I'd like to know how Jellies feel about this:?

I’d like to know which genius thought it was a good idea to photograph and post the video. Didn’t anyone learn anything from the butt pyramids at Abu Ghrab?

Note I am not talking about the acts. Just the stupidity of posting them.

I’d rather be pissed on than shot in the face.

Sure you are disrespecting me by taking a wizz on my dead body, but you kind of all ready did something wose when your organization ended my life. The dead can’t feel anything and are unaware of if they are pissed on or not, all it does is anger the living friends and relatives, who should be quite angry anyway as someone they know got shot and killed.

I’m not saying it is the right thing to do, but it really only is the cherry on top.

Also, if I was forced to shoot someone because they would not stop trying to kill me, after I finally shot the guy, I too would probably be tempted to take a piss on them.

Stop the fighting, stop the war, lets all stop trying to kill each other and blow people up and just get on with being happy. If we are going to keep killing each other, then we may as well t-bag and piss on the victims too.

I was at the libray once and saw a copy of Donald Rumsfeld’s book. I started skimming through it due to curiosity and was pretty baffled by some of the stuff in there.

This guy actually explained how after 9/11, they were deciding how to tackle and deal with this problem. They had two scenarios: either run a small operation that involved going after a few specific targets to capture the people associeted with the attack, or wage a full on assault to combat terrorism as a whole.

They had a lot of meetings and discussions with a lot of top figures to decide what they should do. Then, he essentially said it was obvious what they had to do: launch the full war on terrorism.

Nevermind that it’s impossible and would lead to neverending war or anything.

I think I was just saying this to show how ridiculous war is in general. There’s never really a meaning other than revenge (and resources of course). Really stupid revenge. Some soldiers really think they’re going to kill the bad guys and save the world, it’s sad and upsetting.

Not surprised in the least.

Also, I can’t help but feel that by condemning soldiers pissing on people, that it is almost like saying that the killing is all ok, so long as that is all they do.

“oh sure, blow them up and shoot them, but don’t piss on them, we are not savages”

It does not make sense to me.

EDIT:

- “Hey! why did you drive a bulldozer in to my house, what is wrong with you!?”

- “Chill out dude, it is not like I helped my self to the cookies in your cookie jar after doing it”

The whole point of this is the issue of whether the rules apply to Americans or not. If American soldiers get away with this kind of behavior with little or no punishment, then the people we are trying to impress will not be impressed. They will see American values and morals as hollow and hypocritical. We stand for nothing.

And of course, we don’t stand for anything, anymore, other that what we have always stood for: greed. We are there for what we can get, not what we can give. In this case, we are there to eliminate terrorists. We are not there to prevent future terrorism. We don’t think that way. The military doesn’t think that way. It doesn’t think it’s mission is to prevent future terrorism and I doubt any civilians have dared to tell the military that.

Even if they have, the message is clearly being fought, tooth and nail. That is not a mission the military wants, and perhaps they are right. If we want to win hearts and minds and prevent future problems, we need a different kind of service that is dedicated to that purpose and that should take over the instant the military has cleared out the first wave of hostiles. The occupying force should be a force, but a force with cultural savvy. It should be trained very differently from the military.

The military is a blunt force instrument. Frankly, they don’t train their folks for subtlety. They don’t train them to see multiple sides of the issue. They don’t think they can afford that kind of thinking. The military thinks only one way and that is entirely “us good, and everyone else evil.” Fuck them!

The military has an important place in foreign policy, but occupying a country is not that place. Trying to teach folks about democracy and equal rights for women and respect for culture—the military doesn’t do that well, and probably can’t do it. Period.

The responsibility for the behavior of the Army lies at the top. The President. Of course, the Republicans would be even worse in this respect, since they see no need to win hearts and minds. But the US needs to issue an apology, court martial the soldiers who did this, and reassign the commanders to dead-end jobs.

We then need to start building this new service. But don’t hold your breath, people. It is unlikely that will ever happen. Don’t expect the military to change the way they train folks. It’s not their job.

