|
Killing Wounded Prisoners And The Conscience Of Humanity
Jim Bush
11/16/04 "ICH" -- Growing up in a military family I was exposed to all that is military, including the history of America's wars. One of the things I was led to believe was that Americans didn't kill prisoners. The Japanese and Germans killed prisoners, but not Americans. The Communists killed prisoners, but not Americans. The "bad guys" kill prisoners, but Americans have a higher standard than others, because we're the "good guys." We follow the rules of the Geneva Conventions and we are more humane.
Later, the Vietnam War disabused me of the misconception that Americans didn't kill prisoners, or even civilians for that matter. But the Vietnam War was supposedly an aberration; an unusual situation, where it was hard to know who the enemy was and even women and children were a potential threat.
Since the Vietnam War, books have been written by veterans of World War II that openly describe the killing of prisoners by American soldiers. These descriptions usually include the caveat that while Americans did sometimes kill prisoners, unlike with the Germans and Japanese, it was not official policy to do so. The killing of prisoners on the islands or in the waters of the Pacific, and in the land battles of Europe, were attributed to the fog, heat, and brutality of war.
In 1992 I came to Portland, Oregon and, for want of other work, got a job as a security guard. The pay was low and the work was boring, so I, looking for higher pay and a more interesting situation, decided to become an armed guard.
This was quite a leap for me, having come from a background of nonviolent political activism. But, I've always been open to experiencing new things -- even those that might contradict my basic beliefs -- in order to better understand them, and the experience of carrying a gun was something that, despite my military training, I did not fully understand. So I bought a gun, taught myself how to shoot it, and went to take the written and range testing required for state certification.
The young man who supervised my testing, ran me through the usual lightweight training classes for private armed security certification, which included some tactical advice on what to do in certain potentially dangerous situations. During these sessions the issue of what to do if I were to have to shoot someone came up. With a wink and a nod my young teacher said this, "The law says that if you are forced to shoot someone in order to protect yourself and they are still alive, you must render aid to that person." "Just between you and me, if someone had just threatened my life, and I had to shoot them and they were still alive, I wouldn't lift a finger to help them."
I have found, in my work as an armed security officer, that this is the general attitude among those who work in law enforcement. I also believe that this attitude extends to the military, and beyond, to George Bush.
Most policemen, soldiers, and the President belong to a fraternity that feels hamstrung by the very laws that they are sworn to uphold and enforce. They feel that the general population, especially "bleeding heart" Liberals, do not understand the "real" world that they are forced to live and work in. So, they a play a game, which includes putting up a front for the public, whilst doing what they believe needs to be done in private. With a "wink and a nod" they say that they support the rule of law and the humane treatment of the "bad guy" when he is no longer a threat, but, in reality, many of them would just as soon put a bullet in the bad guy's head.
This mentality extends to our prisons as well; the treatment of the prisoners at Abu Graib was no aberration. It was no accident that one of the guards at Abu Graib had been a prison guard in the US. Those in corrections are a part of the same fraternity as those in law enforcement, the military, and the present administration (Lets not forget how many people George Bush had executed in Texas). They believe that to be hard on the "bad guys," whomever they are and wherever you find them, is the right and just way to be. They also believe that, in order to do this, they must sometimes circumvent the law, when and where they think necessary.
In fairness, let me say that not all police officers, soldiers, correction officers, or Presidents agree with this attitude. There are many good people in law enforcement and the military who recognize the importance of the laws that protect not only the "good guys" but the "bad guys." They recognize that the Rule of Law, and the maintenance of a modicum of compassion, are all that separate us from the "law of the jungle" and the behavior of the beast.
We are living in a time when we have a President who still believes in the unwritten laws of "The Wild West." We have a President who believes in the justice of the gun and the bible; as it was implemented in the badlands of Texas in the 1800s. His attitude permeates his administration and soaks down through the ranks, to both the policeman on the streets of America and the soldier on the streets of Iraq. It runs across this country and fills up the living rooms of the South and the Midwest. It appeals to that part of the American psyche that is impatient with "do-gooders" and mistrusting of intellectuals. It appeals to a mean side in the American character that enabled us to build a nation, not only with courage, faith, hope, and industry, but with covetousness, cruelty, and guile.
