US soldier kills 16 Afghan civilians

[LSN80]

Who would have thought an act of terrorism committed on Afghan soil would be by an American? Now, the dispute is over who should detain and punish the soldier.

http://worldnews.msnbc.msn.com/_new...geant-kills-16-afghan-civilians-officials-say

In today's early morning, the yet to be identified soldier left his base, and headed to Panjwayi, a district just hundreds of yards away from the soldier's base camp. Panjwayi has long been believed to be the "spiritual home" of the Taliban. Further, it has been seen as a hive for harboring Taliban insurgents in recent years. However, the area the soldier entered was residential, and he reportedly entered three homes, opening fire on sleeping Afghan citizens, killing 16 in all. Of the body count, 9 were children, and 3 were women. A female relative of four of the victims, who chose to go unidentified, had the following to say:

"No Taliban were here. No gun battle was going on. said the woman. We don't know why this foreign soldier came and killed our innocent family members. Either he was drunk or he was enjoying killing civilians."

No motive has been given thusfar for the killings, other then speculation being that the man sufferred a nervous breakdown. Which raises the question as to why the young man did enter this village, senslessly opening fire on innocent civilians. Civilian casulaties have been a major source of contention between the Afghan government and NATO, the latter of which were there, somewhat ironically, on a peace keeping mission. Last month, US soldiers burned a large number of copies of the Koran, causing an incident between US and Afghan soldiers. In all, 36 people were killed, 30 Afghan soldiers and civilians, and 6 US soldiers.

Now, it seems another type of war will be waged. The war over who gets to determine the soldiers fate. Afghan President Hamid Karzai called the shooting an assassination, and a spokesman for the Afghan regime, Samad Khan, said the following:

"This is an anti-human and anti-Islamic act. Nobody is allowed in any religion in the world to kill children and women. Our government should punish the American shooter. Otherwise we will make a decision. He should be handed over to us."

A fair enough point. Since the shootings were, as NATO has confirmed, unauthorized by them, there's a point to be made to handing the man over to the government on whose soil the crime was committed. We in the United States detain foreigners who commit crimes on our soil, and their government is unable to protect them in most cases. Afghan troops apparently noticed the soldier leaving their barracks, and notified NATO upon doing so. NATO has noted that they sent a patrol looking for him, and were waiting for him upon his arrival back to the barracks. The soldier immediately turned himself in to NATO officials and supposedly acknowledged his actions. NATO has indicated that the staff-sergeant will remain in their custody. Lt. Gen. Adrian Bradshaw, deputy commander of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force, had the following to say:

An investigation is already underway and every effort will be made to establish the facts and hold anyone responsible to account.

I understand the desire of NATO to want to gather facts and hold the man responsible, but the shootings are bound to increase tension between Afghan troops and American ones. A battle over who should detain and ultimately hold the soldier responsible will likely cause tension to grow even further. It makes me wonder if the man should be handed over to the Afghan government to be detained and punished, if for no other reason then to maintain peace and avoid more bloodshed. Since the incident did take place on Afghan soil, there's an argument to be made for doing so.

Who should ultimately handle the punishment of the soldier? NATO, or the Afghan government?

Do you believe this "isolated" incident is bound to lead to more tension and ultimately bloodshed between US and Afghan troops?

What would be the best way to ultimately attempt to establish peace again between NATO and the Afghan government?

All thoughts and discussion regarding the story are welcome and encouraged.

 

[Sinister Shadows]

It was commited on Afghan soil, against Afghan civilians, so there is absolutely zero reason not to turn the murderer over to the Afghan government for trial and punishment.

 

[GI Cake]

Who should ultimately handle the punishment of the soldier? NATO, or the Afghan government?

That is a really tough question. This was a crime against Afghan people on Afghan soil. But the crime was committed by a a U.S soldier. When Saddam was apprehended by U.S troops, for war crimes he committed against his own people, we gave him back to Iraqi people to try him for his crimes against their people. But however the difference is that Saddam didn't commit any crimes that Americans could try him for.

The proper Middle ground would be for N.A.T.O to hold the trail. But the punishments should be at the Afghan rules and punishments. That way it can eliminate bias over something like this.

