BLOG VIEW  |  HEADLINE VIEW
SUBMIT NEWS  |  RSS FEED  |  SEARCH

Sins of the Brother

TUESDAY MAY 20 2008 5:30 PM

Submitted by OhSoOrdinary. Edited By crispy.

TAGS: Abuse, Iraq, Military, Humanity, Quran

[Editor's note: OhSoOrdinary submitted this article from Iraq, where she is currently serving with the U.S. Army.]

A great deal of our mission here is psychological. The Iraqi people need to believe that siding with us serves their interests better than siding with the insurgents and the militias. That’s why we run humanitarian aid missions and build infrastructure in their towns and villages. Those big, expensive, time-consuming overtures of friendship do very little to help us when things like this happen. I was in the cafeteria when I first saw this story on CNN's The Situation Room. I was horrified.

An American sniper was removed from Iraq after he used a copy of the Quran for target practice, the military said Sunday, a day after a U.S. commander held a formal ceremony apologizing to Sunni tribal leaders.



American commanders launched an inquiry that led to disciplinary action against the unidentified soldier, who has been removed from Iraq, Buckner said. Members of the local U.S.-allied group said the Quran was found with 14 bullet holes in a field after U.S. troops withdrew from a base in the area.


Are you serious? Why don’t you just shoot me instead, guy?

Iraqi police found the bullet-riddled Quran with graffiti inside the cover on a firing range near a police station in Radwaniyah, a former insurgent stronghold west of Baghdad, U.S. military spokesman Col. Bill Buckner said.


When a story like this breaks, two things happen: violence in that area goes up and locals lose trust in us. One stupid ass is all it takes to undermine everything we’re trying to do out here. That’s why that elaborate ceremony was held with generals and television cameras. It’s a really big deal. But, when I saw this story, that’s not what I was thinking about. I wasn’t really thinking. I was looking around. I was listening. Just about everyone’s eyes were on the television. The reactions were all very striking to me.

”Isn’t that near [location omitted]? I don’t want to run missions down there if it is.”


”Humph. That’s how you win hearts and minds…”


”Why is this getting so much fuckin’ press? You know how many [humanitarian aid] missions I ran since I’ve been in this God-forsaken country? When do I get to be on CNN for risking my life to give these fuckers flour and shit?”


”Ooooh… their Holy Book desecrated! Who fucking cares…”



Just like that cafeteria full of soldiers, I have mixed feelings when I see stories like this. My first feeling was that of annoyance. Public opinion of the war and the troops isn’t exactly awesome and this doesn’t help. All the militant liberals who believe we’re all a bunch of villains with blood on our hands raise these stories up and say, “See! Look at the bastardly bastards!” It’s so hurtful to be seen that way by our fellow citizens when the children of this foreign country smile at us and wave when we drive by.

But then I was angry. This jerk has undone so much legwork by so many other service members. All those joes who ran patrols and all those Humint teams who developed rapports with the sheiks and tribal leaders may just as well have stayed on the FOB. Now, whoever has to run missions in Radwaniyah is in even more danger. The herder who would have warned them of that man who had been digging by the road that morning might not speak up this time. The shop owner who always tells them when new people move into the village might just keep things to himself this time. They might be all on their own.

Later that evening, because it is within my nature to do so, I found myself trying to understand this Staff Sergeant. It wasn’t hard. Hating all of them is very easy.

There is a profound sense of kinship in the military. Calling it strong is a gross understatement. Calling it profound is an understatement still. Before we deploy, we spend a year or so living and working with the same people. They become our brothers and our sisters. Then, we all leave for a country full of people who want to kill us. When we land on our FOB, we make a silent and largely subconscious promise to each other: “I’m going to take care of you. I’m going to make sure you’re okay and we’re going to come home together.”

When that promise is broken, it is a kind of pain that I cannot easily describe to you. Everyone experiences it differently, but for me it manifested itself first with anguish and guilt. It tore at my insides and sorrow bled into my soul. It changed into anger. I was so angry at the person who set that IED. He killed my Crouch. He killed my brother. I didn’t know who he was, but I hated him.

