The Media

[sptrawler]

Exactly, by it's very nature war is ugly.

how can we train a normal human being to go and kill other human beings without dehumanising the purported enemy?

While there is a line beetween the rules of engagement and atrocity... somewhere... The incontrovertible fact is that we're giving licence to our people to go and take other people's lives.

There is a reason why PTSD is absolutely rampant in our ex-servicemen.... In fact I was listening to a podcast iPhone x special forces dude hand and his opinion it would be impossible to not have some form of PTSD.

It is easy to set in the relative safety of our homes and sit in judgement of the actions of our people in a theatre of war.

A look at myself and wonder what would I be like, what would I do in those situations, what would be my reactions?

I thank God that I haven't had to.

But after 60 years I have really attempted to know myself.... And to be honest I couldn't honestly say what my reactions would actually be. In equal measure I can see that perhaps I may have been capable of committing an atrocity, but also may have stood up and said no I cannot fulfill my orders.

... this, after many many hours of discussion with family members and friends who have been in this situation.

Going back a few years, where the pilots and bombaderes involved in the London blitz war criminals?

Were our pilots who bombed German cities, especially Dresden, war criminals?

I have 100 questions about such incidences and every side could point to a Million different incidences where human dignity has been removed.

And here we are splitting hairs over relatively minor incidences.

Just another example of self sabotage and as I read these forums and the opinions people have, I've become ever more convinces that we are screwed...

... Not from China or any other adversary, but because of ourselves.

I had occasion to ask my self the same question many years ago, my older brother had to put his name into the Vietnam lottery, we talked about him being called up and what he would do.
It isn't an easy question and in reality we decided if the war came here we would fight, if we had to go to some godforsaken place and fight for god knows what, we would go bush.
Fortunately he wasn't called up and we contained our fighting to the pub..

 

[wayneL]

I had occasion to ask my self the same question many years ago, my older brother had to put his name into the Vietnam lottery, we talked about him being called up and what he would do.
It isn't an easy question and in reality we decided if the war came here we would fight, if we had to go to some godforsaken place and fight for god knows what, we would go bush.
Fortunately he wasn't called up and we contained our fighting to the pub..

I can only repeat that I consider myself *very blessed never to have had to have been in that situation.

Curiously, I find far more hills to die on now, at age 59, then when I was, ”Only 19”.

 

[rederob]

In modern times Israel and the USA have made shooting the messenger an artform, along with prosecuting anyone finding evidence.
Australia recently did the same with raids on journalists and the media.
There is also a stark contrast to what happens in the fog of war as distinct from the clear light of day where combat soldiers know full well what the Geneva Convention allows and what it does not.

 

[SirRumpole]

In modern times Israel and the USA have made shooting the messenger an artform, along with prosecuting anyone finding evidence.
Australia recently did the same with raids on journalists and the media.
There is also a stark contrast to what happens in the fog of war as distinct from the clear light of day where combat soldiers know full well what the Geneva Convention allows and what it does not.

Good to have you back.

Not to mention the trial of David McBride which should now be dropped.

 

[sptrawler]

There is also a stark contrast to what happens in the fog of war as distinct from the clear light of day where combat soldiers know full well what the Geneva Convention allows and what it does not.

So it is o.k, as long as the rules allow some killing of civilians, but not other killing of civilians?
I suppose that covers unavoidable killings due to missile and bomb drops, as opposed to avoidable killings where it is on the ground up close.
By the way, never realised you had been away Rob. Did Donald let you go? ?

 

[macca]

So it is o.k, as long as the rules allow some killing of civilians, but not other killing of civilians?
I suppose that covers unavoidable killings due to missile and bomb drops, as opposed to avoidable killings where it is on the ground up close.
By the way, never realised you had been away Rob. Did Donald let you go? ?

When someone has been on patrol in hostile territory for a week, not knowing who they can trust, all the time knowing that hidden in amongst the false smiles there are people waiting to plant IEDs on paths.