Do you believe this "isolated" incident is bound to lead to more tension and ultimately bloodshed between US and Afghan troops?

Of course this kind of incident is going to hurt the tension between US and the Afghan troops. Then again, any time blood is shed between US and Afghan people their will be a natural lust for revenge or retribution. The US Armed services need to do their best to make up for this incident by providing for the services for the families that lost their family member from the sad, insane solider.

 

[Pay Per Ghost]

This needs to be said.



If this soldier cries 'nervous breakdown' then he is no better than the suicide bombers who kill innocent people. I'm not prepared to believe either way if this/not an 'isolated' incident. However, this got reported.


To answer the OP's question I think he should be punished by the military and sent to a prison back home because if he is sent to an Afghani Prison, his 'nervous breakdown' days will have just begun I fear.

 

[Davi323]

Who should ultimately handle the punishment of the soldier? NATO, or the Afghan government?

The Afghanis should. If this were reversed, and it was an Afghani soldier who murdered 16 American citizens on American soil, is there any doubt that the US would claim jurisdiction? This was not a military action, it was a rogue soldier, not acting on orders. He acted as an individual, not as a soldier. He should be tried as a criminal under Afghani law. What he did was unconscionable.

Do you believe this "isolated" incident is bound to lead to more tension and ultimately bloodshed between US and Afghan troops?

Unless the US allows the soldier to be tried in Afghanistan under Afghani law, I don't how it could lead to anything but increased tension. If I were the Afghani government, I would be righteously pissed off.

What would be the best way to ultimately attempt to establish peace again between NATO and the Afghan government?

Let them have him. The US and NATO need to wash their hands of him, make it absolutely clear that his actions were in no way part of orders he received, were not condoned in any way. He committed multiple crimes against Afghani nationals in Afghanistan, acting as a private citizen, not as a member of the US Military. Swift court martial to completely strip him of rank, dishonorable discharge so he is no longer a member of the military, and then turn him over to the Afghanis for trial.

If civilian deaths result due to a sanctioned military action where the civilians were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time, that they were in essence, collateral damage, that is a far different thing. In that situation, I would probably say that discipline for the soldier responsible would
fall under the responsibility of his military unit/branch. But, this is flat out murder, and Afghani law must be considered sovereign in this situation.

 

[It's Damn Real!]

This needs to be said.



If this soldier cries 'nervous breakdown' then he is no better than the suicide bombers who kill innocent people. I'm not prepared to believe either way if this/not an 'isolated' incident. However, this got reported.


To answer the OP's question I think he should be punished by the military and sent to a prison back home because if he is sent to an Afghani Prison, his 'nervous breakdown' days will have just begun I fear.

While I don't condone or support what happened here, I do feel that this needs to be said regardless...

I think a lot of people overlook the conditioning that goes into creating a soldier, and conveniently ignore it when events like this (or similar ones) happen. I'm not talking about physical training or keeping guys in tip-top shape in terms of being able to run or carry weight, etc. I'm talking about the systematic, mental conditioning (some would call it brainwashing) where the humanity and morality of the man are stripped clean and replaced with the empty conscious of an unquestioning, obedient killer, only to later be blamed as being callous or classified as a sociopath when they do in fact kill (out of context).

There's something inherently wrong with a system that demands these men forget their morality and fight for our freedoms with whatever level of brutality and mental anguish is required, only to "turn the switch off" when they come home or are no longer in a battle scenario.

This is especially true for 'lifers'. When all you know is war and death, how can you honestly be expected to assimilate into a calmer civilian mentality again... without issue?

 

[Police Penis Sucking Goat Fucker]

I say give them to Afghanistan they should chop off his head give that solider what he deserves It's sad how on 9/11 when they mention all the people who died due to 9/11 they don’t mention a single one of the thousands and thousands or civilians that were killed in that pointless war

 

[Mustang Sally]

If a person from another country suffered a "nervous breakdown" in the U.S. and killed American citizens, I doubt we'd be satisfied to turn the person back over to his native country with the assurance he'd truly be punished. Hell, the way a lot of countries feel about the U.S., I wouldn't be surprised to see them throw a parade for the guy when he got back home. I have to admit that the image of Palestinians dancing in the streets in celebration the night of 9/11/01 remains in my mind.

