US soldiers 'killed Afghan civilians for sport and collected fingers as trophies'

[seafan]

Source: Guardian (UK)

Twelve American soldiers face trial over an secret "kill team" that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.

Five of the soldiers are charged with murdering three Afghan men who were allegedly killed for sport in separate attacks this year. Seven other soldiers are accused of covering up the killings as well as a violent assault on a new recruit who exposed the murders when he reported other abuses, including members of the unit smoking hashish stolen from civilians.

In one of the most serious accusations of war crimes to emerge from the Afghan conflict, the killings are alleged to have been carried out by members of a Stryker infantry brigade based in Kandahar province. According to investigators and legal documents, discussion of killing Afghan civilians began after the arrival of Staff Sergeant Calvin Gibbs at forward operating base Ramrod last November Other soldiers later told the army's criminal investigation command that Gibbs boasted of the things he got away with while serving in Iraq and before long was remarking on how easy it would be to "toss a grenade at someone and kill them".

.....

Five soldiers – Gibbs, Morlock, Holmes, Michael Wagnon and Adam Winfield – are accused of murder and aggravated assault among other charges. All of the soldiers have denied the charges. They face the death penalty or life in prison if convicted.
The killings came to light in May after the army began investigating a brutal assault on a soldier who told superiors that members of his unit were smoking hashish. The Army Times reported that members of the unit regularly smoked the drug while on duty and sometimes stole it from civilians at checkpoints or while on patrol.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/09/us-soldiers-afghan-civilians-fingers

---

This is why they hate us.

[ClarkUSA]

1. There are despicable sociopaths on both sides of the war.

Just ask the girl on the cover of Newsweek whose nose and ears were chopped off by the Taliban.

<< This is why they hate us. >>

Who's "they"?

[USArmyParatrooper]

5. And even that isn't an accurate comparison

Unless the Taliban has began prosecuting their own for atrocities. No, in their case it's SOP.

[ClarkUSA]

10. I know.

<< Unless the Taliban has began prosecuting their own for atrocities. No, in their case it's SOP. >>

Good point.

Thank you for your service and for speaking up here. :patriot:

[seafan]

6. The Afghan people speak:

William Dalrymple

New Statesman
22 June 2010

.....

After the jirga was over, one of the tribal elders came over and we chatted for a while over a glass of green tea. "Last month," he said, "some American officers called us to a hotel in Jalalabad for a meeting. One of them asked me, 'Why do you hate us?' I replied, 'Because you blow down our doors, enter our houses, pull our women by the hair and kick our children. We cannot accept this. We will fight back, and we will break your teeth, and when your teeth are broken you will leave, just as the British left before you. It is just a matter of time.'"

What did he say to that? “He turned to his friend and said, 'If the old men are like this, what will the younger ones be like?' In truth, all the Americans here know that their game is over. It is just their politicians who deny this."

During lunch, as my hosts casually pointed out the various places in the village where the British had been massacred in 1842, I asked them if they saw any parallels between that war and the present situation. "It is exactly the same," said Anwar Khan Jegdalek. "Both times the foreigners have come for their own interests, not for ours. They say, 'We are your friends, we want democracy, we want to help.' But they are lying."

“Whoever comes to Afghanistan, even now, they will face the fate of Burnes, Macnaghten and Dr Brydon," said Mohammad Khan, our host in the village and the owner of the orchard where we were sitting. The names of the fighters of 1842, long forgotten in their home country, were still known here.

“Since the British went, we've had the Russians," said an old man to my right. "We saw them off, too, but not before they bombed many of the houses in the village." He pointed at a ridge of ruined mud-brick houses.

“We are the roof of the world," said Mohammad Khan. "From here, you can control and watch everywhere."

“Afghanistan is like the crossroads for every nation that comes to power," agreed Anwar Khan Jegdalek. "But we do not have the strength to control our own destiny - our fate is always determined by our neighbours. Next, it will be China. This is the last days of the Americans."

It will never be clearer than this.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[awoke_in_2003]

9. You are a real piece of work. nt

[ClarkUSA]

14. So these few old men speak for all Afghanis? Do the women of Afghanistan feel this way?

How about the girls who are blown up by the Taliban along with their schools (built for them by American soldiers) because the Taliban feel that educating women is an abomination? Or the ones who have acid thrown in their faces while they walk to school?

Do they feel the same way?

I hope no one over in Afghanistan believe that a few conservative old white guys speak for the American people.

[another saigon]

17. please...

"schools (built for them by American soldiers)" Irony alert! The US bombed and killed more innocent men, women and children than the Taliban ever could.

[ClarkUSA]

18. Prove it.

Even if that were so, does that makes the Taliban's horribly abusive treatment of women and their premeditated mass murder of female children okay?

[polly7]

34. None of the civilians killed in Afghanistan or Iraq have been killed by

occupying forces are women and children? I always have to just wonder in amazement at this excuse ........... saving the women and children. What a joke.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

44. Not deliberately as a matter of command direction.

The terrorists however...

[polly7]

62. Riiiiiighhhhhhhht, I forgot, they were just collateral damage.

How many millions (who weren't 'collaterally damaged') are now widows and orphans in now decimated countries which. in Iraq's case, now has taken previous womens rights away and they are afraid to even go out their own doors? And .......... of course ALL of their husbands, fathers, little boy sons .......... were legitimate targets in this illegal occupation, they had to be ....... they were male in their own oil-rich country. What could be more legitimate??? Barf. Direct command in an illegal occupation sounds like you're endorsing the planning criminal robbing a bank and having anyone in it killed that may possibly stop it. The women and children caught in the crossfire - sad, but shit happens. I saw the 'trophy' pictures long ago on the internet before they were removed - CHILDREN's body parts being compared to fruit, funny stuff like that. I never imagined they would really take home body parts of murdered civilians as trophies. If there is a hell, may they rot.