When things go bad some are going to over react and shoot the wrong person, that is bad.

In the meantime, in a nice safe base many K's from danger, an officer orders a drone pilot to fly and bomb a village that is hosting or is captured by hostiles.

Civilians die, one kills 2 or 3 people who are then claimed to be friendly, the other kills 50 who were captives or hosts, both are bad.

 

[rederob]

So it is o.k, as long as the rules allow some killing of civilians, but not other killing of civilians?
I suppose that covers unavoidable killings due to missile and bomb drops, as opposed to avoidable killings where it is on the ground up close.

Many tools of war continue to be indiscriminate, as in tens of millions of unexploded land mines today still scattered across former conflict zones.
While the Geneva Convention legitimises killing in times of war, it sanctions clearly avoidable events through war crime prosecutions. If you watched the link from Assange's Wikileak you will know the 8 Iraqis were killed on false pretenses, seemingly as sport.
As wars are not moral activities, the Geneva Convention sets out "rules" so that those in the armed services do not regard themselves as wanton killers, and cannot be seen that way by the nations they serve.

 

[sptrawler]

Many tools of war continue to be indiscriminate, as in tens of millions of unexploded land mines today still scattered across former conflict zones.
While the Geneva Convention legitimises killing in times of war, it sanctions clearly avoidable events through war crime prosecutions. If you watched the link from Assange's Wikileak you will know the 8 Iraqis were killed on false pretenses, seemingly as sport.
As wars are not moral activities, the Geneva Convention sets out "rules" so that those in the armed services do not regard themselves as wanton killers, and cannot be seen that way by the nations they serve.

Does the Geneva convention mention anything about wearing a uniform?
During the war, if a soldier was captured not wearing a uniform, they could be shot as a spy or resistance militia?

With regard unexploded land mines, IMO we should start DNA testing them and jailing soldiers for littering or terrorist activities, for not picking them up when they left.

 

[SirRumpole]

During the war, if a soldier was captured not wearing a uniform, they could be shot as a spy or resistance militia?

So who bears the burden of proof as to whether someone in civilian clothes is a spy ?

 

[sptrawler]

So who bears the burden of proof as to whether someone in civilian clothes is a spy ?

Therein lies the problem, how does the soldier dropped behind enemy lines work it out, if the enemy doesn't wear a uniform.
Other than respond to cues and training, it would be very difficult, if that isn't adequate they shouldn't be dropped into volatile situations IMO.
Easy answer, use drones, problem solved?

 

[SirRumpole]

Therein lies the problem, how does the soldier dropped behind enemy lines work it out, if the enemy doesn't wear a uniform.
Other than respond to cues and training, it would be very difficult, if that isn't adequate they shouldn't be dropped into volatile situations IMO.
Easy answer, use drones, problem solved?

The Americans had the same problem in Vietnam.

This is how they dealt with it.

My Lai massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[sptrawler]

The Americans had the same problem in Vietnam.

This is how they dealt with it.

My Lai massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or Japan?

Bangka Island massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Or Russia?

Nemmersdorf massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Sounds like the U.K might have a similar issue?

Did UK Special Forces execute unarmed civilians?

New evidence suggests some of the UK's most elite troops had a policy of killing unarmed men.

www.bbc.com

Yep, trying to run wars and claim you are doing it humanely, is extremely difficult to sell IMO.

 

[macca]

The Americans had the same problem in Vietnam.

This is how they dealt with it.

My Lai massacre - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I know some guys who were in Vietnam and they say the biggest problem was the lack of uniforms on the enemy.

In both World Wars soldiers could easily identify the enemy and act accordingly, any civilians could be assumed to be friendly when in France etc

In Vietnam it was the uncertainty and fact that any civilian could have a bomb or such that caused so much mental stress.

Obviously the disgusting treatment that some of them got when they came home did not help either

 

[moXJO]

Good to have you back.

Not to mention the trial of David McBride which should now be dropped.

McBride wanted the opposite of what happened.

