Can US soldiers (even US citizens) still imagine they're on the 'good side'?

originally posted by: Cancerwarrior
a reply to: Profusion

There is no "good" or "bad" when you are in a war. And make no mistake, trying to be moral in a war will get those with a big heart killed real quick.

I've been to two of them, how many have you been to? No matter what side you are on, its all grey everywhere you look despite any noble assumptions the general population has. Soldiers are the ones that do the dirty work. Thats history.

Of course there's good and bad, otherwise we'd just nuke all our enemies and be done with it... there's a LOT of grey, mostly grey in many instances, but at the same time, the rules in place to govern troops are often there to make sure "bad" done by troops post conflict doesn't turn a victory in a loss...

Allowing pedophiles to use US military bases for serial child rape isn't really a grey area that should be tolerated either... there's literally no upside to that policy.

And the proof is in the pudding - the US policy in Afghanistan hasn't produced a victory, after years of letting pedophiles use military bases as rape rooms, so maybe it's time to try something else...

most awful people see themselves as benevolent or even as hero. i believe it was AL Capone who saw himself as provided necessary services to the rest of society.

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

The problem with simple-minded racist and xenophobic narratives like yours is that they only hold up if you ignore what your own culture gets up to.

How convenient.

If you want do debate US war crimes, US foreign policy, US torture, civilian deaths at the hands of US forces, start a thread on it. Until then you have given us nothing but another straw man.

I never said en masse, but only in relation to the numerous service men who knew about this and stood by and did nothing... there is AMPLE evidence for that.

I’m fairly certain—and anyone can simply go through your posts to see this—that you are clumsy with your accusations, insofar as your claims are too general to make any sense. At no point do you say anything about the actual pedophiles, yet you condemn the US military (once again, in a general way) of providing “rape rooms”, as if the theatre where that Holmes nutcase went postal was guilty of providing a murder room.

Your evidence shows that these events happened, which is nothing new. What you need to prove is that the US is guilty of your accusations.

Now, as per my apparently “xenophobic and racist narrative” (more emotionally charged accusations made without merit) for pointing out that this practice is deeply routed in Afghan culture, here’s wikipedia on the subject:

Bacha bazi is a form of pederasty which has been prevalent in Central Asia since antiquity. It waned in the big cities after World War I, for reasons that dance historian Anthony Shay describes as "Victorian eraprudery and [the] severe disapproval of colonial powers such as the Russians, British, and French, and the post-colonial elites who had absorbed those Western colonial values."

What do you know, the practice has been prevalent in the area since antiquity…well, that is until the colonialists arrived. Historians show that colonial powers disapprove of this practice, and only then did it wane. How racist and xenophobic of wikipedia. But speaking of looking the other way, you’ve gone so far as to invent a scapegoat.

We’re speaking about the transfer of power here, a subject and process so sticky that it shouldn’t be taken lightly. We can argue the non-interventionist policy, which I agree turns a blind eye to these atrocities. We can argue the practice of Bacha bazi, which, though you will not admit it, is deeply routed in Afghan culture. We can argue about whose responsibility it is to keep law and order in Afghanistan. We can argue who has jurisdiction over these crimes. We can argue the moral responsibility and accountability of those who stand by or are powerless to do anything about it. But no reasonable debate should fall into accusations of pedophile defending, racism, and xenophobia.

Racism, xenophobia and child-rape are serious charges, and you better be able to back then up. Frankly, yes, I’m going to defend whom you accuse (individuals of the armed forces, myself and your fellow members included) from the propaganda flung from the moral pedestal of your #hashtag kangaroo court, by pointing out that your rhetoric is dishonest at best, and pure sophistry at worst.

Your ad hominem, your use of straw men, your appeal to emotions, false analogies, your non-sequiturs, and your disrespect towards your fellow members show you cannot be reasoned with. Simple minded. We’ve both wasted our time and energy here.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: CTRTCTRT

The problem with simple-minded racist and xenophobic narratives like yours is that they only hold up if you ignore what your own culture gets up to.

