Shooting one soldier to encourage the rest used to be called the ‘British Army Method’ though it was old when the Romans used it. Apparently Obama’s Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is considering an updated version for U.S. use: Leon Panetta Says It May Be Time To Start Executing U.S. Soldiers For War Crimes tells the story.
The sergeant currently in use for anti-American purposes in Afghanistan served two tours in Iraq and was brain-damaged in a vehicle crash before allegedly shooting a bunch of Afghan civilians who allegedly didn’t deserve it. A murky story in a murky place from murky sources, it seems likely to have murky results.
But there’s nothing murky about the reaction of the Obama Administration to the Afghan government’s pressure; Obama is already apologetic and Panetta is pushing death…for our guys, not the enemy. That’s sure to encourage the rest, right? When Panetta recently visited Afghanistan, the marines he spoke to were reportedly disarmed first, which was described as a new precaution. Makes sense to me, those guys are trained to shoot at the enemy, aren’t they?
Seems to me, we have military to make war. They’re equipped and heavily trained to kill people and blow up stuff. Not nice, but that’s what war is about, isn’t it? Now, we send them to far places where they’re killed, beheaded, shot at, bombed and often enough ordered not to shoot back because civilians might get hurt or some politically important warlord annoyed. The wort part is, there’s no identifiable gain for America, just the outpouring of lives and treasure. Other than channeling money to the war industry in return for its support of politicians, it’s not clear why this goes on and on. It shouldn’t, seems to me.
Is the sergeant a ravening murderer for no reason or is this a political propaganda ploy of some sort? We’ll never know. But now that political appeasement of the de facto enemy has led to the trial balloon for our brass shooting our guys, it’s past time for it to stop.