Oh, and protecting those women, that CIA supplied VIAGRA must have helped quite a few child-brides! If the old warlord they couldn't escape before likes them a little better now, these children / women, don't have a chance.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

69. OK, can we stop with the fantasies about what a teddy bear Saddam was supposed to be

I never agreed with the war and I still don't and I never will but I refuse to lie to myself or anyone else as if Saddam era Iraq was this bastion of egalitarian justice.

It's nonsense people tell themselves.

The people fighting to destabilize Iraq set off bombs in markets as a matter of policy. They deliberate and plan the best way for that to happen to kill the most women and children. It is their objective, it is what they do, it is what they want.

The US does not. We do not target civilians. Yes, civilians get killed; that's one of the reasons I'm against war. Soldiers get killed too and the soldiers I've met I really like and I fear for them . But I know they are good people at heart.

If you can figure out some magical way to insure no civilian need ever die again you would be rich beyond your wildest dreams because the US military would come racing to your door with truckloads of money. But civilian deaths are an inevitable part of war despite the rules and regulations and training and enforcement.

But hey, that's why I'm against war.

But I can still be against the horrors of war without trafficking in non-sensical dark fantasies that good people suddenly lose their minds and become ravaging monsters.

[No Elephants]

74. Kindly point out posts (or anything else) claiming Saddam's Iraq was a bastion of egalitarian jus-

tice.

"We do not target civilians." Who is "we?" Someone cut off those fingers.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

79. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9053152&mesg_id=9053152

Sad, but there it is.

[MH1]

93. but those 'someones' WILL be prosecuted

9 times out of 10, at least, in the US military, when they are found out.

Many other societies, not so much. Taliban? Definitely not so, unless the guys screwed up and cut off fingers of the wrong people.

[another saigon]

63. mr fish always cuts through the crap

[Karenina]

97. Indeed he does. n/t

[TheMadMonk]

40. As a matter of fact, yes, many of the women do feel this way.

Just as many of the women of the Bible Belt are fully supportive of being chattels and subordinate to their menfolk.

Right or wrong, they KNOW exactly what their god wants of them and any effort on another's part to "fix" their situation will be solely for the benefit of the fixer, most so called victims will be made intensely misserable by their "liberation".

The only outside intervention that might put a stop to the cycle of violence would involve taking all children, before they are indoctrinated into their religion. And we here in Australia can tell you exactly how well that works. How well it worked with little black picaninies, how well it worked with little white bastards, and how well it worked with half and halfs rejected by both shades of their birthright.

The one AND ONLY thing the Taliban has over your average abusive AMERICAN husband/partner, is that they are in a position to make this treatment of women a matter of state policy. In AMERICA, right NOW, completely against state policy, there are any number of men playing Taliban with their women, and there are any number of state enforcers who turn a blind eye to men abusing their wives and even children, who refuse to take complaints seriously from the most vulnerable, because they have too much brown in their skin and/or not enough green in their wallets.


Ask the suffragettes how they were treated in their day. Ask battered American women how they are treated right now. Cigarette burns, knives, fists, throttling, daily rape. If you live in an urban location, chances are "Taliban like" behaviour is going on within a stone's throw of where you sit right now.

I probably share much the same sense of what is right and wrong as you. What I don't share is the same sense of false moral outrage. The horrible examples are indeed horrific, but the reality is that under NORMAL circumstances women in the more "backwards" parts of the world, women are probably abused no more often than in the more "enlightened". They may well be denied opportunity, but that is an entirely different thing. Laws and their enforcement may be unequal and seem barbaric to us, but again that is a different thing to actual abuse. Our own past (and even present) is rife with almost exact parallels to the opression of women by -ooga booga- ISLAM.

In our part of the world women, children, African Americans, gays, etc. all gained equal opportunity, slowly, at great cost and over a period of several generations, and even now the journey is far from complete. How do you think you would feel if some strangers came in, guns blazing, calling all American men the lowest of the low, and simultaneously telling all the women to behave like the Bush twins on a bender? How do you think the People of America at the turn of the twentieth century would have behaved if an invader had come in and tried to ram that Century's worth of civil rights progress down their collective throats? Black and white marriage; unwed mothers; almost total sexual freedom; total sexual emancipation; a black president; universal education; etc.

This is EXACTLY what America has been doing from day 1 in Afghanistan. Directly attacking the manhood of the men, and telling the women that they should behave like harlots. This isn't about right and wrong. This is about what people believe.


And sorry to bust your bubble. It's not just Afghanistan that thinks a few old conservative white guys speak for the American people. We've had a century of example and know it to be a fact. Your tourists haven't done you many favours either.

[Nihil]

45. Excellent post.

Thank you for putting things so clearly.
:applause:

[seafan]

65. These Afghan women and children can no longer answer for themselves.

U.S. Admits Role in February Killing of Afghan Women, NYT, April 4, 2010

KABUL, Afghanistan — After initially denying involvement or any cover-up in the deaths of three Afghan women during a badly bungled American Special Operations assault in February, the American-led military command in Kabul admitted late on Sunday that its forces had, in fact, killed the women during the nighttime raid.

The admission immediately raised questions about what really happened during the Feb. 12 operation — and what falsehoods followed — including a new report that Special Operations forces dug bullets out of the bodies of the women to hide the true nature of their deaths.

.....

Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has tried hard, and with some success, to reduce civilian casualties through new rules that include restricting night raids and also bringing Special Operations forces under tighter control. But botched Special Operations attacks — which are blamed for a large proportion of the civilian deaths caused by NATO forces — continue to infuriate Afghans and create support for the Taliban.