I’ve only lost one brother. I’ve only broken one promise. But over 4,000 promises have been broken over the last five years and I can understand how that hate for the person who took your brother could infect the rest of your psyche. It could make you call them towelheads. It could make you exploit the language barrier to make jokes about them. It could make you look for a reason – any reason at all – to pop off a few rounds. It could make you lust for revenge. It could. But, it shouldn’t.

Members of the Armed Services are very often held in high regard. As such, we are constantly reminded that each one of us represents all of us. So, when an unnamed Staff Sergeant plants a few rounds in a Quran, in the eyes of the public, we all do. That’s unfortunate, because the vast majority of us make a choice contrary to this Staff Sergeant. We choose to retain our humanity.

It’s easy to dehumanize an entire race of people when you think they’re trying to kill you. Especially when they all look the same. Especially when there’s a language barrier. Especially when they follow the rules you and yours have set for them. It’s really easy to see them and the things they love as a little less than human and a little less than precious. It’s easy. It’s really easy. But it’s not right.

It’s not right to use Qurans for target practice. It’s not right to massacre entire families for revenge. It’s not right to throw puppies off cliffs. It’s not right to treat detainees like animals. It’s not right to sacrifice one’s humanity by succumbing to hatred.

Members of the Armed Services are very often held in high regard, but we are a microcosm of society. All I ask is that you remember that for every Soldier, Marine, Sailor or Airman who succumbs to hatred, there are ten thousand of us who do not.

[Hat tip: Argene]

OhSoOrdinary can't wait to go home, wash her hands of this whole mess, and start her bright, shiny, new life.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 21

Next

QuargWarrior

QuargWarrior

Norcross, GA
February 2008

MAY 21, 2008 11:00 AM

Virtute said:

QuargWarrior said:
OhSoOrdinary - Thank you for your service. You are so very correct in all you have said. I feel it is also a lack of respect for other people, religions and cultures that would cause a sniper to do something like use a Quoran for target practice. It is, in my opinion symptomatic of an overall lack of respect throughout the world.

We are told that we should uphold the rights and beliefs of Islam while at the same time being told that Christians are intolerant, crazy and stupid. In fact some like Westwood Baptist Church, et al are insane, but no more represent mainstream Christianity than the 911 terrorists represent mainstream Islam.

I have no idea why he would use the Quoran for target practice. The fact that he endangered other people's lives by doing so is not only very poor judgment, but a crime. That said; however, when he sees things that disrespect the Christian Bible why should he feel respect for the Quoran? Here is a case in point.

http://suicidegirls.com/members/Nixon/albums/site/6183/#

This is just my opinion. I believe we all need to be a bit more tolerant and respectful of all people.


If we were fighting to liberate the Bible Belt along with Iraq the false dilemma you set up might actually have some relevance.



So YOU DON"T THINK we need to be more tolerant and respectful of all people and that it is OK to destroy one person's religious book while protecting the other persons.

I'm sorry, but I find that idiotic. Protect them all.

I did say that since it endangered the lives of other soldiers that it was a crime and should be taken seriously in that context. If that were not the case, then who gives a fuck? If it's ok for Nixon to rip up a Bible and eat it then it should be OK for a sniper to use a Quoran for target practice.

Rush

Rush

Astoria, NY
June 2005

MAY 21, 2008 11:21 AM

Quarg, your analogy is very bad.

The whole point of the article is how one bad apple spoils the bunch... the action is the same, but the group being represented and the group who's judging the action is totally different.

Nixon and Fractal's actions probably affect some people's view of nude fetish models or SG, but they have no responsibility to represent anyone but themselves and the site they model for. They have no moral obligation.

The soldier's actions probably affect some people's views of American servicemen, who do have an enormous responsibility to the community they're trying to "liberate" and a responsibility to the US. This article suggests that soldiers do have a moral obligation.

IDGAS

IDGAS

Jackson Heights, NY
March 2004

MAY 21, 2008 11:30 AM

QuargWarrior said:

SPOILERS! (Click to view)

Virtute said:

QuargWarrior said:
OhSoOrdinary - Thank you for your service. You are so very correct in all you have said. I feel it is also a lack of respect for other people, religions and cultures that would cause a sniper to do something like use a Quoran for target practice. It is, in my opinion symptomatic of an overall lack of respect throughout the world.