How convenient.

If you want do debate US war crimes, US foreign policy, US torture, civilian deaths at the hands of US forces, start a thread on it. Until then you have given us nothing but another straw man.

I never said en masse, but only in relation to the numerous service men who knew about this and stood by and did nothing... there is AMPLE evidence for that.

I’m fairly certain—and anyone can simply go through your posts to see this—that you are clumsy with your accusations, insofar as your claims are too general to make any sense. At no point do you say anything about the actual pedophiles, yet you condemn the US military (once again, in a general way) of providing “rape rooms”, as if the theatre where that Holmes nutcase went postal was guilty of providing a murder room.

Your evidence shows that these events happened, which is nothing new. What you need to prove is that the US is guilty of your accusations.

Now, as per my apparently “xenophobic and racist narrative” (more emotionally charged accusations made without merit) for pointing out that this practice is deeply routed in Afghan culture, here’s wikipedia on the subject:

Bacha bazi is a form of pederasty which has been prevalent in Central Asia since antiquity. It waned in the big cities after World War I, for reasons that dance historian Anthony Shay describes as "Victorian eraprudery and [the] severe disapproval of colonial powers such as the Russians, British, and French, and the post-colonial elites who had absorbed those Western colonial values."

What do you know, the practice has been prevalent in the area since antiquity…well, that is until the colonialists arrived. Historians show that colonial powers disapprove of this practice, and only then did it wane. How racist and xenophobic of wikipedia. But speaking of looking the other way, you’ve gone so far as to invent a scapegoat.

We’re speaking about the transfer of power here, a subject and process so sticky that it shouldn’t be taken lightly. We can argue the non-interventionist policy, which I agree turns a blind eye to these atrocities. We can argue the practice of Bacha bazi, which, though you will not admit it, is deeply routed in Afghan culture. We can argue about whose responsibility it is to keep law and order in Afghanistan. We can argue who has jurisdiction over these crimes. We can argue the moral responsibility and accountability of those who stand by or are powerless to do anything about it. But no reasonable debate should fall into accusations of pedophile defending, racism, and xenophobia.

Racism, xenophobia and child-rape are serious charges, and you better be able to back then up. Frankly, yes, I’m going to defend whom you accuse (individuals of the armed forces, myself and your fellow members included) from the propaganda flung from the moral pedestal of your #hashtag kangaroo court, by pointing out that your rhetoric is dishonest at best, and pure sophistry at worst.

Your ad hominem, your use of straw men, your appeal to emotions, false analogies, your non-sequiturs, and your disrespect towards your fellow members show you cannot be reasoned with. Simple minded. We’ve both wasted our time and energy here.

Ad hominem, strawmen, etc., are just more smoke you're blowing to avoid reality...

I had a poke around your responses on other threads and lets just say I wasn't blown away by your ability to always stay completely on topic... which is as I expected. Your pithy and hypocritical demands are just an attempt to shut up a view point you have no real arguments against..

You are also clumsy with your language, but as most of the people you deal with aren't pedantic you aren't endlessly being exposed for your shoddy and casual use of language. And btw., you're only pedantic with people you disagree with; it's simply another ploy to try and change the narrative... typical.

I am not surprised that you want to defend your "comrades" many criminals defend their fellow criminals; whoopdeedo.

I am not impressed.

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

People, on US military bases, while soldiers listened, raped children, for years...

Because we have no control. Now let me correct a few things for you so you don't sound like an idiot:

1. There are NO US military bases in Afghanistan. There are, however, NATO bases under their respective Regional Commands.

2. We have NO AUTHORITY over Afghan National Army personnel. None. Zero. We go to jail or get kicked out for enforcing our laws on a people who do not have laws restricting this behavior at all. Which means it isn't illegal to rape little boys in Afghanistan.

3. If a US Soldier did kill an ANA member you'd just scream about how we're just oppressive.

Not sure what part of that screams, "moral authority" or "good guys" to you.

Well that depends on how morally selective you are doesn't it?