Over two deployments to Afghanistan in 2011 and 2013, he became convinced the war was so dictated by political imperatives in Canberra - especially the desire to avoid civilian casualties - that it became impossible for Australian soldiers to do their jobs.

At the centre of his complaint lies a 2013 Defence directive to Australian soldiers stating they needed a high degree of confidence that anyone they fired upon was "directly participating in hostilities". If not, a soldier could be "exposed to criminal and disciplinary liability, including potentially the war crime of murder", according to the ABC's reports on the documents McBride leaked.


His argument was:

Afghanistan had been politicised to the point that soldiers were at risk in engagement. Politicians were overly concerned with civilian deaths. McBride suggested to pull all troops out of the country because what was the point of being there under those circumstances and risks. Troops were in danger of dying.

It wasn't his intention (from what I know) for the investigation to play out as it did. We had media hamming that up.

I have no doubt some of the allegations are true. Australia has a long history of breaking the rules. SAS should absolutely have known better. It will take years to recover from the actions of those that did it. But who knows what really went on.

 

[satanoperca]

I know some guys who were in Vietnam and they say the biggest problem was the lack of uniforms on the enemy.

In both World Wars soldiers could easily identify the enemy and act accordingly, any civilians could be assumed to be friendly when in France etc

In Vietnam it was the uncertainty and fact that any civilian could have a bomb or such that caused so much mental stress.

Obviously the disgusting treatment that some of them got when they came home did not help either

This is interesting, we invade a country and we ask/request that the defenders of that country can wear a uniform so we can identify them against the civilians.

We should never ever never blame our soldiers after returning from war, they do request to go to war, our pollies send them there.

 

[IFocus]

Join the army go to exotic places and meet different cultures....then kill them. An old joke.

I feel for the SAS troops on the ground, not one senior commander or bureaucrat or politician will get fired for sending those guys on a ridiculous numbers of rotations and keeping them in the field for so long.

The SAS culture certainly fell apart in some quarters, executing captured unnamed combatants or civilian's while being filmed points to extreme breakdown of basic care and discipline.

How there are not officers (junior and senior)line up for court martial for not knowing or sorting the above out is beyond me.

Roberts situation is problematic, I hope he can be cleared if not guilty proving that maybe difficult.

 

[macca]

This is interesting, we invade a country and we ask/request that the defenders of that country can wear a uniform so we can identify them against the civilians.

We should never ever never blame our soldiers after returning from war, they do request to go to war, our pollies send them there.

I assume you are trolling but as we both know we did not invade Vietnam, we were asked to go there by the USA and they were asked to go there by the Vietnamese Government to help fight the NVA

 

[rederob]

I assume you are trolling but as we both know we did not invade Vietnam, we were asked to go there by the USA and they were asked to go there by the Vietnamese Government to help fight the NVA

The libraries of information and media available about the "Vietnam War" (which the Vietnamese actually call "The American War") have no request from the South Vietnamese government to the USA, and nor was it acceptable for the USA to invite Australia into a war in a different sovereign nation.
What is most interesting about this war was the role the media played - especially photo journalists - in shaping public opinion:

This war was the first to be fought and lost in front of our TVs in the living room, so nowadays governments are careful to choreograph and curate what we see.

 

[satanoperca]

I assume you are trolling but as we both know we did not invade Vietnam, we were asked to go there by the USA and they were asked to go there by the Vietnamese Government to help fight the NVA

Go and spend time in North Vietnam, they will beg to differ.

 

[bellenuit]

It's amazing what threats of legal action can do. Fox issued a similar retraction a few days ago.

[ICODE<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Right-wing media outlet Newsmax has made a lengthy statement &#39;clarifying&#39; claims made on-air about alleged US election fraud by voting machine companies Smartmatic and Dominion. <a href="https://t.co/udm8v1gUKv">pic.twitter.com/udm8v1gUKv</a></p>&mdash; SBS News (@SBSNews) <a href="">December 22, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>[/ICODE]