The true face of war

September 23, 2005 3:15 PM

Barbarism or good ole American capitalism?If you want to see the true face of war, go to the amateur porn Web site NowThatsFuckedUp.com. For almost a year, American soldiers stationed in Iraq and Afghanistan have been taking photographs of dead bodies, many of them horribly mutilated or blown to pieces, and sending them to Web site administrator Chris Wilson. In return for letting him post these images, Wilson gives the soldiers free access to his site. American soldiers have been using the pictures of disfigured Iraqi corpses as currency to buy pornography.
posted by halekon (136 comments total)

USA! USA! USA!
posted by Pollomacho at 3:19 PM on September 23, 2005

Now that's fucked up...
posted by blastrid at 3:19 PM on September 23, 2005

"Beyond the Euphrates began for us the land of mirage and danger, the sands where one helplessly sank, and the roads which ended in nothing. The slightest reversal would have resulted in a jolt to our prestige giving rise to all kinds of catastrophe; the problem was not only to conquer but to conquer again and again, perpetually; our forces would be drained off in the attempt."

Emperor Hadrian AD 117-138
posted by dhoyt at 3:20 PM on September 23, 2005

I for one am shocked that American soldiers—God bless 'em!—must go to such great lengths to obtain pornography on the Internet. FOR SHAME, BIG INTERNET BUSINESS.
posted by jenovus at 3:21 PM on September 23, 2005

Actually the images are at this url: http://www.nowthatsfuckedup.com/bbs/forum23.html

Warning: this is *a lot* more gore than most people can handle, I reckon.
posted by clevershark at 3:22 PM on September 23, 2005

And we're giving this guy free publicity because. . . ?
posted by BrandonAbell at 3:22 PM on September 23, 2005

/gets dhoyt's joke
posted by longbaugh at 3:23 PM on September 23, 2005

lol
(nsfw)
posted by Pretty_Generic at 3:23 PM on September 23, 2005

Generation X Kill
posted by stbalbach at 3:29 PM on September 23, 2005

Whoever thought that members of a volunteer army would be so retarded oh wait.
posted by Pretty_Generic at 3:30 PM on September 23, 2005

Wow. that is fucked up.
posted by beelzbubba at 3:31 PM on September 23, 2005

I would happily trade images of corpses for images of hot naked chicks. The only problem is that, once an image of a corpse gets into my head, there's no getting it out, just putting other nicer things to look at in front of it.

So yeah, now I'm going to go and hit up some porn and put something more pleasant in front of those pretty horrific images.
posted by fenriq at 3:36 PM on September 23, 2005

There are some great photos in the non gory Iraq forum.
posted by fire&wings at 3:37 PM on September 23, 2005

This is all very postmodern, viewing the incredible suffering caused by a war in a porno forum.

Brandon Able, in some ways you're right, this violence is essentially meaningless in the context of our lives. We can crack bitter jokes because we are sitting on our asses, safe and warm. However, we want to look at these images so we can be shocked and saddened, so we can freak out a little at the insanity of the situation.

In America there is a pathological disconnect between the suffering and death we cause and the idea of a "Iraq War II".
posted by kuatto at 3:38 PM on September 23, 2005

Wow. I seriously suspected this post would be about all the US servicewomen out of uniform that are posted on the site. FWIW, it's always been my impression that the board existed as a means of exchanging these photos for people that found these things interesting to look at (such as those that inhabited the tasteless newsgroups back in the day). I've never got the impression that there was a big "carnage for porn" theme in play, even if providing one gained access to another.

This is especially true if you consider that picture submission gets 90 days of free supporter access and a 10 dollar donation gets lifetime supporter access.
posted by VulcanMike at 3:39 PM on September 23, 2005

And even more true because a member of the military that posts any amateur pictures -- non-violent or violent -- gets supporter access.
posted by VulcanMike at 3:41 PM on September 23, 2005

So in summary...

Barbarism? Not very much more than any "tasteless" area of the Web, except for the fact these are recent and from a consistent place.

