here.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2010/01/military-industrial-compex-is-rui...
This recent spate of off-financial topics on ZH is really bringing out the nut jobs.
You're all a bunch of squeemish little girls. We should have turned the entire triangle into molten glass 9 years ago. Then drop Fat Man and Little Boy on the holy sites. Game over.
or we can but hope they get a suitcase wmd on the doorstep of your family home first.
The tactics proposed are in violation of numerous regulations and are at direct odds with counterinsurgency manuals that the military's strategy is based on. I'm not defending the elected civilian leadership's decision to invade and remain in Afghanistan or Iraq, but demonizing the military at large for the renegade actions of a few is unfair. These actions were conducted outside of standard tactics and strategy, and higher commands were likely not aware. I commend you for questioning with boldness... that's what a true patriot does... but be fair and see this through to what is ultimately the real truth, and not just petty anti-military propaganda.
What a bunch of serfs in the comments today. And then they complain about the eevil goobermint. You're already indoctrinated for serfdom if you somehow even justify this warmongering and crimes against humanity. And this wasn't in Hayek's book, wonder why...
The lower orders delight in war, as long as it's some other fellow having to fight in it and pay for it.
When you are an emasculated loser with an external locus of control, what better way to alleviate the pain than to pretend you are part of some great, collective, Manichean struggle between good and evil in which the fate of the world hangs in the balance.
This cant be right as Obama said combat ops are over in Iraq - Mission Accomplished!
Iraq ROE has been leaked some time ago. I basically states that troops cant even return fire without calling a lawyer:
http://wikileaks.org/wiki/US_Iraq_Rules_of_Engagement_leaked
So I am not sure how true this article is, sounds like it could be made-up.
ROE is very restrictive in accordance with counterinsurgency strategy which needs the support of the people to succeed. Sounds like the order of their battalion commander was illegal and he should be prosecuted if true.
To be absolutely clear we have already lost BOTH wars.
Ted Rall made this point about Afghanistan today
http://imgsrv.gocomics.com/dim/?fh=6711832176dfa75ebb56b685320be502&w=750.0
In 2002 most soldiers in the Afghanistan resistance were between 22 and 30, today between 14 and 18!
That doesn't mean the majority of 22 - 30 year olds died just the recruitment started younger with the more skilled used for training.
Reminds one of gangs doesn't it. We all know how well that's working out everywhere in the world.
Does anyone think the stats for Iraq are different?
The US will NEVER win a war again. It is beyond our capability. Right now the wars are merely to prop up the economy.
http://www.businessinsider.com/us-gdp-defense-driver-2010-8
U.S. Warfare Boosted Q2 GDP MassivelyPissing away money to private contractors and cronies has ZERO to do with winning and everything with maintaining the illusion we are not in an economic death spiral.
All is well! The new Gay brigade has been issued paint ball guns as to not offend the ALLAH loving slime we call insurgents.
skippy9
Fuck you!
We invaded their nations. We invaded Afghanistan not only for economic reasons but even after the government offered to hand over Bin Laden. Iraq was a joke from day one.
The people battling agains the US are Freedom Fighters combating foriegn invaders.
It's fucking Red Dawn with Turbans.
I am a patriot only to myself thats why I will never get double crossed by a corrupt governmnet, and if I ever forget that and go fight someone elses war feel free to slap me in the face and remind me what I just said
The war on drugs is a joke..
If the US Gov was really pursuing a war on drugs
they would Napalm all the Poppy Fields over there..
They don't do it... Why... ?
The war on drugs is not just a joke, it's the biggest joke ever. How the hell do you fight a war on drugs while leaving the southern border open? such bullshit
How do you fight a war on drugs while they're still illegal (thereby forcing consumers to use the illicit dealers as the only means of obtaining drugs, which fuels the druglord side in the war on drugs)?
You can't remove the demand, so you'd do well to control the supply. That is why we should legalize and regulate all drugs, including the real hardcore stuff like heroine and meth.
I've never done meth, and if I could buy it at circle K tomorrow, I still wouldn't. You don't friggin lock someone in jail because they're suffering an addiction.
The war on drugs is a joke..
If the US Gov was really pursuing a war on drugs
they would Napalm all the Poppy Fields over there..
They don't do it... Why... ?
Check out Penn & Teller's show called bullshit. They do an episode on this subject, and it really hits the nail on the head.
The bottom line is, in a free country, you have the right to put anything that you want to in your body. You have to be the proper owner of your own body. Anybody arguing anything else is completely and totally filled to the brim with bullshit.
We Americans are Trespassing over there..
Bring the troops home...
Trespassing?
They should just bomb the living daylights out of it, ignore the "human rights" bullshit and close the borders instead of staying inside.
The Cuba kind of embargo does wonders.