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: CTRTCTRT

People, on US military bases, while soldiers listened, raped children, for years...

Because we have no control. Now let me correct a few things for you so you don't sound like an idiot:

1. There are NO US military bases in Afghanistan. There are, however, NATO bases under their respective Regional Commands.

2. We have NO AUTHORITY over Afghan National Army personnel. None. Zero. We go to jail or get kicked out for enforcing our laws on a people who do not have laws restricting this behavior at all. Which means it isn't illegal to rape little boys in Afghanistan.

3. If a US Soldier did kill an ANA member you'd just scream about how we're just oppressive.

Not sure what part of that screams, "moral authority" or "good guys" to you.

Well that depends on how morally selective you are doesn't it?

Honestly, NATO or US, it matters little, because US personal (and whatever limited personal there is from other nations) opened there doors to pedophiles, pedophiles they were working with, and gave them space to rape children. As was previously stated, if an Afghan came onto a NATO base with a truck load of kids, and then started shooting them in the head, US and NATO troops would stop him; there's zero difference here:

- Raping kids IS against the law in Afghanistan
- Raping kids IS against US military code
- Not intervening is against US military code

You suggest that the only solution was to kill pedophiles; nowhere have I said that. I am not for summary execution.

Finally, if you think there's some legitimate version of morality that accepted brutalisation of children then you're just as bad as these pedophiles in Afghanistan.

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

- Raping kids IS against the law in Afghanistan

No it isn't.

- Raping kids IS against US military code

Yes it is.

- Not intervening is against US military code

No it isn't.

The UCMJ governs the actions of US military personnel.

You suggest that the only solution was to kill pedophiles; nowhere have I said that. I am not for summary execution.

I suggested no such thing.

Finally, if you think there's some legitimate version of morality that accepted brutalisation of children then you're just as bad as these pedophiles in Afghanistan.

I made no such comparison.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: CTRTCTRT

- Raping kids IS against the law in Afghanistan

No it isn't.

- Raping kids IS against US military code

Yes it is.

- Not intervening is against US military code

No it isn't.

The UCMJ governs the actions of US military personnel.

You suggest that the only solution was to kill pedophiles; nowhere have I said that. I am not for summary execution.

I suggested no such thing.

Finally, if you think there's some legitimate version of morality that accepted brutalisation of children then you're just as bad as these pedophiles in Afghanistan.

I made no such comparison.

Yes, it is.

Shocking that you don't know that, but it is.

bacha bazi is outlawed in Afghanistan, being against both sharia law and the civil code...

thediplomat.com...

Afghanistan has also punished troops caught doing it... and all of this is easy to find with some basic googling.

Not intervening is against article 133 which stated that military personell can be court martialled if:

the accused did or omitted to do certain acts; and (2) under the circumstances, these acts or omissions constituted conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman

Unless you think standing by while a law is broken, and a child is raped, is good conduct for an officer and a gentleman...

You suggested that if troops started killing pedophiles... not sure why you ONLY suggested that if you think there's other options...

Finally when I suggested that protecting pedophiles, etc., was not going to put US troops in a position of moral authority, you said, " Well that depends on how morally selective you are doesn't it?".

People can read into that whatever they want, but it's pretty obvious what you meant.

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

the accused did or omitted to do certain acts; and (2) under the circumstances, these acts or omissions constituted conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman

Tell me more internet lawyer.

Please explain to me where in the UCMJ it states that US troops will be prosecuted for not enforcing an Afghan law?

I can tell you where disobeying lawful orders is found. We do not enforce Afghan law.

As I mentioned in the other thread, there is no law in Afghanistan against the kind of thing we're talking about here. What ever you're quoting you need to read into more.

It is unenforceable and widespread.

When a law is unenforceable it is rendered meaningless.

The UCMJ does NOT cover the actions of Afghan no matter how you'd like to twist it.

The DOD also says that if you know that someone has been sexually assaulted you should:

"Ensure that the victim is at a safe location away from the perpetrator. If not, take the victim to a safe place."

www.safehelpline.org...

