U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Afghan Allies’ Abuse of Boys

Gardez, 2002, locals complain of boys being kidnapped by local warlord soldiers....asked for help, we looked into it and started doing night patrols in specific areas. Seemed to help....but we never really addressed the issue as much as we could have.
 
Freefalling, I appreciate the insight.
Perhaps this belongs in the collapse of Afghanistan thread or another on COIN. Do you think that the United States should maintain a sphere of influence with military presence in regions who are polar opposites even if their interests may branch from ours?
 
EchoBravo said:
Freefalling, I appreciate the insight.
Perhaps this belongs in the collapse of Afghanistan thread or another on COIN. Do you think that the United States should maintain a sphere of influence with military presence in regions who are polar opposites even if their interests may branch from ours?
Click to expand...

Absolutely! A nation doesn't exist to benefit the citizens of other nations. If our interests merge that is great, but at times they won't; see also, the UK, Canada, etc. The thread around about Vietnam is a good example of working with old foes (Vietnam) to offset the new hotness (China). On a certain level it may gall us to do so, but people and nations need to look forward and not behind them...or at least they should stop staring.
 
EchoBravo said:
While I agree that we should not go to war specifically to spread our morals in other sovereign nations, Why are we there to begin with in a "nation building occupation"? Good luck having an independent and functioning Afghanistan in which there is rule of law if the ANA and ANP can seemingly have carte blanche without consequence. If we are to say "their soil, their rules" then we should not be there and let the chips fall where they may. Alternatively if we just wanted the Taliban out of power it was done earlier on and we should have left it to Karzai and the Northern Alliance back in 2001. If its just about destroying the Enemy then Total War or no war. If you are to go to war do so with a clearly defined objective that makes sense for the long haul or not at all. Yes, every service-member should not necessarily act unilaterally in uniform but neither should bureaucratic principles be the only rule in which you act as a human being IMO.

As far as the authors statement, "His orders precluded his morals from having justification" with that you could justify ANY action or process no matter how heinous. Nuremberg trials anyone?

Though I'm sure many of you on this board have personal experience in these conflicts so I may be preaching to the choir.

-EB
Click to expand...

I have personal experience being embedded with a foreign military and witnessing certain activities which, under the UCMJ, would be subject to prosecution and courts martial, had those activities been carried out by Americans.

When we get involved with foreign conflicts or engage in operations in host countries, quite often the circumstances are so complicated as to preclude any one simple strategy with a single goal. There is no magic bullet to resolve all the facets of a particular conflict, so sometimes we have to settle for partial success in one area.

Nation building, in my opinion, is a natural offshoot of our extended presence in a Third World environment and is facilitated by our political designs and logistical and tactical needs. In other words, if we're going to conduct combat operations someplace for years on end, whether or not it was our original intent, our influence is going to permeate many aspects of that particular society...and not always in a good way.

But some things will always resist foreign influence, like religion, morals, ethics, long standing cultural traditions. You cannot change everything to be how you want it...but that fact can't stop you from proceeding with actions and obligations in your own national interests...if those interests are intimately associated with a foreign intervention.
 
Do they still put the war crimes incident into courses like they did in the 90's? (that was a hypothetical question BTW).

We can't tell people to report war crimes/crimes against humanity; then do nothing when they get reported.

IIRC eliminating child rape was one of the things the Taliban prosecuted, so guys like this would have been strung up. Not doing anything about the pedophile gives the impression we condone it, how does that work in the hearts and minds scheme of life?

Say mom and the kid get pissed at inaction, and start feeding info to the taliban, or the kid grabs an AK next time he is used as rape date and whacks some of our guys? Then what, we wring our hands and say they can not be trusted?
 
I was never over there but know the Taliban like their little boys. Not sure about your orders-but if I saw something happening like that I would still want to do something. It is hard to accept that people see this and just carry on. Please know there is no blame,from me- but I am adamant in protecting youth in any country.Maybe if I was over there I would be desensitized or think like you guys.Not all you guys-I see some want to exact change. I have been called a racist by my son-my only child for yrs. I am not. But hate men in certain cultures. DA SWO=I think they have been picking up their AKs or whatever for so many yrs. As far as I now we-Canucks too-never won the hearts and minds-not really. If m wrong let me know-lol-you will anyway.
 
