I thought one of the things that was most interesting about Lt. Col. Marttala's visit was the language that the Air Force uses to justify the rules of war they teach. For example, when the internet test explained why troops shouldn't fire on a church, it wasn't because of cultural value or non-civilian space but to save resources. Of course, this is a valuable thing for the military to care about, but I just thought it was interesting that that this issue was never something we discussed in class.
Also, it's funny how technology can both improve our lives but also create chances for error. For example, Lt. Col. Marttala said that troops just had to take that online quiz once a year (or extra classes if you handled a weapon regularly). I imagine that there are some troops who do managed to understand and absorb the rules within that one computer simulation, but I imagine there are others who don't. Also, it is amazing how much things seem to vary from unit to unit. I imagine that not all units had someone like Lt. Col. Marttala who cared so much about civilian causalities and the rules of war.
Ok, and here are some news links!
I'm sure most everyone has already seen this article, but the NYTimes did a big piece on waterboarding and how the Justice Department is actually reviewing the technique and the CIA's choice to use it. According to legal experts, the most that this review will manage to achieve is the creation of a public debate about what torture is. In light of our discussion about norms and adhering to norms, it seems important that the public gets some input/new knowledge about what exactly is going on. If this issue continues to stay in the spotlight, there is a greater chance that people will demand the CIA changes its techniques. Unfortunately, it seems that news like this is big one day and gone the next. Apparently the Geneva Convention can't keep up with reality TV and our short-attention span generation!
I also found this NYTimes article from February 14 which details one of the experiences of a detainee from Guantanamo. Apparently an Al Jazeera camera man named Sami al-Hajj was arrested in Afghanistan and held in captivity for five years. It was pretty clear that he wasn't a criminal and the US even offered to let him go free...if he agreed to spy on Al Jazeera. He refused, and as a result, is still in captivity. He has been on a hunger strike for over a year, and twice a day he is held down and force fed through a feeding tube. Apparently lubricants aren't always used, and as a result, his throat is scrapped, bloody and raw. Also, he has said that the tube is sometimes still bloody from previous uses with other detainees.
Seriously? How is this not torture. It really is unbelievable that this stuff goes on.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It seems that most soldiers would see the computer training on rules of war as just another hoop to jump through. Think about how we look at drivers' permit tests or online alcohol education classes. They're just a chore, one more thing we have to do to satisfy some requirements. Do we really remember or value the things we learn during those computer sessions if they're not reinforced elsewhere? I tend to think military leadership is the key to recognition and enforcement of the rules of war. If military leaders teach and reinforce the rules of war, adherence to them will be expected. If all soliders go through the kind of real-life training Lt. Col. Marttala said he advocated, the rules of war would be much better remembered than by requiring just one computer training session per year.
I was going to post the same sentiment that ROWB said, so other than saying "I agree," I will refrain from further comment. :-)
ps- One could say that since I screw around on YouTube enough to find something like that Bambi video, that I also have too much time on my hands. You know me well enough to know that I don't have time on my hands... I just never sleep. ;-)
I also couldn't believe that they just had to do that online course. Doesn't the "rules of war" seem like the most fundamental aspect of being a soldier? Yet somehow it has the least amount of time in training. What is the chance they'll even remember most of what they've learned? Sure, they get a nice little laminated card with the Geneva Convention on it, but that just doesn't seem to cut it. I wonder if there is any reform on the horizon, or any advocacy groups looking to change this?
Post a Comment