1 terrorist attack =
DROP 1 BILLION POUNDS OF THE NASTIEST STUFF ON THEIR CAPITAL!
Social control! I don't think they would allow another terrorist attack when they would know that 50.000 of theirs would die because of it!
But I don't see the need to try to create control over there. Let them kill each other and fight it out themselves!
If somebody points a gun to us and wants to kill us, what do you do?
KILL THEM ALL AND REWRITE THE HISTORY BOOKS!!
"...'human rights' bullshit..."
what a depressing statement; I can only pray you're being sarcastic, but even if that is the case you really missed the mark...
can someone ban this cunt please?
lets hope its 5 billion of you types the exponential function takes down asap.
I'm sure those troops mean well.
I don't think you want to send pussies like the UN troops over there or all you'll get back are bodybags.
Last week there was like this "big" crisis in my country as somebody noticed that our troops in Afghanistan have a risk of getting hit by a bullet!
WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO GO TO THE MILITAIRY IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RISK OVER GETTING SHOT!
Our Euro troops only like to drink and fuck all the native woman but can't handle a gun.
"WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO GO TO THE MILITAIRY IF YOU DON'T LIKE THE RISK OVER GETTING SHOT!"
College?
PS.
you kind of sound like a misanthropic jerk, not just from this post, but others as well. There, that's going be 2c, the cost of free speech... (or $1.05 depending on who you talk to).
fucking cretin.
Sudden Debt
Put down the crack and Call of duty. Maybe find a good therapist or check into rehab.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
There is no "nice" way to conduct war. There has never been a clean war. War reallyis hell.
Yes folks, our soldiers are no longer combatants but targets:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68C1XU20100913
the only good central banker is dead one I know that
It would be interesting to research the Northern press during Gen. Sherman's March to the Sea when he laid waste to a wide swath of Georgia to demonstrate the futility of Southern resistance. He was so successful that he was later credited as the architect of total war and dispatched out West where he would demonstrate his tactics on the Indians. He was quoted as saying, "The only good Indian is a dead Indian."
Like his boss, Sherman was a deranged psychopath; one of the essential character flaws needed for deification by the court historian and the mob.
The only terrorists are at 33 liberty street
the most dangerous man in the world is there not Afghanistan
Do you think this would work in your neighborhood? Not likely. I would just plant the device in a rival gang neighborhood.
:) +1
"This is the 1st strategy that makes any sense, yes it might be brutal but its the only way to win a guerila war, be the bigger thug."
Sure.
"It became necessary to destroy the town in order to save it."
Worked wonders in Vietnam.
Most of the military operations in Vietnam where a success, only that the politicians did everything they could to squander any victories and make all loses seem 1000x bigger, the Green Beretes and other special foreces did a vonderfull job in Vietnam and where actually winning on their fronts, the war in Vietnam was lost only on the political front. Didnt you watch 'Apocalypse Now' the government wanted Walter E. Kurtz dead - because he was too succesful at defeating the enemy (I wonder if the movie wasnt realy based on leaked facts), it corresponds to many documentaries I saw about that war
So what is the objective for our military, kill or be killed? Should our military plant and cultivate the Poppy fields to encourage a prosperous market based economy? Then all sit around and sing kumbaya? We need to get the hell out of there.
Who gets rich in prolonged wars?
What type of person would knowingly ham string the military so wars are protracted with no clear objectives other than the creation of wealth for the right people?
In VietNam war a co was owned by the Johnson family "as in president Johnson" called Pacific Architects and Engineers which were given big contracts there.
Why are all of our most recent wars "open ended". ??
IF you found yourself in combat under above conditions..would you see the result of a" no win policy "for what it is and act accordingly?
who wants to be the last American killed for a corrupt Government in Afghanistan or Iraq?
I dont know about the last but there where plenty of volunteers for the 1st place
The best of us for sure, the immediate mission was what mattered ..however now years into each war the policy of avoiding a victory/conclusion is impacting the troops behavior and tactics and in my opinion not for the better or the good of the military or the soul of our Nation ..
remove the leadership that threatens the USA sure but then go home, with the threat that if new leadership does the same we come back.
make the leaders the enemy- not the citizens of those hell holes of Iraq and Afghanistan.
The leaders of our country in my opinion are
guilty of a cruel hoax..that is why these wars drag on and on.
This is the 1st strategy that makes any sense, yes it might be brutal but its the only way to win a guerila war, be the bigger thug
when and where has it ever worked before?
Malaysia...South Africa...
Do you think the US won the WO II war by playing it nicely?
The US did some fucking nasty things to win the war, but you'll never see it in a movie.
But if they didn't, can you imagine what if they would have lost the war?
WAKE UP!
Completely true, all the trocities commited by the Allies and Russians(especially) where shoved in German shoes(on top of what the Germans did), actually more German people died in the Ally bombings that in the concentration camps