We are told that we should uphold the rights and beliefs of Islam while at the same time being told that Christians are intolerant, crazy and stupid. In fact some like Westwood Baptist Church, et al are insane, but no more represent mainstream Christianity than the 911 terrorists represent mainstream Islam.

I have no idea why he would use the Quoran for target practice. The fact that he endangered other people's lives by doing so is not only very poor judgment, but a crime. That said; however, when he sees things that disrespect the Christian Bible why should he feel respect for the Quoran? Here is a case in point.

http://suicidegirls.com/members/Nixon/albums/site/6183/#

This is just my opinion. I believe we all need to be a bit more tolerant and respectful of all people.


If we were fighting to liberate the Bible Belt along with Iraq the false dilemma you set up might actually have some relevance.



So YOU DON"T THINK we need to be more tolerant and respectful of all people and that it is OK to destroy one person's religious book while protecting the other persons.

I'm sorry, but I find that idiotic. Protect them all.

I did say that since it endangered the lives of other soldiers that it was a crime and should be taken seriously in that context. If that were not the case, then who gives a fuck? If it's ok for Nixon to rip up a Bible and eat it then it should be OK for a sniper to use a Quoran for target practice.



Nixon is in the US.
Quoran sniper is in Iraq.

Nixon is not in the US military or a representative of the US government.
Quoran sniper is in the military.

Nixon has the freedom the destroy Quorans, Bibles, Torahs, the US flag, and a lot of other stuff. She is also able to consume alcohol, go where she wants when she want, and tell General David Petraeus to go take a flying fuck at a rolling donut.
Quoran snipe if he engaged in any of the conduct the I listed for Nixon would more UCMJ charges than he could count.

Do you see the difference.

And, I would like to commend you and your call tolerance.

IDGAS

IDGAS

Jackson Heights, NY
March 2004

MAY 21, 2008 11:31 AM

Rush said:
Quarg, your analogy is very bad.

The whole point of the article is how one bad apple spoils the bunch... the action is the same, but the group being represented and the group who's judging the action is totally different.

Nixon and Fractal's actions probably affect some people's view of nude fetish models or SG, but they have no responsibility to represent anyone but themselves and the site they model for. They have no moral obligation.

The soldier's actions probably affect some people's views of American servicemen, who do have an enormous responsibility to the community they're trying to "liberate" and a responsibility to the US. This article suggests that soldiers do have a moral obligation.



You beat me too it frown

OhSoOrdinary

OhSoOrdinary

New York, NY
July 2006

MAY 21, 2008 01:05 PM

You ALL beat me to it. I was going to rip that guy another one.

tinsoldier

tinsoldier

Lawrence, KS
January 2005

MAY 21, 2008 02:13 PM

I was deployed for OIF II in 2004.

While i was deployed the Abu Ghraib abuses were reported and within a day the whole planet had seen the pictures. I had the same emotions and thoughts in your article, the shock, anger, and dread were instant and lasting.
When an incident like this happens it is not just a smear on the military and the nation. It is a personal attack on every servicemember who is doing their duty with compassion and dedication the right way.

The stupidity of individuals who commit acts like these has given me a jaded and pessimistic attitude about what depths people can gleefully sink to.

hk85

hk85

Guerneville, CA
October 2007

MAY 21, 2008 02:20 PM

Do you think that the extended tours of duty and/or lowering enlistment requirements plays a part in any of this behaviour?

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAY 21, 2008 02:39 PM

i am curious--are there any posters here offended by the act itself, rather than by the act in the context of its possible consequences? if it had been some civilians at a private shooting range, would anyone be offended? just to be clear, i'm not trying to make any kind of point, with this question. i'm simply wondering.

Coyotemike

Coyotemike

Kearney, NE
May 2006

MAY 21, 2008 02:58 PM

motorfirebox said:
i am curious--are there any posters here offended by the act itself, rather than by the act in the context of its possible consequences? if it had been some civilians at a private shooting range, would anyone be offended? just to be clear, i'm not trying to make any kind of point, with this question. i'm simply wondering.