NATO military officials had already admitted killing two innocent civilians — a district prosecutor and local police chief — during the raid, on a home near Gardez in southeastern Afghanistan. The two men were shot to death when they came out of their home, armed with Kalashnikov rifles, to investigate.

Three women also died that night at the same home: One was a pregnant mother of 10 and another was a pregnant mother of six.

.....

Related stories of this incident:


This Time It's Pregnant Women: Another American Atrocity in the Bush-Obama War in Afghanistan , Truthout, March 14, 2010

Obama’s Afghanistan War: US Special Forces Killed Pregnant Women, Covered-Up Deaths, PubRecord, April 5, 2010
(follow-up report of the Truthout piece above)

US special forces 'tried to cover-up' botched Khataba raid in Afghanistan, London Sunday Times, April 5, 2010



Before that, they came for the children.

Afghan Children Handcuffed, Then Killed By American Soldiers, December 31, 2009




So, yes, rational people expect that the Afghan women and children 'feel the same way'.


Something very sinister has gripped America and it has infected the thought processes of far too many who fall prey to it.

[femrap]

98. Women, children and the

elderly...these are the ones killed in war...the number of soldiers is much, much smaller.

I'd like to go back to hand-to-hand combat where only the soldiers die. Or better yet, have the leaders of the dispute fight it out. We'll sell tickets on Pay TV and balance the budget!

[grahamhgreen]

19. "There is no instance of a nation benefitting from prolonged warfare." - Sun Tzu, Art of War, 500 BC

[ClarkUSA]

26. Then it's a good thing Pres. Obama has a firm exit date set for the end of combat in Afghanistan...

... and has recently ended the war in Iraq, just as he promised he would when he ran for president.

[Alcibiades]

30. If keeping 50,000 under arms in Iraq really counts as an "end"

More like an indefinite occupation.

[ClarkUSA]

32. No more combat = no more war, period. We still have troops in Korea but we're not at war with them.

<< More like an indefinite occupation. >>

Thats' not how the Iraqi PM sees it. The Iraqi people don't, either. They celebrated in the streets when Pres. Obama made his announcement formally ending Bush's war. Nor does Iran or their Shia go-to guy in Baghdad, Iraqi parliamentary member and Iraqi Shia leader Muqtada al-Sadr or any other nation in the Middle East. Guess you're right and they're all wrong, eh? Are we indefinitely occupying Kuwait, Japan, Germany, and South Korea too?

[Alcibiades]

35. We'll see

You're claiming there's no more combat? Really? I had thought that there was combat, considering that there were two guys KIA on Monday. I'm sure you are right about that and I am wrong.

South Korea was our ally in the Korean War, so, no, I wouldn't consider our forces there to be an occupying force, and it's puzzling why you would include it in any list of "occupied" countries. The occupation of Germany--or at least part of it-- technically only ended in 1990.

The difference between the Iraq SOFA and the ones governing Japan and Germany is that those countries have democratically elected governments that could ask us to leave--as was done in the Philippines. The SOFA in Iraq was negotiated by Bush's people, whom I distrust, and contains plenty of wiggle room. You may not be aware, but the political situation of the Iraqi government is quite tenuous, and they have not been able to form a government since the elections. This could well provide a pretext for keeping a large presence.

You've posited a testable proposition. The status of forces agreement stipulates that all US forces will be out of Iraq by December 31, 2011. If my view is correct, a pretext will be found for keeping them there, hence the "indefinite occupation." I'd rather you were right.

[polly7]

36. Kuwait, probably. It's got oil. My opinion. n/t.

[No Elephants]

73. Not true. See Reply 71. And Korea is not comparable in the least.

Neither are Japan or Germany, where we still also "have troops."

"They celebrated in the streets when Pres. Obama made his announcement formally ending Bush's war."

You mean when Obama kept Bush's draw down agreement with Iraq and used those troops to increase the Obama Afghani War surge.

ETA: Yogi Berra was Colbert's guest last, as Colbert was trying to figure out if the Iraq War was over.

Yogi repeated his famous line, "It ain't over til it's over."

They didn't nickname him Yogi falsely.

[MH1]

94. Just as we have an indefinite occupation of Korea.

I've been there many times and it never seemed that the Koreans minded very much. The shop owners were actually quite happy for our presence. Not to mention the bar owners. :)

[grahamhgreen]

39. We are not benefitting from Americans dying for the corrupt Islamic republics we set up there, IMHO.

[No Elephants]

71. Actually, Bush fixed the draw down date in Iraq before Obama's election and there's no guaranty

the Iraq War is over. Yes, Obama kept Bush's agreement as to the draw down (using drawn down troops to surge further in Afghanistan), renamed the Iraq mission and re-named the 50,000 remaining combat troops "advisors" or some such (shades of the early days of the Vietnam War). However, it has always been said by him and his generals that everything depends upon conditions on the ground at any given time. Bet you all my worldly possessions that the same proviso will be made as to Afghanistan, if it has not already been made.

[glitch]

77. Wars aren't fought to benefit nations, they are fought to benefit a few individuals

and for those they are very successful, which is why they are still made.

[Blue_Tires]

64. those who don't learn from history...

[No Elephants]

75. You can't learn diddly from anything if you insist on remaining in denial or spin facts more

feverishly than Rumpelstiltskin spun straw. Sooner or later, you become convinced your spin was factual.

Seems puppy love and idolatry are more powerful than the Force.

[BreweryYardRat]

11. Yup. At least we're going to execute our sociopaths.

Are military courts still allowed to sentence people to death by firing squad or hanging?

