Marines accused of desecrating bodies

[thebishopp]

While I agree with:

“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.​

I can't agree with:

“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”
​

I've seen a version of this very argument used to defend "rogue" members of our law enforcement community. Just substitute the word "Taliban" with "criminals"... and before you say it's different because it's "not" a war on our streets, I would say unless you have been shot at by criminals, shut your mouth.

 

[9mmfan]

I first saw this thread last night and decided not to comment until I had some sleep.
Is what they did wrong? Did they hurt Americans 'image' in that part of the work. No, our image is **it their anyway. Yes. Do they deserve punishment? Well.....I suppose whatever it is, it will be much more 'punishment' than any Taliban received after BEHEADING ON CAMERA captured Westerners.


Just my

 

[halfmileharry]

Fox News is having this same arguement right now

 

[Blackhawk2001]

I first saw this thread last night and decided not to comment until I had some sleep.
Is what they did wrong? Did they hurt Americans 'image' in that part of the work. No, our image is **it their anyway. Yes. Do they deserve punishment? Well.....I suppose whatever it is, it will be much more 'punishment' than any Taliban received after BEHEADING ON CAMERA captured Westerners.


Just my

I suggest before you comment further, read the pro and con arguments advanced upthread so we don't have to repeat ouselves for your benefit. Just as an FYI! This is primarily about a failure of some Marines to maintain discipline and uphold the honor of the Corps (although some posters don't agree with me) and secondarily about affecting how we're seen by others.

 

[dross]

As a side point (minor threadjack) the Crusades were not completely unreasonable. There were several, all for slightly different reasons and politics. They started, however, because of the atrocities committed against Christian pilgrims by Muslims. Their purpose was to free the "Holy Land" from Muslim control so Christians could make pilgrimages there without being raped, tortured and killed. Reasonable.

 

[Bull]

What a crass thing to say! How would you like it if it had been a dead relative of yours being pissed on by our enemies? It's not how we as American service members conduct ourselves! These actions only serve to foster the Taliban description of an American. I don't wish to be lumped in with the lower rungs of our society! My servie to the country was honorable, by choice and action. Wrong is wrong no matter where you are from!

I agree 100 %

 

[thebishopp]

As a side point (minor threadjack) the Crusades were not completely unreasonable. There were several, all for slightly different reasons and politics. They started, however, because of the atrocities committed against Christian pilgrims by Muslims. Their purpose was to free the "Holy Land" from Muslim control so Christians could make pilgrimages there without being raped, tortured and killed. Reasonable.

While you are correct it does need to be clarified that it wasn't all muslims. It was a particularly extreme branch who took over the area (from other muslims who had previously allowed the pilgrimages as well as settlements around the are). Just like it wasn't all christians who engaged in the burning of witches or the inquisition or passing out disease ridden blankets to native americans, etc. etc. etc.

 

[rugertoter]

Don't even get me started on this. My words and how I feel would get me into trouble. To state a quote from a movie, "accusing someone of doing wrong in that place is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500".

 

[thebishopp]

What a crass thing to say! How would you like it if it had been a dead relative of yours being pissed on by our enemies? It's not how we as American service members conduct ourselves! These actions only serve to foster the Taliban description of an American. I don't wish to be lumped in with the lower rungs of our society! My servie to the country was honorable, by choice and action. Wrong is wrong no matter where you are from!

+1 We are better than our enemies only if WE ARE BETTER THAN OUR ENEMIES. Otherwise we are, at best, merely hypocrites.

 

[dross]

There are a lot of good reasons not to urinate on the dead bodies of the enemy. I appear to be in the minority viewpoint here, however.

There's another aspect to this. Soldiers have to obey orders or be punished. We can't have individual soldiers and marines making up their own rules. This was against UCMJ, and I'll bet against specific orders. Do we not think that our military should have to obey orders?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

There are a lot of good reasons not to urinate on the dead bodies of the enemy. I appear to be in the minority viewpoint here, however.