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: CTRTCTRT

the accused did or omitted to do certain acts; and (2) under the circumstances, these acts or omissions constituted conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman

Tell me more internet lawyer.

Please explain to me where in the UCMJ it states that US troops will be prosecuted for not enforcing an Afghan law?

I can tell you where disobeying lawful orders is found. We do not enforce Afghan law.

As I mentioned in the other thread, there is no law in Afghanistan against the kind of thing we're talking about here. What ever you're quoting you need to read into more.

It is unenforceable and widespread.

When a law is unenforceable it is rendered meaningless.

The UCMJ does NOT cover the actions of Afghan no matter how you'd like to twist it.

LOL. A minute ago it wasn't an Afghan law according to you... maybe you'd better take a step back and educate yourself instead of trying to mock and attack the person who obviously knows more about this than you.

You told me previously:

"We have NO AUTHORITY over Afghan National Army personnel. None. Zero. We go to jail or get kicked out for enforcing our laws on a people who do not have laws restricting this behavior at all. Which means it isn't illegal to rape little boys in Afghanistan."

Now you're saying we can't enforce our laws OR their laws on a NATO base... lol.

Once an Afghan comes onto a military base he can just rape who he wants, and no one can stop him... quite the system...

"Sorry General, we can't stop him from raping you, he's an Afghan..."

I can TELL you, again, that it IS against the law.

First, they were told, one of the militia commanders raped a 14- or 15-year-old girl whom he had spotted working in the fields. Captain Quinn informed the provincial police chief, who soon levied punishment. “He got one day in jail, and then she was forced to marry him,” Mr. Quinn said.

www.nytimes.com...

"I have personally spoken with [Afghan] President [Ashraf] Ghani on this issue and he made it clear to me that the Afghan government will not tolerate the abuse of its children, or any of its people, and will thoroughly investigate all allegations and administer justice appropriately," Campbell said.

www.militarytimes.com...

Care to make those ridiculous claims again?

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

Learn to read man.

We cannot enforce OUR LAWS against Afghans.

We also can't enforce Afghan laws whether they exist or not, which, in this case, it doesn't.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: CTRTCTRT

Learn to read man.

We cannot enforce OUR LAWS against Afghans.

We also can't enforce Afghan laws whether they exist or not, which, in this case, it doesn't.

You - the person who can't read that Afghans DO HAVE LAWS AGAINST THIS as has been said by the President of Afghanistan, even after seeing examples of people, Afghan people, being punished for it, think I can't read??

Pretty hilarious.

We can and DO enforce laws on our bases, or else anyone we invite on to a base could simply murder anyone they want on the base with no consequences at all... You KNOW they can't do that.

Why you think this is ANY different is beyond me... actually it's not, you're just lying. And you're lying to protect an ideology, and to protect people who you don't want to blame for reprehensible behaviour... that sort of blame shifting and dishonesty is exactly the same sort of behaviour that allows our troops to sit around while they hear kids being raped...

And of course it's despicable, and it explains exactly why so few people have respect for American troops, outside of brainwashed America citizens...

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

You - the person who can't read that Afghans DO HAVE LAWS AGAINST THIS as has been said by the President of Afghanistan, even after seeing examples of people, Afghan people, being punished for it, think I can't read??

You mean the FEW people who have ever been punished for it?

While still remaining largely unenforceable in the entire country?

Secondly those bases are typically Split bases.

ANA on one side and US or Lithuanian or British...So forth on the other.

I've been to several of these.

FOB Apache, Mescal, Spin Boldak, so on and so on.

We don't go on their side and they don't go on ours. Had they committed a crime on our side we would be entitled to arrest them. That said, we still can't keep them. We have to turn them over to Afghan authorities per SOF agreements. Even if we were allowed to interfere, the lack of enforcement on the Afghan side of the house prevents any justice from actually being done.