I would probably be even more pissed off if civilians pulled that kind of shit. At least over there I can somewhat understand the "it's us vs. them" mentality that could lead to the act.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAY 21, 2008 03:11 PM

interesting. my personal feeling on the matter (which i'm quite certain everyone is dying to know!) is that, while i recognize the act is intended to be offensive to certain sectors, i don't personally find it offensive. similarly, i don't find it offensive when someone burns the flag, or rips apart a bible. i think it's probably unwise to perform these acts in situations where the people you're trying to offend are heavily-armed and notoriously violent; and it's quite offensive to me to perform these acts in situations where those heavily-armed people are likely to respond by killing people who chose to serve their country with you. but that's all context--the act itself is more likely to elicit an "oh, brother" eyeroll from me than anything else.

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

MAY 21, 2008 03:41 PM

motorfirebox said:
i am curious--are there any posters here offended by the act itself, rather than by the act in the context of its possible consequences? if it had been some civilians at a private shooting range, would anyone be offended? just to be clear, i'm not trying to make any kind of point, with this question. i'm simply wondering.



I think it would depend on context.

If someone went and bought a Quran, simply to shoot lumps out of it, well, I don't see a problem except that those people are too dumb to own guns; they increase sales of Qurans, and make themselves poorer in the process. Fine with me.

If they took film of it and posted it on YouTube? I'd see that as incitement intended to cause violence; I'd like to see that prosecuted.

If (as seems likely for SSgt Sniper) they stole it? Bust them for theft (or looting), and for incitement intended to cause violence.

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

MAY 21, 2008 03:45 PM

motorfirebox said:
interesting. my personal feeling on the matter (which i'm quite certain everyone is dying to know!) is that, while i recognize the act is intended to be offensive to certain sectors, i don't personally find it offensive. similarly, i don't find it offensive when someone burns the flag, or rips apart a bible. i think it's probably unwise to perform these acts in situations where the people you're trying to offend are heavily-armed and notoriously violent; and it's quite offensive to me to perform these acts in situations where those heavily-armed people are likely to respond by killing people who chose to serve their country with you. but that's all context--the act itself is more likely to elicit an "oh, brother" eyeroll from me than anything else.



I don't think the act is separable from the context.

baudot

baudot

Los Angeles, CA
February 2004

MAY 21, 2008 03:50 PM

Isn't sending the offending soldier home from Iraq something of a reward? Seems like that aspect of the discipline is sending the wrong message.

motorfirebox

motorfirebox

Pittsburgh, PA
March 2004

MAY 21, 2008 04:00 PM

i don't think most soldiers see career suicide and possible UCMJ action as an easy way out of Iraq. those who do (and there certainly are a few) are going to do what they're going to do regardless of this incident.

SockPuppet said:
I don't think the act is separable from the context.


that's a bit too fuzzy a concept for me to really agree or disagree with.

SockPuppet

SockPuppet

I'm lost
July 2006

MAY 21, 2008 04:07 PM

motorfirebox said:
i don't think most soldiers see career suicide and possible UCMJ action as an easy way out of Iraq. those who do (and there certainly are a few) are going to do what they're going to do regardless of this incident.

SockPuppet said:
I don't think the act is separable from the context.


that's a bit too fuzzy a concept for me to really agree or disagree with.



That was what I was going after in the post before the one you replied to.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 21

Next

Now Hear This

Last Comment 5 HR by orbro

Now Hear This

Last Comment 5 HR

There's like a half-hour of video here. You should do a vlog. More ...

Asshole Fuckface Roundup #74

Last Comment 5 HR

Parents who are accustomed to carrying guns around may not think anything of going into child-related... More ...

An Encounter With Jonathan Shaw's Narcisa

Last Comment 6 HR

thanx gurlz... u rrrrrule!! xx jonathan shaw and narcisa More ...

SuicideGirl: Bob

Bob

Terrible Woman's MySpace Alias Leads to Teen's Suicide.

Last Comment 21 HR

But, it's delivered poorly...really poorly. Unless, it's not a joke, in which case, it's a good place... More ...

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08 by Shalome

Bail The Shit Out Of Detroit

Last Comment 11/30/08

Oh my fucking god. More ...

Filtering the Truth: Religion - Friend or Foe?

Last Comment 11/30/08

I'm just going to skip over the mass orgy that's going on and say my piece: I don't think religion is... More ...

SuicideGirls Interview: Travis Barker
SuicideGirls Interview: Stan Lee
SuicideGirls Interview: Mike Patton: A Perfect Place