Same thing goes if an American commits crimes on foreign soil. If that government wants him handed over to them, let them have him. If we won't allow foreign nations to interpret our laws, I don't see why we have the privilege of dictating theirs.

 

[LSN80]

While I don't condone or support what happened here, I do feel that this needs to be said regardless...

I think a lot of people overlook the conditioning that goes into creating a soldier, and conveniently ignore it when events like this (or similar ones) happen. I'm not talking about physical training or keeping guys in tip-top shape in terms of being able to run or carry weight, etc. I'm talking about the systematic, mental conditioning (some would call it brainwashing) where the humanity and morality of the man are stripped clean and replaced with the empty conscious of an unquestioning, obedient killer, only to later be blamed as being callous or classified as a sociopath when they do in fact kill (out of context).

And almost coincidentally, this comes in from the wire on CNN.com. Specifically, regarding the base the particular soldier who committed these murders on Sunday were stationed.

Originally posted by CNN.com
A handful of soldiers from the base have been involved in violent incidents in the past few years, including four soldiers convicted of killing Afghan civilians in 2010 as part of a "kill squad." Also in 2010, three other soldiers "suffered dangerous public mental breakdowns" after returning from Afghanistan, with two of them shot to death by police, according to the Stars and Stripes military newspaper.

I realize that the base is coming under obvious scrutiny due to the incident on Sunday, rightfully so, I say. Still, there's a disturbing trend that comes into play when you have past attrocities committed of the exact same nature. I also question the environment that's being fostered there- This is now a trend, with this being just the latest incident to have taken place.

So, what is happenning this base? Like IDR said, these men are broken mentally and emotionally, essentially reprogrammed. It's the same with the Taliban, Mossad, or any other militant group-always with disastrous results, it seems. A "killing squad" targeting Afghan civilians in 2010, three different men sufferring "dangerous mental breakdowns" that lead to their deaths upon returning home. How could this base possibly be seen as a healthy environment?

There's something inherently wrong with a system that demands these men forget their morality and fight for our freedoms with whatever level of brutality and mental anguish is required, only to "turn the switch off" when they come home or are no longer in a battle scenario.

Especially true when you see stories arise such as the one posted above. Or these examples below, again, all soldiers from the same base. Between the killing squads, the murders from yesterday, and these incidents, there's a disturbing trend going on within the setting of this base. This, also from CNN's wire.

Originally posted by CNN.com
This year, a former soldier from the base is believed to have shot a Washington park ranger to death on New Year's Day. Twelve soldiers on the base committed suicide in 2010, according to the base's Northwest Guardian newspaper.

Just so I'm clear, I'm not assigning blame to the base here, the commanding officers, the policies, or procedures. They're there for a reason. But what could possibly cause an epidemic of incidents surrounding one base in particular. God have mercy on the things they may have witnessed and seen-things that may have stuck with them- and were unable to erase from memory. The level of PTSD among soldiers returning from Afghanistan is the highest among any group of individuals in the United States today, and I'm not surprised. It's a serious medical, psychological ailment, and when left untreated, leads to incidents such as this.

I'm not excusing actions such as the "killing squad", the murders on Sunday, the killing on New Years, or the suicides. Far from it. It still comes down to personal responsibility, specifically, the responsibility to seek help when one's mental status begins to deteriorate. It's a humbling experience, I'm sure, and the soldiers I know and am friends with are a prideful lot.

Still, sacrificing one's pride seems to be a small price to pay then the death toll shown coming just from this base. If you get to a place where your sense of morality becomes blurred between right and wrong, and nothing is done about it, be it by yourself or superiors, how fit are you to serve anyway?

Perhaps I make this sound too easy. I don't believe it to be such, but just as with Columbine, Virginia Tech, or the recent school shooting in Ohio, the warning signs undoubtably are there. With regards to this base, and undoubtably others, there's a pattern here, repetition.

So do we as a nation truly care about the welfare of our own soldiers, or is it use, discard, rinse, and repeat? Callous as it may sound, that seems to be the pattern with regards to this base. A damn shame for men who are giving their lives, every part of it, to serve a greater good.