Freefalling said:
Absolutely! A nation doesn't exist to benefit the citizens of other nations. If our interests merge that is great, but at times they won't; see also, the UK, Canada, etc. The thread around about Vietnam is a good example of working with old foes (Vietnam) to offset the new hotness (China). On a certain level it may gall us to do so, but people and nations need to look forward and not behind them...or at least they should stop staring.
Click to expand...

If Cali is paying hoods NOT to engage in crime, why not offer incentives to the Afghan government?
 
lindy said:
If Cali is paying hoods NOT to engage in crime, why not offer incentives to the Afghan government?
Click to expand...

We shouldn't have to offer them OUR money to change THEIR ways! If they don't want to change bad enough to do it themselves, we shouldn't have to pay them to do it.
 
Martland has been reinstated.

I definitely didn’t see that one coming.

In a move described as a “stunning reversal” by Fox News, the Army announced today that Sergeant First Class Charles Martland will be allowed to continue his military service after all. You might recall SFC Martland as part of the Special Forces duo who confronted an Afghan warlord over the alleged abuse of an Afghan “tea boy” (i.e. sex slave). The confrontation ultimately turned physical, and Martland and his compatriot were reprimanded by the Army.
Click to expand...
 
Reinstated is great news, they should also remove the letter of reprimand from his permanent record. With news coverage this has gotten it's pretty clear he was in the right, regardless of policy.
 
Okay, why?

This never happens. While I am pleased that he will be able to stay in the Army, typically these types of decisions are not reversed...why so in this case?

My typical "follow the money" does not apply, so was there enough internal grumbling within the ranks? Would that really make a difference?
 
Ooh-Rah said:
Okay, why?

This never happens. While I am pleased that he will be able to stay in the Army, typically these types of decisions are not reversed...why so in this case?

My typical "follow the money" does not apply, so was there enough internal grumbling within the ranks? Would that really make a difference?
Click to expand...

THAT is the problem: the absence of "intestinal fortitude" to do the right thing for the soldier vice the "right" thing for the next grade. He should be reinstated and then EVERYONE who recommend dismal immediately have their records scrubbed.
 
Because we don't stop standing for what we believe in regardless of where we find ourselves physically.

Warriors aren't changed by their environment...they remain Warriors and do what's right regardless of whether it's popular or not.

He did what was right...and those that would want to persecute him for it would be viewed as crumbs...IMO!
 
It's not our place to throw our belief system on everyone else. Is it fucked up? Sure, no arguing that. But it's their country and their culture. The article with a counter-perspective posted by @Marauder06 was spot on, IMHO.
 
Don't agree with that at all @CDG . The SF unconventional warfare and FID missions do impart American values on the partner force through education on human rights education/war crimes, or intervening by force. We let illegal or immoral acts occur when there is no alternative and we'll have a catastrophic loss of rapport with out partners, like working with indig the initial invasion of a country or early stages of a war. Doing nothing can appear to mean we condone the acts, and that can have huge implications, both on the ground, and at the strategic level.

There is no one answer to how to react to these incidents eg. Just report it, do nothing, just report. As Americans, we have to live by our values, and doing nothing about child rape is the opposite. SFC Martland almost lost his career because of low character individuals trying to protect their own career by not providing top cover for their guys.
 
CDG said:
It's not our place to throw our belief system on everyone else. Is it fucked up? Sure, no arguing that. But it's their country and their culture. The article with a counter-perspective posted by @Marauder06 was spot on, IMHO.
Click to expand...
One of the biggest objectives of the vetting process, which is necessary to spend certain types of US funds, is to ensure the recipient of said funds has not been involved in war crimes or human rights violations.

@moobob is right. In some cases it's even more than a moral requirement, it's a legal requirement.
 

Similar threads

Bypass
  • Locked
U.S. Soldiers Told to Ignore Sexual Abuse of Boys by Afghan Allies
Replies
2
Views
650
Bypass
Bypass
Back
Top