[No Elephants]

76. How many did we even try after Abu Ghraib, let alone hang? How did prosecution of Bushco go?

Yoo and Condi still excusing themselves and teaching their brand of ethics, etc. to our nation's future lawyers, historians and government leaders? Bybee still a federal judge? His boss, Gonzo, in jail?

Please.

[another saigon]

12. It was her Father in law and Brother in law who did that to her

I thought that propaganda piece was put to bed.

[ClarkUSA]

20. The Taliban terrorize schoolgirls and women for daring to educate themselves.

<< I thought that propaganda piece was put to bed. >>

Why was it a "propaganda piece"? Prove it. In Afghanistan, outside of the presidential palace in Kabul, you are either for or against the Taliban. If you're against them, you're pretty much a target for daily beatings or a bullet in the head. It isn't a stretch to suspect that the uber-conservative Islamic husband who chopped off the ears and nose of that teenage girl who was on the cover of Newsweek are Taliban members, considering her husband got Taliban approval before he did it: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-afghan-girl-20100809,0,672514.story

Misogynistic Taliban butchers aren't worth my sympathy. I don't give a damn about them.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

24. He seems to imply because her family mutilated her...

...that allegations of cultural misogyny are unfounded.

I'm not entirely certain how that is supposed to work but I think that's what he's saying.

Maybe since it was family it isn't misogyny it's more akin to the troglodyte that backhands his little girl in the middle of Wal-Mart?

Who knows, maybe she had it coming. :sarcasm:

:shrug:

[ClarkUSA]

25. I noticed that jarring dissonance, too. Yet it's the "occupying force" that is such a concern!

:crazy:

<< I'm not entirely certain how that is supposed to work but I think that's what he's saying. >>

Me neither. I'll bet that girl is very grateful to American soldiers for saving her life, providing medical care to restore her looks as best they can, and likely making sure she never returns to such conditions again.

"Mutilated Afghan girl comes to L.A. for treatment"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4496733

[ClarkUSA]

28. You're wrong. The 18 year old victim said "her abusive husband" did it "with Taliban approval"

'The 18-year-old, identified only as Bibi Aisha (Miss Aisha), told Time that her nose and ears were cut off by her abusive husband — with Taliban approval — to punish her for running away. The controversial photo appeared with the headline, "What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan."'

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-afghan-girl-20100809,0,672514.story

[another saigon]

13. I take umbrage with the despicable sociopaths in the occupying force.

After all, there would be no occupation/enemy/conflict at all if the US were not taking the Empire Route.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

23. What about th despicable sociopaths in the civilian world?

There are plenty of those running around. Will you condemn civilian life in the name of consistency?

It's one thing to be anti-war, I'm against the war. Books will neutralize far more enemies than the bombs ever will at a fraction of the cost but the US military does not breed sociopaths. As was pointed out earlier the army is prosecuting, not condoning. I'm no soldier but I'm willing to bet those who are convicted will encounter a penal system far less accommodating than anything its civilian counterpart can conjure.

Slandering an entire group just to express your dismay over the war is despicable in itself. It's no better than someone who is robbed by a minority allowing that episode to distort their entire view of all minorities.

[ClarkUSA]

27. +1

Well-said.

:thumbsup:

[Alcibiades]

33. Most people condemn them: they are called criminals

The difference here is that the criminals have been armed and trained by the government, and are supposed to abide by the rules of war, which no one expects of criminals.

My dad collected ears in Vietnam. It's not as if this is slander. We pay people, some number of whom commit atrocities, and some even smaller number of whom are caught. The rest get their pensions.

My guess is that this wouldn't have been found out if not for the Hashish. Extrajudicial killings is one thing, but hashish is taken more seriously.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

43. And civilians are supposed to abide by civil law

Putting a uniform on is not some magical cure for being a sociopath.

And how does, "wouldn't have been found out if not for the Hashish" change anything? They hid their crimes because they knew they were committing crimes and the military would punish them because the military would not tolerate their crimes. Just because some other event led to their discovery doesn't change this fact. How many civilian criminals are caught for a serious crime because they were tripped-up over something as mundane as a burnt out brake light?

[Alcibiades]

72. The difference is that there is more leeway

Soldiers know that there isn't going to be a criminal investigation every time they shoot a civilian, but that they certainly will have some 'splaining to do if it is alleged they are smoking hashish. Inherent in the job of the soldier is killing people. Kills are presumed righteous, and it's easy to plant an AK. In a conflict where the enemy is in among the people, these sorts of things are even more likely. Claims that civilians have been killed are probably less likely to be followed up upon in today's military than the charge that they are smoking hashish.

My dad did two long tours and three short tours in Vietnam. He took trophies, much like these men, but he's not a sociopath--more than a little narcissistic, but not a sociopath. I doubt very much that all these men are sociopaths, either. I doubt that all the folks who acted in the My Lai massacre were sociopaths either. People's actions are determined by context, and the context of combat, particularly a counter-insurgency, enables people to justify them doing things they would not normally do. The military is set up to kill people, and if a few people wind up dead, it's usually just considered collateral damage, which makes it that much easier for these sorts of things to happen. Look at the Milgram experiments: if you authorize people to use force, you change them. They are not sociopaths, but acting as part of a context that has made it acceptable. And then, if you tell people waterboarding isn't torture, don't be surprised if they come home and waterboard their children. The point is that they are features of every war, and we ought to think about this when it comes down to questions such as "should we really spend another decade in Afghanistan?"

[Nuclear Unicorn]

80. OK, I'm throwing a flag on this play

I had to consult more knowledgeable authorites on your statement, "Soldiers know that there isn't going to be a criminal investigation every time they shoot a civilian..."

The reply: bullshit...jag scarier than

[Alcibiades]

91. Did something go wrong with your keyboard?

than what?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

92. weird

I wrote the word "enemy" in brackets as I was paraphrasing what my "consultant" had to say in regards to his time over there.

