Killing It, US Army Style

"If we withdraw from Afghanistan, there will be senseless violence but if we stay, we can cause it.” - Andy Borowitz, American comedian and New York Times bestselling author. 

Over the years, the United States Army has served as a source of immense pride for the average American citizen. Solemn pledges are made in support of their troops battling bravely in different parts of the world, upholding democracy in countries like Afghanistan and Iraq. American schoolchildren aged as young as six and seven are made to write letters in class addressed to their courageous troops overseas, sending their innocent wishes to these seeming heroes.

On Saturday night, one of these courageous American soldiers, having had too many bottles of Guinness at one of the Army’s routine nights of revelry, stormed out of his base and killed sixteen innocent Afghan civilians at a village close to Kandahar. The dead included nine children. Reports have surfaced revealing that the soldier was laughing hysterically while committing these murders and even wrapped some of the corpses in blankets before setting them on fire!

What a lunatic, you’re thinking. But this is just one case of a soldier gone mad, he’ll face the punishment he deserves. I’m sure this sort of thing has never happened before.  

Think again.

In 2010, a group of US soldiers killed three Afghan civilians in a different part of Kandahar.  They are believed to be part of an ever-increasing faction within the US Army who murder civilians ‘for sport’ before dropping weapons near their bodies to make it appear as if they’re insurgents who present a threat and need to be eliminated. The strangest part about this incident from 2010 was that the soldiers posed for photographs with the corpses of their victims and even collected body parts and skulls as trophies!

 In January this year, a leaked video showed four US marines urinating on three bloodied corpses in the Helmand province of Afghanistan. One of the marines, evidently aware that he was being filmed, says “Have a great day, buddy,” referring to one of the dead. Back in Washington, a spokesman from the Marines reassured the world that the matter was “being investigated.” Gee, thanks for that.

Conflicting reports emerged from the Bagram airbase, near Kabul, as copies of the Qur’an and other religious literature were burned by American soldiers in February.  One group of investigators found the incineration to be intentional as the soldiers were lead to believe the books contained ‘inflammatory content’, while another group claimed it was an unfortunate error on the part of the American soldiers who routinely incinerate all belongings of deceased prisoners at the base. The sensitive nature of this incident lead to widespread anti-American sentiments across the Islamic lands, and understandably so. Violent demonstrations in different parts of Afghanistan lead to even more senseless killings, on both sides.

Every year, numerous incidents of killings within the US Army emerge – usually a group of soldiers killing a single ‘rat’ who threatens to report rampant drug usage or sexual abuse within a particular battalion. The authorities usually dismiss these soldiers as being ‘mentally unstable’ begging the question – why were they recruited into the Army in the first place?

The underlying truth behind all of this is that these cases fortuitously reached the hands of the willing media allowing the world to take in its sordid realities. Imagine how many cases of militaristic atrocities escaped our attention over the years? Are the victims of sadistic actions by misguided militia counted as mere ‘casualties of war’ – a rather frail and misused term itself, I’m sure you’ll agree?  An insight into why these atrocities continue to take place will lead us into a feverish debate over the United States’ foreign policy. The ongoing misadventure of those brazen folks over in Washington, however, is a story for another day. General Douglas MacArthur, Ex-Chief of Staff in the US Army once said, “In War, there is no substitute for victory.” In today’s scenario, though, even the most ardent hardliners will admit that the possibility of victory never existed ever since the US decided to invade every country with a whiff of black gold. The aim of damage limitation seems the most plausible course of action until American troops finally leave foreign lands, their tails firmly between their legs. You and I both share the hope, I’m sure, that this process of damage limitation is carried out in the most humane manner possible.