Somewhere along the line, that greater good in several occasions became corrupted into lawlessness and evil. And some of our soldiers became the exact thing they were sent there to stop. Where's the sanity in that?

If a person from another country suffered a "nervous breakdown" in the U.S. and killed American citizens, I doubt we'd be satisfied to turn the person back over to his native country with the assurance he'd truly be punished.

Same thing goes if an American commits crimes on foreign soil. If that government wants him handed over to them, let them have him. If we won't allow foreign nations to interpret our laws, I don't see why we have the privilege of dictating theirs.

I'm almost inclined to agree with this. All logic and sound reasoning says this is the appropriate way to handle the situation. What happened here was heinous, occurred on Afghan soil, and was committed against civilians in a peaceful village. If you or I had traveled to Afghanistan and done similarly, we no doubt would be held responsible by the Afghan government, and no political baragaining would be done on our behalf. However, this isn't the case here.

I talked quite a bit above about state's of mind, sanity, and and deteriorating mindsets. And with the disturbing pattern of these things that's been reported having taken place with regards to this base, I believe the fair thing in this situation is for the young man to be properly examined mentally to determine his soundness of mind. Should he be simply turned over to the Afghan government for trial and punishment, that's likely not to happen. As much as most of me wants to say "Turn the bastard over and let him rot", the humane part of me says otherwise. If he truly was sufferring from a nervous breakdown, as been's reported, then the best course of action would be for him to get both the punishment he deserves and the help he needs.

If he's found to be of sound mind, turn him over without question. But at least afford him the opportunity to go through mental status exams and testing of the like. Which government is more likely to afford him that opportunity? The one who is should be the one to handle this, at least initially.

 

[Trill Co$by]

There isn't really anything to debate. The crime was committed on Afghan soil, thus making it an Afghan trial. An American was tried in (I believe) Italy where she was found guilty of murder by that country and sent to court. I would assume the same goes for this guy who committed the crimes in Afghan.

I honestly think Obama would allow the Afghan culture to decide the punishment. Afterall, this wasn't a warranted attack at all nor was it necessary.

 

[PlayTheGame]

Let me start off by saying that this, of course, is a reprehensible tragedy, and obviously this American soldier is in the wrong and totally deserves to be punished. I hope justice is served and he gets a fair punishment. Everything's pretty much been said about this case in this thread already, so I just wanted to add one unique point.

This comment:

"No Taliban were here. No gun battle was going on. said the woman. We don't know why this foreign soldier came and killed our innocent family members. Either he was drunk or he was enjoying killing civilians."

Kind of a dumb comment by this woman. Sure, she's making sense in what she's literally saying... but let's not forget history here. To be surprised that a small-scale act of terrorism is being committed by an American on Afghans is a bit stupid if you ask me. After all, the whole reason why American soliders are even present there is due to the fact that a large-scale act of terrorism was carried out by Taliban-Afghans on American soil that killed thousands of Americans. Was this lady involved in the 2001 attacks? Obviously, most likely not. But don't pretend that your country is innocent lady. Or maybe she's just that dumb, another feasible possibility.

My response to this lady: "I don't know why your foreign jihadists came to our country, hijacked airplanes, and killed our innocent family members. Either they were drunk or they just enjoyed killing civilians."

Not so great when it happens you, huh lady?

 

[Peoples_Champ]

Let me start off by saying that this, of course, is a reprehensible tragedy, and obviously this American soldier is in the wrong and totally deserves to be punished. I hope justice is served and he gets a fair punishment. Everything's pretty much been said about this case in this thread already, so I just wanted to add one unique point.

This comment:



Kind of a dumb comment by this woman. Sure, she's making sense in what she's literally saying... but let's not forget history here. To be surprised that a small-scale act of terrorism is being committed by an American on Afghans is a bit stupid if you ask me. After all, the whole reason why American soliders are even present there is due to the fact that a large-scale act of terrorism was carried out by Taliban-Afghans on American soil that killed thousands of Americans. Was this lady involved in the 2001 attacks? Obviously, most likely not. But don't pretend that your country is innocent lady. Or maybe she's just that dumb, another feasible possibility.

My response to this lady: "I don't know why your foreign jihadists came to our country, hijacked airplanes, and killed our innocent family members. Either they were drunk or they just enjoyed killing civilians."