In essence, I'm told that soldiers are very conscious of the "rules of engagement" and they fear being hauled into an investigation at the slightest complaint or mishap. Rephrasing: they fear the lawyers more than the enemy.

[Alcibiades]

95. That's heartening

Have you seen the video of Ethan McCord reporting his experiences on the day of the wikileaks video?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kelmEZe8whI

This is just one instance, accidentally uncovered. There have been no consequences for the gunship crew. Apparently the RoE allowed them to fire on a van simply because it was picking up the wounded. The reporters and the folks who were with them were walking down the middle of the street, not firing or hiding. I'm from a military family, professional Army dating from the era when there was practically no army, and the attitude McCord reports fits in with what my great-grandfather reported from his service as a sniper in WWI, my grandfather as an infantryman in WWII and Korea, and my dad in the Dominican Republic, Vietnam (and Laos and Cambodia, but we don't talk about that, which is a related issue: if we can keep something as massive as our broader involvement in Southeast Asia secret, what chance is there for justice for an individual civilian?). Sweep everything under the rug, cover everyone's asses, if you have a problem with it there's something wrong with you, etc.

The army has a history of these things going back to the war against the Creeks. I would love to think that the US Army has its act together, and that it doesn't take outright murder for them to seriously investigate killings of civilians. But when the whole world is watching, as in the instance McCord recounts, and there are no consequences, I have little faith that it is otherwise when people are not watching.

[No Elephants]

87. Respectfully, if your dad killed lawfully, and not "for sport," it's not

in the same ballpark. Sure, taking an ear, or a scalp or a finger as a trophy from someone who is already dead is disrespectful of the dead. That, however, does not equal taking human life for sport.

[Alcibiades]

90. In the jungle

or the hills of Afghanistan, who is to say what is lawful? Dad's always been more forthcoming about the atrocities perpetrated by the Vietnamese than upon them.

But that's beside the point: taking trophies, as these men did, tends to go along with committing atrocities. It's part of a broader pattern of dehumanization that is inherent in warfare.

[No Elephants]

78. Try putting a post in context. Plenty of posters have pointed out civilian sociopaths.

the poster to whom you are replying is not denying that, simply pointing out the civilian sociopaths are not the whole story.

You're way Over the top on those accusations, too.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

83. What context?

The post pretty much implies that if not for the war the accused would be sweet, church-going boys who rescue kittens.

I'm going to consider that these thugs were thugs long before they put on a uniform.

Why do I assume that?

Because if the military turns good people into bad people then they would still be bad people after they leave the military. But are nation is NOT swimming in millions of sociopaths who happen to be combat vets. Yes, many need help leaving hte horrors of war behind but they come home and resume their lives as the loving parents, spouses, friends and neighbors that they were when they left.

If the military, by training or neglect, made these thugs cut off fingers then why do we not have an epidemic of finger cutting murderers roaming our streets as millions of combat vets resume their normal lives?

[No Elephants]

88. My reply 78 already answered that question. And your elaborate characterizations of

of Reply 13 in your post 23 ad 83 are whole cloth. This was Reply 13 in its entirety:

"13. I take umbrage with the despicable sociopaths in the occupying force.
After all, there would be no occupation/enemy/conflict at all if the US were not taking the Empire Route."

And, as my Reply said, you need to read it in the context of the OP and everything that was on the thread before Reply 13. Simply bc the poster did not choose to recite some phrase about Taliban or "honor" killings does not he or she approves of them. As my Reply 78 said, your characterizations of that post are way over the top.

[roguevalley]

41. fuck. put them into prison a long time if they are guilty. if that

was my kid I would kill myself.

[roguevalley]

42. true, and they both need to be slapped into the next millennia.

there is no slack to be cut on either side. they are both fuckers who need jailed.

[No Elephants]

68. ...

"<< This is why they hate us. >>

Who's 'they'?


Probably the same folks referred to in the silly "they hate us for our freedoms" meme.

[NC_Nurse]

2. No doubt. That's so horrible.

[RandomThoughts]

3. I always figured that was the intent of war.

A chapter outline from a story I was writing years ago.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=279x3484

People were sent to war, not to win anything just to fight till their conscious was broken, mostly they fought for nothing, to create despair, only thing that mattered was for them to fight until they were broken, the ones that would not fight for things that did not matter were sent to the prison camp.


There is actually much more to the story, the woods people attacking the fronts of the camp for diversion, and the elders moving on the upper structures of the complex, that post is just an outline.


They will pay...


AC/DC Thunderstruck
http://www.tu.tv/videos/acdc-thunderstruck

[polly7]

4. OMG. I thought nothing else could surprise me.

Afghan / Iraqi civilians - bonus targets in arrogant, illegal, one-sided invasions and occupations. Disgusting, filthy pigs are those who did this ........ yes, it is no wonder they hate.

[dkf]

7. I notice this is in the UK papers, not ours.

[another saigon]

15. lets have a look at the killers

Stryker soldiers who allegedly plotted to kill Afghan civilians. Andrew Holmes, Michael Wagnon, Jeremy Morlock and Adam Winfield are four of the five Stryker soldiers who face murder charges. Photograph: Public Domain

[Brooklyns_Finest]

16. Drugs

This is why I am totally against legalizing drugs.

[grahamhgreen]

22. WTF? Non Sequitur. Illogical. You should be against the legalization of war for profit.

[4saken]

29. This comment is why...

I'm totally against not taking at least one critical thinking class. So fewer people assert causation based on correlation to confirm their biases. Look at the evidence, smoking hash/marijuana doesn't cause people to feel more justified in using violence or the dehumanization of others.

