Posted on 05/10/2007 2:05:05 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
BAGHDAD - The top U.S. commander in Iraq reminded troops Thursday they must fight by the rules after a Pentagon survey found many of them support torture in certain cases and would not report a comrade for killing or wounding civilians.
In a letter to U.S. service members, Gen. David Petraeus said that adhering to high moral values "distinguishes us from our enemy" and is essential to winning support among the Iraqi population — the cornerstone of the new U.S. counterinsurgency strategy.
By contrast, Petraeus said al-Qaida's "indiscriminate attacks" had finally begun "to turn a substantial proportion of the Iraqi population against it."
"This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we — not our enemies, occupy the moral high ground," he said in the letter, addressed to "soldiers, sailors, airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen" serving in Iraq.
The Associated Press obtained a copy of the letter, which was dated Thursday.
Petraeus' message followed a Pentagon survey which found that fewer than half of Marines and a little more than half of Army soldiers said they would report a member of their unit for killing or wounding an innocent civilian.
More than 40 percent support the idea of torture in some cases, and 10 percent reported personally abusing civilians, the Pentagon said last week in releasing its first ethics study of troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The survey found that 44 percent of Marines and 41 percent of soldiers said torture should be allowed to save the life of a soldier or Marine. Thirty-nine percent of Marines and 36 percent of soldiers said torture should be allowed to gather important information from insurgents.
Only 47 percent of the soldiers and 38 percent of Marines surveyed said noncombatants should be treated with dignity and respect. About a third of them said they had insulted or cursed at civilians in their presence.
In the letter, Petraeus said he understood that watching a fellow trooper killed by "a barbaric enemy" can "spark frustration, anger and a desire for immediate revenge."
"Hard as it might be, however, we must not let these emotions lead us — or our comrades in arms — to commit hasty, illegal actions," he said. "In the event that we witness or hear of such actions, we must not let our bonds prevent us from speaking up."
The general also reminded troops that torture is not only illegal but often produces information "of questionable value."
"We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly and we must be violent at times," Petraeus said. "What sets us apart from our enemies in the fight, however, is how we behave."
Petraeus acknowledged that troops suffer from stress because of long deployments and brutal combat. But he said stress was not a sign of weakness and encouraged troops to turn to their commanders, chaplains and medical experts.
On Monday, Petraeus told the annual meeting of The Associated Press that he was concerned about the survey's findings and called for a "redoubling of our education efforts" to identify potential for abuses among soldiers.
"We have done that at times in theater and it has cost us enormously," he said by video link from Baghdad, referring specifically to the torture and humiliation of prisoners at the Abu Ghraib prison.
The Iraq war has seen other high-profile incidents of alleged abuse, including the killings of 24 civilians by Marines in Haditha and the rape and killing of a 14-year-old girl and the slaying of her family south of Baghdad.
Pentagon officials said they were studying the results of the survey and were revising training programs to focus more on values, suicide prevention, rules of warfare and behavioral health awareness.
Better that there are no dead Marines, they can’t reincarnate like people here at FR.
Patton would have had little trouble handling Iraq..and the insurgents...as long as he were free to command. This stuff isn’t rocket science unless the hands of the command are tied by politics.
Your reply indicates that you have not operated under counter-insurgency doctrine.
"Our Country won't go on forever, if we stay soft as we are now. There won't be any AMERICA because some foreign soldiery will invade us and take our women and breed a hardier race!" -Lt. Gen. Lewis B. "Chesty" Puller, USMC
My reply indicates that I know that Patton wouldn’t have tolerated the type of political hamstringing current commanders are forced to endure. Left to make his own rules within the actual legal framework of the Geneva Convention, Patton could have handled this “insurgency.”
I have previously posted information about a group of men who were called “The Regulators,” who took up arms in the North Carolina Piedmont, against the British militia. This was prior to our war for independence. The Regulators were whipped, but they were right. They were defending their homes, families and churches from the British militia who was detached under orders of Anglican clergymen in eastern North Carolina who detested the Baptist revival led by one Shubal Stearns. The outcome of the battle didn’t determine who was right and who was wrong.
I believe that you were trying to imply that General Robert Lee is somhow to be doubted as to his Christian leadership in time of war, and that his insistence upon his troops abiding by Christian principles (these were my points) means nothing just because he surrendered to General Grant. Well, General Grant himself knew better than that. Grant respected Lee as a Christian Gentleman and leader. Lee’s surrender never changed that.
And the defeat of the Confederacy doesn’t indicate that President Lincoln was correct in every one of his positions with regard to the Constitution or the Union, either. I and millions of others believe that he made trash of the Constitution. We, however, still believe that he was also a Christian with an upright testimony. He erred in his view of how to preserve the Union, in our opinion, but he was a fine man and a Christian in his innermost principles.
Patton's credo most likely would have been: "Grab them by the balls and their hearts and minds will follow." Unfortunately, that does not conform to contemporary doctrine.
On balance, we do not disagree.
Which branch of service and MOS?
One function of the General is to say the right words. What the General does is demonstrate what he meant. He says fight fair; he means dominate and rule fair when possible.
“Is it possible to win ‘nicely’? I don’t want indiscriminate slaughter of innocents, but I want to win!”
As we all do. But such wars are political in ature as well as militray. Defeating the enemy units militarily, whether regular or irregular is one thing - but one must careful to avoid being defeated politically. The Tet offensive, for example, was a military disaster for the Viet-Cong, but they managed to turn it into a political boon.
The Coalition troops in Iraq walk a fine line, but there is no viable alternatie. Incinerating whole cities or communities won’t help them win this war - and more importantly, will only spell the end of any US-friendly Iraqi government.
--
War is hell. I'll take the last two words to mean.. Git It Done!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.