Posted on 12/09/2003 10:00:24 AM PST by Ispy4u
WASHINGTON -- An investigation that is expected to result in criminal charges against a decorated Army battalion commander in Iraq has raised serious new questions about whether there is such a thing as ethical behavior in war and if there is, to what degree one should be held accountable for violating it.
On the surface, the case involving Lt. Col. Allen West seems trivial. He fired his pistol near the head of a detainee in an effort to elicit information about opposing forces. Before that, it is alleged, he did nothing to stop an interrogation that included beating the prisoner, who apparently was neither killed nor seriously injured. All this was done in the name of protecting American lives. The detainee was said to know about a planned sniper attack on West's troops.
But the recent revelations about American atrocities in Vietnam by an elite "tiger" group and the Pentagon's decision to sweep it into the underbrush two decades ago have intensified the U.S. military's concern about its image as a force that is held, or at least holds itself, to a higher standard. The question now is whether West should face a court martial and the possibility of a prison sentence or be given an administrative punishment that effectively would end his career.
Congressional leaders, like Sen. John Warner, R-Va., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and his counterpart in the House, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., have expressed concern about the case. The Army rightfully has asked them politely to butt out.
Is there a responsibility by American forces to be more humane, if that is possible in war, than most of the armies of the globe? Or is this unrealistic given the life and death aspects and the constant pressures that generate normal fear and often anger in any combatant? It never has been an easy problem and it has been made more difficult by the insurgency nature of the current conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan.
There is grave danger that fear of this kind can be used to justify some of the worst atrocities. Certainly that excuse was used in Vietnam where death often came from the most innocent looking sources, little children with grenades and so forth. It was used to defend the My Lai massacre, for instance. Even in conventional war experiences, heroes often were propelled into extraordinary action by anger at losing a friend or comrade. The two most decorated soldiers of World Wars I and II, Sgt. Alvin York and Lt. Audie Murphy, explained their own heroism as reaction to this intense need to get even.
The West case, of course, focuses attention on a much larger issue of how far one should go in protecting one's own countrymen, military or otherwise, against the shadowy, elusive forces of terrorism. In other words, is torture a legitimate tool if it results in saving lives? Doesn't unconventional warfare require unconventional measures? The congressmen seem to think that it does, as long as it isn't all that severe. After all, the uncovering of a plot to destroy a dozen American airliners clearly came about when Philippine authorities used more than normal persuasion during an interrogation. In that case a huge number of lives were saved. Most Americans would support the use of torture if it would halt the horror of terrorist attacks.
The Army has a different problem, however. It deals with rules about war crime that have been designed through the ages to protect parties on both sides. When these have been violated to whatever degree, whether by the torturing of prisoners or in the sanctioned rape and murder of civilians that was so recently prevalent in Bosnia, there is an obligation to uncover and punish those who have done so. Unfortunately, at times we have been negligent in doing so. West's actions, while seemingly minor in comparison, nonetheless must result in some form of official sanction. Col. West is a good soldier and understands this. Sadly, he may have sacrificed his career to save his men and the Army should take that into consideration when deciding his fate.
As to whether this nation should hold itself to a higher standard, one would certainly hope so. There is nothing to be gained and plenty to lose in the long run by lowering the bar to the level of those elements we abhor. If we condone even the minor infractions, it can only result in more serious breaches of the ethical code we present to the rest of the world. If this makes us vulnerable, it is the price we pay for being who we claim to be.
Dan K. Thomasson is former editor of the Scripps Howard News Service
13 posted on 12/09/2003 11:15:46 AM PST by Ispy4u
Who was it that introduced raping someone's wife as a means of making them talk? Looks like it was you. Seems to me an odd technique. If I were to "advocate" anything, it would be Col. West's methods rather than the rape tactic you have devised.
As for your precious "legitimate means," that's the problem rule book wavers like you can't seem to grasp. Our enemies view all means as legitimate and if we do not do the same, we are at a disadvantage. How many of the attacks on U.S. forces since the war ended and the occupation began may have been thwarted by threatening and intimidating captured enemies? How many dead and wounded have paid for your precious rules that no one we ever go to war with will ever respect? Our enemies laugh at you and your rules and use them against us.
"You are the one who answered "wouldn't it" and then posed a scenario where you believe it would be ok to rape someone for information."
That's right, I'd do just about anything to save the life of one of my fellow American's. I can't think of a darn thing I wouldn't do! Too bad you place more importance on rulebooks than American lives.
"You are not only a sick individual you are also an intellectual midget."
So now you resort to name calling/personal attacks, which tells me all I need to know about the size of your intellect.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.