[HEyHEY]

38. WHAT?! They were snoking Hash, that's like drinking brandy

How about you make a stand against war instead? That's why this happened.

[No Elephants]

82. Baloney. It's how troops are trained. "Kill, kill, kill." They could just as easily have been

drunk or riled when sober.

[Soylent Brice]

21. K&R

[sfwriter]

31. These punks would have done less damage...

...if they had joined al queda.

Eff them.

[HEyHEY]

37. Remember the moive "casualities of war"

Same thing.

[Hissyspit]

46. US Soldiers 'Killed Afghan Civilians for Sport and Collected Fingers as Trophies'

Source: Guardian (UK)

US soldiers 'killed Afghan civilians for sport and collected fingers as trophies'
The Guardian News Thu 9 Sep 2010 02:11 BST
Soldiers face charges over secret 'kill team' which allegedly murdered at random and collected fingers as trophies of war

Twelve American soldiers face charges over a secret "kill team" that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.

Five of the soldiers are charged with murdering three Afghan men who were allegedly killed for sport in separate attacks this year. Seven others are accused of covering up the killings and assaulting a recruit who exposed the murders when he reported other abuses, including members of the unit smoking hashish stolen from civilians.

In one of the most serious accusations of war crimes to emerge from the Afghan conflict, the killings are alleged to have been carried out by members of a Stryker infantry brigade based in Kandahar province in southern Afghanistan.

Read more: http://m.guardian.co.uk/?id=102202&story=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/09/us-soldiers-afghan-civilians-fingers

[jobycom]

47. Why is the general public always surprised when our soldiers do what all soldiers have done?

I remember telling people before we invaded Afghanistan that wars brought these kinds of behavior, and being told over and over that our soldiers were more virtuous, and our leaders didn't do that stuff.

I remember telling someone that our troops were torturing people, just as all troops do, and being called all kinds of names. A week later the Abu Graib story broke, and these same people acted as though they had never heard of such a thing.

This is why you don't go to war. This is what war is. This is what happens. Bush should hang, and then rot in hell for all eternity. Every death there is on his hands. The rest of the gang, too, from Cheney on down.

[panzerfaust]

50. Heros Defending Freedom(tm)

Young men with automatic weapons and explosives need close supervision and control - things that are very difficult to achieve in a guerrilla war.

It is good that such things are now, finally, being allowed to be reported.

Now if we would just end our unjust wars of opportunity and choice ...

[jobycom]

51. It's always that way. They report them as things are winding down. It's housekeeping.

It shows the other side that you do have a heart, and that none of the atrocities were really on purpose, and you will take care of them, so they don't really have to complain. We police ourselves, that's how good we are.

Always the same. As long as history has been recorded.

[No Elephants]

81. Pelosi quickly cleaned tables and Obama decided to look only forward, and

made sure other nations did not engage in looking back. And he's praised Bush's love of country and patriotism, as well as making him an unofficial goodwill ambassador re: the disaster in Haiti. So, dream on about punishment.

Our rule of law is badly broken, with future violations almost guaranteed.

[jobycom]

96. Quit blaming Pelosi and Obama. Neither campaigned on prosecuting Bush because

this nation wouldn't have put them in office if they were going to. Look in the mirror, look at your window. It's a democracy, we are the government. Scapegoats are cowardice.

[No Elephants]

84. "What is" De Nile ain't just a river in Egypt," Alex.

[Loudmxr]

48. Just remember what Sarah sez: "Don't apologize!"

It didn't start with Reagan but his administration began the blatant and open disregard of law and decency.

[Hubert Flottz]

55. That's pretty much what this guy said...

The best political weapon is the weapon of terror. Cruelty commands respect. Men may hate us. But, we don't ask for their love; only for their fear.
Heinrich Himmler

[No Elephants]

85. I blame almost everything on Raygun, but disregard of law and decency began long before him.

Maybe not far from Plymouth Rock. Or Jamestown.

[Better Today]

49. And yet we are worried about how a couple dozen people burning Korans is

going to endanger our troops. Geez, we are really a fucked up nation and world, that spends so much time on Koran burning, and this on the other hand will be swept away in short order.

[Autumn Colors]

58. "Swept away" in short order?

Has this even gotten a mention in U.S. media? This article is from a U.K. paper. I would be surprised if this appeared in ANY U.S. media to begin with ... never mind being "swept away in short order"...

[Nihil]

61. And any reprisal for *THIS* ...

... will be blamed on "Muslim extremists over-reacting to the Koran burning" ...

Anyone willing to bet that this isn't going to be the spin in the US media?

:shrug:

[No Elephants]

86. +1

[ixion]

52. The whole so-called 'war' on terror (and drugs) is one large rolling crime, war and otherwise

so end them now.

[DrSteveB]

53. I believe Pat Tillman was killed in this manner

In order to create a hero, or perhaps in retaliation for his being a liberal.

[proud2BlibKansan]

56. Tillman was killed by friendly fire

[Hubert Flottz]

54. Look at the shit George Bush and Dick Cheney had the CIA doing

to people abroad. They set the examples for the troops. The CiC is at the top of the chain of command.

We're over there "winning a victory," we'll let God sort out the "hearts & minds" and assholes & fingers LATER.

[pjt7]

57. This is a reality of a perpetual war

& every American who pays taxes to fund this, needs to know where their $$$ is going.

[a la izquierda]

59. Now, where have I read this before...

oh wait, I know!

Read any story about campaigns against Native Americans in the 19th century, especially about the campaign against Black Kettle and the Northern Cheyenne. You'll wish the soldiers were only taking fingers.

Fucking hell. I wish I could say that things shocked me anymore. They don't.

[timo]

60. I would

burning korans be damned, I think this would put troops in danger more than burning a book!!