American soldiers are killing prisoners and civilians in Iraq. Don't let anyone fool you into believing otherwise; the powers that be will try to persuade you that it isn't so. A young Marine came home and told his sister that he had been ordered to kill two prisoners. He said that he looked them in the eyes and then closed his own as he pulled the trigger. The military says that there is no record of the incident and that he must have been delusional. The young Marine later hanged himself in the basement of the family home. A young man I met in a video store told me that a friend of his had just returned from Iraq and confessed to him that he had once been ordered to shoot a group of civilians -- women and children included -- by his Sergeant. When the soldier reported this to his commanding officer, he was told that it would be looked into. He heard nothing more about it. Now we're seeing the killing of wounded prisoners on our television sets; now we're seeing some of our young men, apparently, killing without compunction or remorse; now we're seeing our young men killing other young men like they are nothing more than images on a video screen.
I'm reminded of the 1943 movie "The Ox-Bow Incident." In it three men are caught by a posse that is trying to catch some cattle thieves. The men are in possession of the stolen cattle but claim that they bought them from someone else. The posse is impatient for "justice" and wants to hang the three right away. The men plead for their lives, and two of the posse try to make the rest wait to give the men a proper trial, but the other men in the posse, for corrupt and personal reasons, refuse to wait and the men are hanged. After the hanging the posse runs into the sheriff, who tells them that the real cattle thieves had been caught and that they had confessed to their crime. Later, back in town, one of the posse who had wanted to wait for a proper trial, reads the shamed posse a letter that one of the wrongly hanged men had written to his wife just before he was hanged:
My Dear Wife.
Mr. Davies will tell you what's happening here tonight. He's a good man, and he's done everything he can for me. I suppose there's some other good men here, too, only they don't seem to realize what they're doing. They're the ones I feel sorry for, 'cause it'll be over for me in a little while, but they'll have to go on rememberin' for the rest of their lives. A man just naturally can't take the law into his own hands and hang people without hurtin' everybody in the world, 'cause then he's just not breakin' one law, but all laws. Law is a lot more than words you put in a book, or judges or lawyers or sheriffs you hire to carry it out. It's everything people ever have found out about justice and what's right and wrong. It's the very conscience of humanity. There can't be any such thing as civilization unless people have a conscience, because if people touch God anywhere, where is it except through their conscience? And what is anybody's conscience except a little piece of the conscience of all men that ever lived? I guess that's all I've got to say except - kiss the babies for me and God bless you.
Your husband, Donald.
Young Americans in Iraq are fighting an enemy that is determined and brutal. This enemy kills prisoners, kidnaps the innocent, cuts off heads, and blows up civilians, including women and children. Some would say that it is understandable, and maybe even just, that they would behave in a like manner towards that enemy. There are major problems with this argument. The Iraqi insurgents are fighting in the streets of their own country, and they are fighting a classic insurgent war. They are fighting with a limited capability, against a superior military force. They are taking huge losses, but are willing to do so to achieve their goals. They are using all the tactics necessary in a guerilla war against an occupying army; this includes terror. The US, on the other hand, claims to be coming from a higher moral ground. The US claims to be in Iraq to bring a better, more just, and more humane form of government to the people of Iraq. In order to do this the US must convince the Iraqi people that it is more humane and just. When American soldiers abuse prisoners, kill civilians, and shoot wounded insurgents, all this does is convince Iraqis that the US is no better than Saddam. At this point, in the eyes of many of the Iraqi people, because the Americans are occupiers and nonbelievers, they are even worse than Saddam; or the insurgents, whom are, at least, Iraqis and believers.
So, where do we go from here? Does the US have to "destroy the village to save it ?" Do we Americans allow the continued moral, as well as physical, destruction of our young men and women? Do we continue to support the rabid-dog fighting in the streets of the cities of a country that did not attack us and was no threat to the US? How can we justify the killing of tens of thousands of innocent civilians, throughout a a whole country, because we lost less than three thousand, in two buildings, in one city, to a different enemy? Have we gone insane?
I repeat, and hope we all take to heart, the words of the wrongly hanged husband and father in the "OX-Bow Incident" :
"A man just naturally can't take the law into his own hands and hang people without hurtin' everybody in the world, 'cause then he's just not breakin' one law, but all laws. Law is a lot more than words you put in a book, or judges or lawyers or sheriffs you hire to carry it out. It's everything people ever have found out about justice and what's right and wrong. It's the very conscience of humanity. There can't be any such thing as civilization unless people have a conscience, because if people touch God anywhere, where is it except through their conscience? And what is anybody's conscience except a little piece of the conscience of all men that ever lived?"
Copyright: Jim Bush <Newfirelock@aol.com>
(In accordance with Title 17
U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to
those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the
included information for research and educational purposes.
Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the
originator of this article nor is Information Clearing House
endorsed or sponsored by the originator.) |