Lastly, WE CANNOT PROSECUTE THEM. Unless the crime was against a member of the coalition we are not allowed to do much more than detain and transfer, IF THAT.

You just wanna blame the US for what Afghanis like to do. You know full well there isn't much we can do about their societal practices.

This # isn't our fault. THEY are the ones committing the crimes.

originally posted by: projectvxn
a reply to: CTRTCTRT

You - the person who can't read that Afghans DO HAVE LAWS AGAINST THIS as has been said by the President of Afghanistan, even after seeing examples of people, Afghan people, being punished for it, think I can't read??

You mean the FEW people who have ever been punished for it?

While still remaining largely unenforceable in the entire country?

Secondly those bases are typically Split bases.

ANA on one side and US or Lithuanian or British...So forth on the other.

I've been to several of these.

FOB Apache, Mescal, Spin Boldak, so on and so on.

We don't go on their side and they don't go on ours. Had they committed a crime on our side we would be entitled to arrest them. That said, we still can't keep them. We have to turn them over to Afghan authorities per SOF agreements. Even if we were allowed to interfere, the lack of enforcement on the Afghan side of the house prevents any justice from actually being done.

Lastly, WE CANNOT PROSECUTE THEM. Unless the crime was against a member of the coalition we are not allowed to do much more than detain and transfer, IF THAT.

You just wanna blame the US for what Afghanis like to do. You know full well there isn't much we can do about their societal practices.

This # isn't our fault. THEY are the ones committing the crimes.

How's the shifting sands over there?

First it was legal, then it was still legal even after you'd been shown it was actually illegal, now it's illegal, but unenforceable...

First we couldn't touch them, now if they're on our side, we'd arrest them - shame that's not ACTUALLY true:

KABUL, Afghanistan — In his last phone call home, Lance Cpl. Gregory Buckley Jr. told his father what was troubling him: From his bunk in southern Afghanistan, he could hear Afghan police officers sexually abusing boys they had brought to the base.

“At night we can hear them screaming, but we’re not allowed to do anything about it,” the Marine’s father, Gregory Buckley Sr., recalled his son telling him before he was shot to death at the base in 2012.

or how about this:

The American policy of nonintervention is intended to maintain good relations with the Afghan police and militia units the United States has trained to fight the Taliban. It also reflects a reluctance to impose cultural values in a country where pederasty is rife, particularly among powerful men, for whom being surrounded by young teenagers can be a mark of social status.

Some soldiers believed that the policy made sense, even if they were personally distressed at the sexual predation they witnessed or heard about.

“The bigger picture was fighting the Taliban,” a former Marine lance corporal reflected. “It wasn’t to stop molestation.”

Still, the former lance corporal, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid offending fellow Marines, recalled feeling sickened the day he entered a room on a base and saw three or four men lying on the floor with children between them. “I’m not a hundred percent sure what was happening under the sheet, but I have a pretty good idea of what was going on,” he said.

www.nytimes.com...

You can see, if you aren't too busy recalibrating your beliefs again, that we not only didn't do anything about it, on our bases, but actively allowed it to happen, and punished soldiers who tried to directly intervene...

Anyway, I'll be here waiting to see what you claim to believe next...

a reply to: CTRTCTRT

You're the one who used the UCMJ. It is not applicable here
You're the one who is blaming American soldier for what Afghans do. Law or no law, the practice is tolerated there and any regulations are rendered useless. Maybe I was wrong about legalities, but if the law isn't enforced what good is the law?

Just reading the title...YES! Most soldiers and citizens of the United States ARE on the good side. It is the government that controls us which is NOT on the good side.

So the real question is this. Are we US citizens ready to ask for help from some other nation to overthrow our government and regain our freedom and liberty? Because we obviously aren't able to do it ourselves.

Arctic Sea trough you special forces together with the Russian prevented blue blood vs red blood falsh flag and ww3

a reply to: Profusion

This can be applied to most guys I know that have seen combat.

They dont fight for their country. They dont fight for the constitution. They dont fight for freedom or the people back home.

They fight for the guys to their left and right.