There's another aspect to this. Soldiers have to obey orders or be punished. We can't have individual soldiers and marines making up their own rules. This was against UCMJ, and I'll bet against specific orders. Do we not think that our military should have to obey orders?

+1

It also brought dishonor and discredit to the Marine Corps, a crime far more aggregious than simple violation of the UCMJ. If people don't understand that it's because they've never held our title or worn our uniform.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

There are a lot of good reasons not to urinate on the dead bodies of the enemy. I appear to be in the minority viewpoint here, however.

There's another aspect to this. Soldiers have to obey orders or be punished. We can't have individual soldiers and marines making up their own rules. This was against UCMJ, and I'll bet against specific orders. Do we not think that our military should have to obey orders?

+1

It also brought dishonor and discredit to the Marine Corps, a crime far more [STRIKE]aggregious[/STRIKE] egregious than simple violation of the UCMJ. If people don't understand that it's because they've never held our title or worn our uniform.

For probably too many of our young soldiers, FEELINGS tend to replace PROFESSIONALISM in combat, leading to these types of breaches of discipline. Feelings are just that - feelings - and they are neither right nor wrong. What IS wrong is when we allow our feelings to override our duty, discipline and/or common sense and commit acts we've been specifically forbidden or acts which we KNOW are wrong and forbidden. For all our talk of our troops being "warriors", what we really need are "soldiers" (and Marines) - that is, disciplined team-working warriors who carry out their missions in thoughtful, frightfully violent fashion. Once they are reduced to emotional outbursts like urinating on dead enemies, they are not effective soldiers or Marines at that point.

 

[warriorbob]

bottom line is this act probally turned otherwise nuetral people toward the side of our enemies and will kill more Americans. Some brothers in arms semper bardus.

 

[J_Wales]

Daniel Pearl having his head removed is desecration.

Cutting the hands, cutting the feet, and cutting the off of people and hanging the remains upside down from a bridge in Fallujah is desecration.

Pissing on the dead body of an enemy is not desecration.

 

[rugertoter]

There are a lot of good reasons not to urinate on the dead bodies of the enemy. I appear to be in the minority viewpoint here, however.

There's another aspect to this. Soldiers have to obey orders or be punished. We can't have individual soldiers and marines making up their own rules. This was against UCMJ, and I'll bet against specific orders. Do we not think that our military should have to obey orders?

Rules of warfare pretty much go out the window when people are trying to kill YOU. In the last days of WWII, in the European Theater, even the mild-mannered General Bradley told his troops to shoot on site, any German soldier equipped with a scoped rifle. I have seen the video of American GI's gunning down German uniformed soldiers, after they had surrendered, because they had been found to be snipers. I don't think they would be able to get away with that now. My father was in WWII, and one time years ago when I was home on leave myself, he went through some of his service stuff with me. He had a number of grizzly pictures and such from Guadalcanal. There was one picture of him standing on the torsos of two Japanese soldiers while he was holding their heads by the hair. I asked him how the heads came off, and in a gravel voice and a mean look in his eyes, he said he cut them off with a bow saw. I chuckled to myself and asked if they were dead, to me kinda joking around. He was not amused, but replied that one was and the other was after he cut the f***ers head off. My dad saw a lot of combat there until he got shot up in 1944, and then was sent home. How can we ask them to go through untold horrors, and then be respectful to the very enemy that was just trying to kill them. I would have taken a whiz on them too, just would not have been dumb enough to record it.

 

[jeremy]

Question for the Audience....

If I were to kill your Father/Uncle/Brother, pick one, and then **** on his corpse videotaping it for posterity and the World to know. Would this action not anger you?!

 

[HUFFMANWG]

Hey, when you constantly see death and destruction, peeing on your enemies bodies doesn't seem that bad. Besides people seem to forget about our people getting decapitated and broadcasted on national TV. The only punishment I see fit is to bring them home and give them some leave. Hell bring them all home.

I believe GlockFox has said all that needs to be said

 

[HUFFMANWG]

Daniel Pearl having his head removed is desecration.

