more:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_n ... lians.html

Ugh, what a mess.

Sad thing is the lefties and righties are desperatly reserching right now to see is the guy one of the other side, with predictible results if so.

It 'll be Obama's fault by the time the neocons get done with the narrative

I'm so sorry this happened. It's going to be a nightmare for all.

On the other hand, give young men weapons, tell them the people all around them are enemies who deserve to die for what they believe, as opposed to us deserving to live for what we believe, and the results are somewhat predictable.


Fuck this war.

The soldier is reported to be a staff sergeant who suffered a "breakdown" before the killings. He is said to have turned himself in to military authorities after the intentional murders of civilians, mostly women and children.

I certainly hope that it is impossible under the UCMJ to be found the equivalent of "not guilty by reason of insanity."

This follows upon the extremely stupid "mistake" by a U.S. officer in burning copies of the Koran, which led to riots and deaths of both U.S. and Afghan soldiers. This incident may exacerbate that already dangerous situation. If the officer had eyes to see and ears to hear, this officer could not have been unaware that this burning of Korans would be a major shock to U.S.-Afghan relations.

I suspect these murders are a retaliatory action by a Christian against Muslims for the killing of U.S. soldiers. That would not be a breakdown; it could be a culmination of teachings by Christian radicals. The burning of the Koran may have the same source. The extent to which the U.S. military tolerates these loons is worrisome.

Der Spiegel reported that it had gained access to a secret U.S. military report concerning the actions of the 5th Stryker Brigade "kill team" that killed civilians in Afghanistan, took photographs showing the soldiers' grinning, and mutilated the bodies for "souvenirs." 04/04/2011 'Let's Kill' Report Reveals Discipline Breakdown in Kill Team Brigade

One wonders how many other Tunnell's are on duty in Afghanistan. The honorable men and women serving there deserve to have these bloodthirsty leaders separated from the services.

What is excruciatingly sad about this is they'll probably continue to be more angry about the burning of some stupid fantasy novels (the Koran) than the murder of women and children, who they don't seem to care terribly about.

Its a cultural thing, sadly. Children are seen as subserviant to the needs of the family. Not to mention they are whipped up by Mullahs who are all vying for power and followers, and the best way to get attention and followers is to scream about americans butning the Koran the loudest. Its like a thousand GOP Primaries going on in miniture day after day.

Associated Press March 11, 2012 "US soldier kills 16 Afghans, deepening crisis" Emphasis mine.


An Afghan youth mourns Sunday for relatives who were killed by a U.S. service member in Panjwai. People are people everywhere. People grieve everywhere, no matter what they believe. The Afghans are humans, too.

Crescent-online October, 2010 Murder of Afghan civilians by coalition forces by Fahad Ansari in London

Suaranis:

We get our news through filters including filters put on by the military. Of course we will be shown angry crowds protesting the burning of the Koran and of course they will be made out to be crazed and irrational mobs. It is also unlikely we are going to see the depths of grief and mourning for those innocent lives that were just lost just as we rarely see the innocent victims of friendly fire and drones gone astray wiping out villages. We are conditioned to believe that no one values life as much as we do and that they don't care for their children as much as we do.

It's a propaganda tool and you can't invade and occupy other lands without turning the inhabitants into beings less human than we are.

Neal Puckett who defended Mr. Lakin defended Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich. Cut a deal 24 guilty pleas in exchange for no prison time.

There is no comparison with My Lai. Lt Calley commanded the soldiers. This doesn't involve ordering someone to to something that is not lawful. This looks to be the act of one soldier. When you put as many folks through the Stan several times you are bound to get a 'bad apple'. This type of thing happens in the civilian world. The services are pretty much a reflection of the culture at the time.

A collection of recent news at Common Dreams US Soldiers Open Fire on Afghan Civilians in Rogue Attack


Al Jazeera



Maybe there is a reason that the U.S. has refused to accept the International Criminal Court.

This was the second Item on Irish News tonight, after an item od national political news.

WQOW.com U.S. Army Sergeant who killed 16 Afghan civilians is from Washington Emphasis mine.

The circumstances surrounding the massacre of civilians by soldiers in a war zone are frequently such that it is going to be very difficult to gain murder convictions in any system of justice that presumes innocence and places the burden of proof on the prosecutor. I do not like that, but I do not see an easy way around it.