[seafan]

66. Yes, this will endanger our troops severely. The extremist pastor's book-burning antics seem like

an orchestrated reason this week for the inevitable fury that will erupt over this story.


How else to explain the large numbers of media satellite trucks sitting outside a part-time used furniture store that doubles as a church with 50 conservative extremist members whose pastor is on a hate-driven anti-Islam rampage... hoping we won't notice what just happened this year in Afghanistan.

[seafan]

67. This will endanger our troops also, Mr. President.

US soldiers 'killed Afghan civilians for sport and collected fingers as trophies', September 8, 2010


It happened this year, under your watch, Mr. President.




Obama: Koran Burning 'Stunt' Could 'Greatly Endanger' Troops, September 9, 2010

[w8liftinglady]

70. This is awful.I am wondering how many tours these guys have done.

PTSD from multiple deployments mind-fucks a lot.There have been many reports on tendencies to murder and commit suicide.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-soltz/ptsd-and-murder-among-new_b_81380.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11057430
http://www.ptsd.va.gov/public/pages/overview-mental-health-effects.asp
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/2010/02/20102685951740629.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/11/iraq-friendly-fire-incide_n_201512.html

[No Elephants]

89. Shameful.

[seafan]

99. Conspiracy to murder Afghans, mutilate corpses and cover up the evidence.

"It is just a matter of time."




19 June 2010:

A total of five US soldiers are now charged with murder in the killing of three civilians in Afghanistan earlier this year, according to a statement issued by the Army Wednesday. Three soldiers were charged Tuesday, joining two charged earlier this month. All could face the death penalty if convicted.

Staff Sgt. Calvin Gibbs, 25, of Billings, Montana, and Spec. Jeremy Morlock, 22, of Wasilla, Alaska, were charged with three counts each of murder and one count each of assault. Pfc. Andrew Holmes, 19, of Boise, Idaho; Spec. Michael Wagnon, 29, of Las Vegas; and Spec. Adam Winfield, 21, of Cape Coral, Florida, were charged Tuesday with one count of premeditated murder.

The three killings took place in separate incidents near Forward Operating Base Ramrod in Kandahar province, a position manned by soldiers of B company, 2nd battalion, 1st infantry regiment, 5th Stryker brigade combat team, 2nd infantry division.

Pfc. Holmes is accused of killing Gul Mudin in January. Spec. Wagnon is accused of shooting Marach Agha to death on February 22, as well as asking another soldier to erase the evidence of the death from a computer hard drive. Spec. Winfield is accused of killing Mullah Adahdad May 2. The killings all involved the use of grenades and rifle fire

Spec. Morlock and Staff Sgt. Gibbs were charged in all three of the killings, and in an assault on a fourth victim May 5. According to the French news service Agence France-Presse, the assault victim was a fellow soldier who was trying to expose drug abuse in the unit and was severely beaten in retaliation. While recovering from his injuries in the hospital, the soldier revealed the involvement of the five men in the three murders. The charge sheet indicates that the assault involved punching and kicking, as well as spitting in the face.

The five soldiers are now being held in pre-trial confinement at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, near Tacoma, Washington, the home base for the Stryker Brigade, which remains in Afghanistan. The brigade has seen heavy combat against Taliban fighters since it deployed in July 2009, suffering 33 combat deaths, with three more soldiers dying from non-combat-related causes.

Two of the five soldiers were on their third combat deployment—Gibbs, who was in Iraq from January 2004 to January 2005 and in Afghanistan from January 2006 to May 2007, and Wagnon, who was in Iraq twice, from February 2004 to February 2005 and from August 2006 to November 2007.

The other three soldiers were on their first overseas combat deployment. Morlock had a criminal record before and during his military service, including a domestic-violence protective order obtained by his wife two years ago, and a conviction for disorderly conduct last year.

.....

June, 2010: Charge Sheet


September 9, 2010: Soldier's father: Army was warned of murder plot

SEATTLE The father of a U.S. soldier serving in Afghanistan says he tried nearly a half dozen times to pass an urgent message from his son to the Army: Troops in his unit had murdered an Afghan civilian, planned more killings and threatened him to keep quiet about it.

By the time officials arrested suspects months later, two more Afghans were dead.

And much to Christopher Winfield's horror, his son Adam was among the five Fort Lewis-based soldiers charged in the killings.

The elder Winfield told The Associated Press in an exclusive interview that his son did not kill the unarmed man and would never have been in the situation if the Army had investigated the warnings he says he passed along to Fort Lewis.

.....

Winfield is charged with murder in the final killing, and his attorney, Eric Montalvo, insists he was ordered to shoot after Gibbs hit the civilian with a grenade. Winfield deliberately shot high and missed, he said.

.....

This article goes on to describe the chilling communications between Spec. Adam Winfield, 21, of Cape Coral, FL and his parents, in which the soldier expresses a need for assistance as he feared for his safety.

The first indication for Christopher Winfield and his wife, Emma, that something was amiss came Jan. 15, the day of the first killing.

"I'm not sure what to do about something that happened out here but I need to be secretive about this," their son wrote them in a Facebook message. The couple gave the AP copies of the Facebook messages, Internet chats and their phone records.

Winfield, 22, of Cape Coral, Fla., didn't immediately provide more details, and over the next month he had little contact with his parents. They said they checked constantly to see if he was online.

On Feb. 14, he told his parents what happened in a lengthy Internet chat: Members of his unit on patrol had killed "some innocent guy about my age just farming." He said he did not witness the killing.

But, he wrote, those involved told him about it and urged him to "get one of my own."

He said that virtually everyone in the platoon was aware of what was going on, but no one seemed to object.