Not so great when it happens you, huh lady?

I wasn't aware that all Afghans were responsible for 9/11. Even if it was state-sponsored since the Taliban were in charge at that time, I fail to understand how it justifies the cold-blooded murder of civilians. As a matter of fact, I don't understand how that represents the Afghan people because Taliban ruled under a totalitarian regime, and these regimes never have the will of the people.

I love how Americans can't see to find the best outlet for their anger and rage. Those responsible for terrorism (Taliban, Al-Qaeda) deserve retribution, not innocent Afghans who 1. didn't support the 9/11 attacks 2. had no part to do with it 3. probably like Americans in the first place.

Rise Above Hate dude.

 

[PlayTheGame]

I wasn't aware that all Afghans were responsible for 9/11. Even if it was state-sponsored since the Taliban were in charge at that time, I fail to understand how it justifies the cold-blooded murder of civilians. As a matter of fact, I don't understand how that represents the Afghan people because Taliban ruled under a totalitarian regime, and these regimes never have the will of the people.

I love how Americans can't see to find the best outlet for their anger and rage. Those responsible for terrorism (Taliban, Al-Qaeda) deserve retribution, not innocent Afghans who 1. didn't support the 9/11 attacks 2. had no part to do with it 3. probably like Americans in the first place.

Rise Above Hate dude.

You obviously didn't comprehend my post. I never blamed her. I just said her train of thought was stupid in that it's ironic and dumb on her part to wonder how this could ever happen to her and her country, when her country did it to our country first on a more massive scale. That's why I started off the post saying the act was wrong and that justice needs to be served. But for her to act like she didn't see how this could happen is blatant stupidity combined with embarrassing ignorance.

And finally, don't equate this to a silly John Cena gimmick.

 

[Peoples_Champ]

You obviously didn't comprehend my post. I never blamed her. I just said her train of thought was stupid in that it's ironic and dumb on her part to wonder how this could ever happen to her and her country, when her country did it to our country first on a more massive scale. That's why I started off the post saying the act was wrong and that justice needs to be served.

The woman wasn't referring to her country. She was referring to her village. Re-read the quote:

"No Taliban were here. No gun battle was going on.

She wasn't talking about her country, she knew gun battles had been ongoing throughout the country. She was referring to her village or town - Taliban were not in her neighbourhood. They were American-loving Afghans who relied upon and trusted American soldiers.

So in the end, it had nothing to do with her country. Like Americans, people in the South Asian subcontinent are very regional. They support their own, like how people from Michigan hate people from Ohio, it's a similar concept. She wasn't speaking on behalf of Afghans everywhere, but on behalf of people from her own area.

But for her to act like she didn't see how this could happen is blatant stupidity combined with embarrassing ignorance.

How can you blame this woman for not having the foresight to see an American soldier would mass murder 16 people? Obviously the American military didn't have the foresight, otherwise the shooting would have been prevented somehow. But then again, you could be right that she, like the American military, are guilty of "blatant stupidity combined with embarrassing ignorance." Maybe the victims of the Fort Hood massacre are just as "stupid" and "ignorant" as well?

Point being, it was a horrible crime to innocent civilians. It's not justifiable and the citizens of that village / area are victims, not collateral damage of a decade-long war.

 

[Loveless]

To be surprised that a small-scale act of terrorism is being committed by an American on Afghans is a bit stupid if you ask me. After all, the whole reason why American soliders are even present there is due to the fact that a large-scale act of terrorism was carried out by Taliban-Afghans on American soil that killed thousands of Americans.

I'd just like to address this.

19 Hijackers

15 from Saudi Arabia
1 from Egypt
2 from UAE
1 from Lebanon
0 from Iraq
0 from Afganistan

 

[PlayTheGame]

What does that matter? The hijackers were born there, but actually formed together and worked for the Taliban BASED out of Afghanistan. Sects pop up all over, but they were primarily organized and based out of Afghanistan. It really doesn't matter where they were born or if they're citizens of the country or not, which they very well could be, and possibly are. Since the Taliban was overwhelmingly entrenched in/associated with Afghanistan, then that's where the focus lies. Not sure what you're trying to say.