Saturday, May 03, 2008

He doesn't get it.

Scott Stroud, that is, whose column in today's paper carried this lovely header:

Acquittal rate in military war-crime trials raises questions

He's referring, in this case, to the acquittals of SFC Trey Corrales & Sgt Leonard Trevino.

A snippet:

Again, it's hard to blame soldiers for reacting under pressure, but the tone is set from the top. If the White House and the Pentagon are serious about abiding by rules of military conduct, they need to make that clearer than they have so far. If they don't, out-of-control situations like the shameful treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib are inevitable.

The risk is that American soldiers who find themselves in difficult circumstances, including captivity, might be treated the same or worse. Perhaps that will happen anyway, but we Americans should be better than that.

Really, I got nothin'.

Robert's technically a combat veteran of OIF, but only technically, & he knows it. His war was conducted underwater, in air conditioning, a few hundred miles away from the enemy he was firing upon.

Knowing him, and knowing a few other sailors, all I can say is that I simply don't know enough about combat or the rules of engagement to make a judgement call in this case, or any other. And I sure as hell wouldn't have the balls to question the decision reached by men who do know what these guys dealt with. Too bad Mr Stroud hasn't figured out that he's got even less ability to make that call than I do.

I vaguely recall Rob's "Use of Deadly Force" card, and I'm pretty sure the fellow they killed met at least two or three of those guidelines, but even if he didn't I vote for erring on the side of a dead bad guy any day.

No comments: