"How We Fight" article in Foreign Affairs magazine
Daistallia 2104
20-11-2006, 18:24
This month's Foreign Affairs magazine has an interesting article on the US military's conduct of the Iraq war in regards to war crimes, and in particular the targeting of civilians.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20061101faessay85608/colin-h-kahl/how-we-fight.html
What do you think?
Risottia
20-11-2006, 18:45
As the war transitioned into a counterinsurgency mission and U.S. forces confronted adversaries who were largely indistinguishable from the civilian population, the criterion became conduct-based: U.S. troops must now positively identify a "hostile act" (such as the firing of an automatic weapon in their direction) or a "hostile intent" (such as the brandishing of a rocket-propelled grenade or the planting of an improvised explosive device) before they may fire their weapons.
I think that also speeding is considered an hostile act, since an italian secret service agent (Nicola Calipari) was shot and killed by a US soldier (Mario Lozano) as he was speeding in a service car towards Baghdad airport (to take back to Italy a freed italian hostage) and allegedly failed to stop at a US checkpoint...
I guess many US soldiers are too nervous, if not downright trigger-happy, to attain strictly to engagement rules. Not that I don't understand them, but I cannot justify them, either.
Daistallia 2104
22-11-2006, 07:41
Bumpity Bump
Rokugan-sho
22-11-2006, 15:12
They bring up the legitimate point that the US army is actually trying the best it can to prevent civillian casualties (the us army after the 2nd world war), however it could imply we shouldn't be so negative whenever Americans commit war crimes since "other nations armies are alot worse".
Non-sense, with a nation as the US being (or trying to be) a shining example of a free and just nation it is only right to continue to critise them non-stop. On the contrary, we should be dread the day when we consider the USA just "another" nation and care less about their war crimes.
Andaluciae
22-11-2006, 15:17
I guess many US soldiers are too nervous, if not downright trigger-happy, to attain strictly to engagement rules. Not that I don't understand them, but I cannot justify them, either.
This has a lot to do with what fighting an insurgency does to the soldiers who are involved.
Demented Hamsters
22-11-2006, 15:22
Slightly off-topic but in todays paper it said that in today's dollar terms, the "War on Terror" (tm) has cost almost as much as the Vietnam war.
Vietnam cost $531 Billion (in todays $)
Korea cost $361 Billion
Iraq and Afghanistan $501 Billion (most on Iraq)
It's expected the Pentagon will be asking for up to $170 Billion extra for next year.
Risottia
22-11-2006, 15:30
This has a lot to do with what fighting an insurgency does to the soldiers who are involved.
Agreed. And also with what the average US soldier was told by top-ranking officers (from the regiment's colonel to CINC Bush jr) and Fox News. "The Iraqi people will love you because you free them from Saddam". "The Shiites will love you because Saddam used to massacre them". "Iraq is an Al-Qaida op base". "There are WMDs hidden in Iraq". "You'll stay in Iraq for a short term". "Iraq is going to be a piece of cake"...
No wonder those guys in boots are totally out of their minds by now. And if a guy with a gun goes out of his mind...:(