Alyeska wrote:
What PeZook and Thanas both noted are very good ideas. They need to rework the fundamental framework of investigative practices within the military
They need to rework the entire
mindset, which isn't going to happen anytime soon: people brought up My Lai, and the investigation into it looked almost exactly like Haditha - first everyone denied anything happened (despite the massacre being reported
on the same day by Hugh Thompson, the helicopter pilot who stopped it), with only a report being requested from the commander of the unit whose men did the killing. Obviousl, the report said nothing happened.
It took a
year, and a letter written by a former Charlie Company soldier to the President, the JCOS and several Congressmen to even start a proper investigation, at which point of course the evidence was gone, half the culprits were already out of the military, etc. - and even then, the denial phase continued for quite some time.
And naturally, the idea of command responsibility and "just following orders" not being a defence was eviscerated when the company's commander was cleared of any wrongdoing (despite him actively concealing the crime...) and the only person convicted was the lieutenant in charge of the 20 or so murderers. The LT got 3.5 years house arrest on base, too, depsite him personally shooting at least one wounded person in full view of Thompson.
Had the investigation been immediate and thorough, all (or most) of the culprits could have been convicted. But a lot of powerful people simply didn't want any of that, just like they didn't want it here ; The US prefers to pretend its soldiers can do no wrong, and punish them lightly if it turns out that they actually can. It would like to punish enemy leaders and officers for the conduct of their troops, while shielding their own leaders and officers from any responsibility.
Sidewinder wrote:The more I read about these war crimes, the more I appreciate Metal Gear Solid 4's otherwise ridiculous idea of nanomachine-controlled soldiers with nanomachine-controlled weapons. There MUST be a middle ground between "Punish the entire unit! Everyone is presumed guilty, until proven innocent!" and "Let everyone get off, scott free! No need for a criminal investigation!"
The US military must simply acknowledge that 150 minutes of lectures about the geneva convention and rules of conduct isn't enough to prevent war crimes. It must decide: does it want its soldiers to have a conscience, and refuse unlawful orders and report such incidents (in which case you need to press this issue all the time during training, and treat reports of atrocity seriously so that the chain of command actually acts on them), or does it want its soldiers to obey all orders, but hold the officers accountable (in which case you need a high caliber of officer even for simple lieutenants, so that you can count on them keeping their troops disciplined)?
The mentality of "deny, cover up, wait it out" is what causes these breaches of justice, but nobody really wants it to go. The commanders like the idea they cannot be held accountable for the behavior of their officers, the troops don't feel the obligation to act against their officers when they give an unlawful order, and the public enjoys the illusion that American troops are such good people that they just don't do war crimes.
"
- PeZook