"If you talk to anyone on my behalf, I have proof that they are planning another one in the form of an AK-47 they want to drop on a guy."

He added that he didn't know whom to trust and feared for his safety if his comrades learned he was talking to authorities.

"Should I do the right thing and put myself in danger for it. Or just shut up and deal with it," he wrote his parents. "There are no more good men left here. It eats away at my conscience everyday."

In statements to investigators, at least three platoon members said Gibbs directly threatened Winfield. Morlock added that Gibbs devised "scenarios" for Winfield's death, one of which involved Gibbs dropping heavy weights on him as he was working out.

Gibbs accosted Winfield as he was on his way to speak with a chaplain and warned him to keep quiet, Montalvo said.

.....

Apparently, other soldiers were threatened to keep quiet about what they knew:

One soldier, Pfc. Justin A. Stoner, who reported hashish smoking in the unit, said he was beaten by several platoon members. Gibbs and Morlock then paid him a visit, with Gibbs rolling out on the floor a set of severed fingers, he told investigators.

Morlock told him that "if I don't want to end up like that guy ... shut the hell up."

More about the expressed desperation in the communications between soldier Adam Winfield and his parents about what he'd witnessed:

Winfield asked his parents to call an Army hotline because he didn't want anyone to overhear him using the phone.

His father, a Marine veteran, was shocked, and made five calls to military officials that day, his phone records show.

He said he left a message on a Defense Department hotline and called four numbers at Fort Lewis. He said he spoke with an on-duty sergeant and left a message at an Army Criminal Investigations Division office before reaching the base's command center.

In that call, an official told him that if his son wasn't willing to come forward while deployed, there was nothing the base could do, Winfield recalled in interviews with the AP and in a sworn statement to Army investigators.

The official suggested the soldier keep his head down until his deployment ended and investigators could look into his claims, he said.

The elder Winfield told AP he regrets not writing down the identities of those he spoke with. He said he did not give any of them Gibbs' name, but did identify his son. He said one of his son's sergeants had been involved in a civilian's murder and was planning more.

His son soon expressed concern about what would happen if Army officials stateside began making inquiries, and asked his dad to back off. The elder Winfield said he complied.

A week later (about February 22), the second killing occurred. On May 2, the third killing took place.

The killings eventually came to light when the soldier who had reported the drug use told investigators that Morlock "had three prior kills that none of which I believe were actually justified."

Preliminary hearings in the case are expected to begin this fall.

According to the Charge Sheet above, in addition to the first article in this post, on or about May 5, Morlock and Gibbs are accused of severely beating and spitting in the face of another individual who is possibly fellow soldier Adam Winfield. This occurred three days after the third Afghan murder on May 2.



September 9, 2010:

Twelve American soldiers face trial over an secret "kill team" that allegedly blew up and shot Afghan civilians at random and collected their fingers as trophies.

Five of the soldiers are charged with murdering three Afghan men who were allegedly killed for sport in separate attacks this year. Seven other soldiers are accused of covering up the killings as well as a violent assault on a new recruit who exposed the murders when he reported other abuses, including members of the unit smoking hashish stolen from civilians.

September 9, 2010: Army: 12 soldiers killed Afghans, mutiliated corpses

WASHINGTON - Twelve U.S. soldiers face a variety of charges in what military authorities believe was a conspiracy to murder Afghan civilians and cover it up, along with charges they used hashish, mutilated corpses and kept grisly souvenirs.

.....

Authorities allege Gibbs kept finger bones, leg bones and a tooth from Afghan corpses. Another soldier, Spc. Michael Gagnon II, allegedly kept a skull from a corpse, according to charging documents. Several soldiers are charged with taking pictures of the corpses, and one - Spc. Corey Moore - with stabbing a corpse.

Staff Sgt. Robert Stevens is charged with lying to investigators about the deaths, saying the civilians posed a threat.

Other soldiers are charged with assaulting Afghan civilians by shooting at them, and several soldiers face charges of failing to properly account for and dispose of weapons.

Eight of the soldiers also are charged with using hashish and beating a junior soldier in an attempt to stop him from reporting them for misconduct, including hashish use.

Gibbs is also charged with telling another soldier to lie about the incidents including the platoon's involvement in illegal drug use. He is alleged to have told Spc. Adam Winfield, "I'm going to send you home by dropping a tow bar on you," if Winfield revealed information to investigators.

.....

Stevens and Pfc. Ashton Moore are charged with conspiracy to commit aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon, and Sgt. Darren Jones is charged with conspiracy to commit assault and battery and conspiracy to commit aggravated assault with a dangerous weapon.

Cpl. Emmitt R. Quintal, Staff Sgt. David Bram, Spc. Adam Kelly and Spc. Corey Moore are charged with conspiracy to commit assault and battery.

Stevens is charged with wrongfully and wantonly engaging in conduct likely to cause death or bodily harm to other soldiers, and Jones, Quintal, Bram, Kelley and Corey Moore are charged with unlawfully striking another soldier.

(all bold type added)


*************************************

After the jirga was over, one of the tribal elders came over and we chatted for a while over a glass of green tea. "Last month," he said, "some American officers called us to a hotel in Jalalabad for a meeting. One of them asked me, 'Why do you hate us?' I replied, 'Because you blow down our doors, enter our houses, pull our women by the hair and kick our children. We cannot accept this. We will fight back, and we will break your teeth, and when your teeth are broken you will leave, just as the British left before you. It is just a matter of time.'"

What did he say to that? “He turned to his friend and said, 'If the old men are like this, what will the younger ones be like?' In truth, all the Americans here know that their game is over. It is just their politicians who deny this."

----LINK

[Solly Mack]

100. k/r

[bemildred]

101. Gee, who could have predicted this? nt

[Name removed]

102. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.