So expect the US to continue to shoot itself in the foot, diplomatically speaking for the foreseeable future. Maybe at such a time as we become really weak and have lost all influence and power, then the Afghans will invade us and pee on our corpses. Petty, petty. Like bullies on a playground. Like us.

^^ GA!

Double Standards Girl’s hypocrisy sense is tingling.

I read the article and two points came to me right a way.

Commanders are like Police Chiefs. They cannot police their troops from sitting behind a desk and I understand this. I understand why lower-ranking marines will pay the price and not their Commander.

As far as the urinating goes…....suppose this role had been reversed? Suppose those were dead marines on the ground and Afghans were urinating on them?

I wonder how the world and the military would feel about this situation and would Afghan soldiers receive as much publicity as our marines?

Just food for thought.

I’m glad that I’m from Canada, right now (and, in general).

Sorry, but that’s how I feel.

It is a very under reported war, we know little of what is going on. What is unusual about these images is that we are able to see them.

It’s false machismo to diss your opponent after the victory.

The same applies in sports metaphors. We want to be winners, obviously, but we want to be “good winners”. For one thing, it helps to end the fight. It’s one reason, I think, why Germany rose as it did after World War 1 to fight WW II. They were dissed as an entire nation – blamed for the entire war and all its damages – which was simply wrong militarily, diplomatically and economically. They really had very little choice but to somehow “throw off” the ending of that war.

When they were beaten after WW II they were not dissed in the same way. Criminal ringleaders were tried for war crimes (not “the war itself”, but “high crimes and crimes against humanity committed during the war”) and punished to the extent that the victors thought seemly. The countries were occupied, but not harshly, and we tried to let time heal open wounds. That seems to have worked.

For people like Afghans, who don’t have material goods, honor is all they have. When you try to take that away by dishonoring the corpses of dead fighters, you start whole new conflicts. (It’s what’s currently happening with nationwide rioting and violence directed at US soldiers and supporters over accidentally burned copies of the Quran.)

But this is how undisciplined soldiers – undisciplined (especially young) men of all kinds – they want to rub it in that “we beat you” and turn it into “we humiliate you”.

We can only be glad that it’s discovered, discussed and rooted out as much as possible. That, and that it seems to be (we hope) the exception, and not the rule.

To @john65pennington: We’ve been on the other side of this. We saw what happened in Somalia after the Black Hawk helicopter shootdown and dragging dead US Marines through the streets of Mogadishu. The difference is that we can’t very well riot against Somali thugs anywhere on this continent.

@wundayatta

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Earth_Battalion ??

@CWOTUS

Excellent answer. And you are correct: anyone who has ever been on the losing side of a conflict can anticipate their opponent defiling and humiliating and desecrating, even if commanded not to do so. Read a bit about the treatment accorded the defeated Berliners after the Russians moved in to occupy.

Aye to that. Cornelius Ryan wrote the book that I read decades ago about the Berlin invasion from the East. (And having recently watched period footage of the Siege of Leningrad, I guess I’m not so surprised at the brutality of the Soviet attack.)

For the record, what the marines did, I’m not too crazy about that. My g/f’s cousin just came back from Afghanistan, though. He’s a great kid, and I have a lot of respect for him.

@CWOTUS

Agreed. Those who win usually inflict a terrible vengance on those defeated. Which usually simply engenders more hatred and desire for vengance. Where ( and HOW ) does it end?

Where why and how does it end? That’s a tall order. I think it will take politicians with some iron in their spines and who carry the right kind of ethics. They will have to stand up to the military brass and insist that business as usual is not possible any more. They will have to insist that ethical behavior does not mean being pansies. It means conducting war—a horrible business—the right way.

Sounds like a job for… President Paul! : D

President Paul? That is too funny! Thanks. I needed that laugh! Omg! That’s funny. Mercy

It is a stupid thing to do but as was said above, it reeks of the machoism of soldiers of any country in war. Rape, pillage, pee, etc.

I can’t help but wonder why anyone would want a video taken of themselves urinating under any circumstances. Isn’t spitting just as disrespectable and less revealing?

Ha Ha, @zigmund , verily my body is wracked with hysterical laughter. Um… shouldn’t you use a tilde ( ~ ) after that sarcasm?