The victims in the place where the crime took place have little reason to trust American investigators. The bodies of the dead are often unavailable for autopsy. Locating evidence to show that certain shots came from certain issued weapons my be impossible. Eyewitness testimony requires asking people who were under large amounts of stress to distinguish between uniformed foreign soldiers, and must take into consideration the fact that the survivors of the atrocity might not particularly care if the right foreign soldiers have been identified, as long as some foreign soldiers are punished. Showing that a specific soldier committed murder is very difficult.

Declaring that everyone present bears the full responsibility for every individual crime committed can result in treating people who are guilty of attempting to hide a murder committed by a comrade as though they are as guilty as the person who pulled the trigger. It also puts more pressure on anyone who might want to speak out, because they would be placing those of their friends who lack the courage to speak up in the same jeopardy as those who pulled the trigger. And there's the matter of coercion. Do you hold someone guilty for not speaking out if they were told that speaking out would make them the subject of a "friendly fire" incident? Do you distinguish between someone who steps forward immediately and someone who struggles with their conscience for a time before stepping forward? Do you distinguish between those who step forward voluntarily and those who only step forward when directly questioned?

Reversing or revising the burden of proof based on the severity of the crime is difficult to reconcile with the idea of a system of justice. This is particularly true if we are talking about making it easier to gain a conviction when the crime is more severe.

I don't like the results that this can produce when the time comes to attempt to bring individuals who have committed atrocities to justice, but I do not see an easy way around these issues. Convicting Private Smith for a murder that Sergeant Doe commits, and that Private Smith had no advance knowledge is wrong. Letting Sergeant Doe walk free because it is impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he, and not Private Smith, committed is also wrong. Failing to gain justice for the victimized civilians is wrong. Discarding our standards of proof because of the heinousness of a particular crime is wrong. I'm not seeing anything right within a thousand miles of any of this.

Zorba, that's very few words that attempt to answer the difficulties in trying to prosecute masacres of civilians in war zones.

I am repulsed by the lack of punishment for the guilty. I am repulsed by the idea of circumventing the protections that any other defendant would receive under our justice system if accused of any other crime. If there is a way to reconcile the two issues, I'm happy to listen.

And so what?

Is that your definition of Justice or Law?

Don't get your emotions confused with the Law. Justice and the what is Lawful may be 2 totally different things.

ALL military forces are subject to specialized discipline (UCMJ) tailored to the needs of soldiers in wartime. Soldiers are trained to kill people and to break their things. They are NOT policemen, nation builders, or ambassadors of good will.

If you want to play the blame game, blame the US Congress. They are the ones that set up and authorized the UCMJ and the authority for the military to prosecute military members for crimes (see the individual charges/specifications. If the charge doesn't meet the specifications then you can't charge someone. Wuterich was charged with manslaughter. He copped a plea through his lawyer (one of the best - cleaned up DogBite's Mess and got Lakin a deal at 1/2 off.

Before you criticize the military's justice system, please familiarize yourself with it - The Uniform Code of Military Justice.. It is also empaneled with soldiers (service folks) who "have been there and seen the elephant".

The last incident would be a crime anywhere in the world not just in the military. As far as turning a US soldier over to the locals, it is covered by the local SOFA (Status of Forces Agreement) - it has happened, but not in the Stan. There are Americans spending time in Foreign Jails. There are many former soldiers who are in State Prisons for committing crimes off base. There is always a question (unless the crime happened on Federal Property) of who gets to try the criminal. Many times, the directions of the law can go "downtown" or can stay on the military side usually it depends on which penalty is the greatest coupled with "which would be easier to prosecute & convict?" It also depends on the relationship between the military folks and the local community.

Since it was an intervention by the President of the United States (Richard M Nixon) to reduce Lt. Calley's sentence, the strawman here doesn't hold up.

You can talk My Lai all you want, but it doesn't apply to the latest case (16 to 18 dead) as what happened isn't a war crime, but just simply plain old murder. In this case it just happened to occur outside the US.

And your point????

The Nation March 12, 2012 Afghanistan's Haditha: An Atrocity to End the War by Robert Dreyfuss

There is a rising bipartisan consensus that the war in Afghanistan must end and end quickly. For nearly two years, there has been a majority of Americans opposed to the war. 60% of us feel that the war has not been worth the cost in lives and expense. In comparison to the lives of citizens of many countries that were lost on 9/11, a large multiple of that number of Afghan lives have been taken by the war.

The Afghan war once made sense to me. It ceased making sense a while ago.

It doesn't matter whether I agree with policy or not, it was my job (US Army) to implement it.

AFAIC None of the wars have made sense to me except in the cases when someone else hits first (Pearl Harbor etc) It can become a fact of national survival.

Morelock gets 24 years in plea bargain.

Got 24 years...

Next...