Cutting the hands, cutting the feet, and cutting the off of people and hanging the remains upside down from a bridge in Fallujah is desecration.

Pissing on the dead body of an enemy is not desecration.

 

[J_Wales]

Rules of warfare pretty much go out the window when people are trying to kill YOU. In the last days of WWII, in the European Theater, even the mild-mannered General Bradley told his troops to shoot on site, any German soldier equipped with a scoped rifle. I have seen the video of American GI's gunning down German uniformed soldiers, after they had surrendered, because they had been found to be snipers. I don't think they would be able to get away with that now. My father was in WWII, and one time years ago when I was home on leave myself, he went through some of his service stuff with me. He had a number of grizzly pictures and such from Guadalcanal. There was one picture of him standing on the torsos of two Japanese soldiers while he was holding their heads by the hair. I asked him how the heads came off, and in a gravel voice and a mean look in his eyes, he said he cut them off with a bow saw. I chuckled to myself and asked if they were dead, to me kinda joking around. He was not amused, but replied that one was and the other was after he cut the f***ers head off. My dad saw a lot of combat there until he got shot up in 1944, and then was sent home. How can we ask them to go through untold horrors, and then be respectful to the very enemy that was just trying to kill them. I would have taken a whiz on them too, just would not have been dumb enough to record it.

Please say "Thank You" for me to your father for his service and sacrifice.

It's always easy to question how men in combat should handle enemies trying to kill them from the safety of one's couch... and it is complete bs to do so.

"War means fighting. The business of the soldier is to fight. Armies are not called out to dig trenches, to live in camps, but to find the enemy and strike him; to invade his country, and do him all possible damage in the shortest possible time. This will involve great destruction of life and property while it lasts; but such a war will of necessity be of brief continuance, and so would be an economy of life and property in the end."
-Jackson

PS: I hope the saw was dull.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Rules of warfare pretty much go out the window when people are trying to kill YOU. In the last days of WWII, in the European Theater, even the mild-mannered General Bradley told his troops to shoot on site, any German soldier equipped with a scoped rifle. I have seen the video of American GI's gunning down German uniformed soldiers, after they had surrendered, because they had been found to be snipers. I don't think they would be able to get away with that now. My father was in WWII, and one time years ago when I was home on leave myself, he went through some of his service stuff with me. He had a number of grizzly pictures and such from Guadalcanal. There was one picture of him standing on the torsos of two Japanese soldiers while he was holding their heads by the hair. I asked him how the heads came off, and in a gravel voice and a mean look in his eyes, he said he cut them off with a bow saw. I chuckled to myself and asked if they were dead, to me kinda joking around. He was not amused, but replied that one was and the other was after he cut the f***ers head off. My dad saw a lot of combat there until he got shot up in 1944, and then was sent home. How can we ask them to go through untold horrors, and then be respectful to the very enemy that was just trying to kill them. I would have taken a whiz on them too, just would not have been dumb enough to record it.

There are times when emotion carries the day in battle. WWII, from the American standpoint, was largely a war fought by "amateurs" - conscripts and we used superior numbers and equipment equal to or superior to our enemies'. It was also largely a war with - somewhat - clear battle lines and an identifiable enemy. The conflicts we've been in since the Korean conflict generally defy such easy identification of the enemy and require different tactics to deal with a brutal and callous enemy. We also are using a smaller, all-volunteer, professional military force to fight our battles and such professionals need to be trained to be above such displays of emotion - in public - except possibly where such emotional outbursts serve as a deterrent to the enemy. While these Marines' conduct has not, apparently, aroused as much emotion in our foreign enemies as it has our domestic ones, it is still behavior that cannot be condoned because it is contrary to the "good order and discipline" that must be maintained to allow us to kick the bad guys' butts with fewer - but better trained, equipped, and lead - military personnel. Demanding anything less will make a difficult duty even harder to accomplish as our government is again cutting the muscle from our military forces.