Good ole American capitalism? Nope. He's a big fan of the military and of members of the military. A $10 donation for lifetime membership is hardly anything for a site that is struggling to support this many members, and recently started hosting videos as well -- and they can't even afford bandwidth for videos in their native size -- all of them are edited and resized.

Ridiculous hype? Oh, yes.
posted by VulcanMike at 3:45 PM on September 23, 2005

Courts Martial for the lot of them. Now.
posted by jmgorman at 3:45 PM on September 23, 2005

The few times I've had the stomach to peek in the gory forum, I've found it to be a humbling dose of reality. This is what's going on over there. We live in an age of citizen journalism, and it's not such a stretch to think that the people most able to document the horror of war are the same people that would want to see amateur pictures of naked ladies when their days are over.
posted by VulcanMike at 3:49 PM on September 23, 2005

interesting source for the *real* effects of war.
posted by Substrata at 3:54 PM on September 23, 2005

Superb. I'm unclear on what NowThat'sFuckedUp's motives are, but this is the perfect collection of anti-war photos. War is incredibly ugly, and the current administration has done (for their party) a superb job of sanitzing anything the least bit objectionable or graphic. This solves that. The human costs of war must be told, and the American public being the thick-headed fools that most of them are, told in the most graphic, bread-and-circuses form.

The Memory Hole and a few other places are probably quietly mirroring the entire forum and all linked photos for when this blows open, and what a fun round of denials, no-comments, prosecutions, and finger-pointing this will be!

Servicemen are providing photos of the terrible costs of war that our spineless, dickless "in-bedded" (with the military that is) journalists are unwilling or unable to capture. While their motives of free porn aren't exactly the most uh, pure, the photos are precious.
posted by NucleophilicAttack at 3:55 PM on September 23, 2005

Why do they hate us?
posted by leapingsheep at 3:55 PM on September 23, 2005

Why stop with the pictures? I'm sure there's a market for the corpses themselves among a certain clientèle.

God bless the free market.
posted by cleardawn at 3:55 PM on September 23, 2005

But why won't they accept photos of American casualties?
posted by cytherea at 4:01 PM on September 23, 2005

NucleophilicAttack, Servicemen are providing photos of the terrible costs of war that our spineless, dickless "in-bedded" (with the military that is) journalists are unwilling or unable to capture. While their motives of free porn aren't exactly the most uh, pure, the photos are precious.

You don't think, not even for an instant, that the military is censoring the photos the embedded journalists are allowed to send back for publication? I don't know the soldiers are allowed to send this images back but they apparently are and I do think its important to see the grim, ugly reality of war and death and destruction.

The sanitized view on the news is more disgusting to me really in its attempt to gloss over the hell that war really is.
posted by fenriq at 4:01 PM on September 23, 2005

*makes note to recommend adding more saltpeter to their rations*
posted by fixedgear at 4:05 PM on September 23, 2005

leapingsheep: Why do they hate us?

Because they are told to hate you, and they are spineless cowards.
posted by cytherea at 4:06 PM on September 23, 2005

But why won't they accept photos of American casualties?
posted by cytherea at 7:01 PM EST on September 23 [!]

It's not porn if it's someone you know and love.
posted by Rothko at 4:06 PM on September 23, 2005

NucleophilicAttack : "Servicemen are providing photos of the terrible costs of war that our spineless, dickless 'in-bedded' (with the military that is) journalists are unwilling or unable to capture."

fenriq : "You don't think, not even for an instant, that the military is censoring the photos the embedded journalists are allowed to send back for publication?"

I dunno, that's what I interpreted the "unable" to mean.

Rothko : "It's not porn if it's someone you know and love."

So what's with all those people who film themselves and their loved ones fucking? Are they fancying themselves documentary filmmakers?
posted by Bugbread at 4:09 PM on September 23, 2005

I don't know the soldiers are allowed to send this images back but they apparently are and I do think its important to see the grim, ugly reality of war and death and destruction.

They're not allowed to send back images like this, but try and stop them. There are almost as many digital cameras in Iraq as there are M4 assault rifles. It's always been my belief that what happened at Abu Garabe wasn't so much a problem with the solders, but a problem with the proliferation of digital cameras and internet connections on the battlefield.

The scum has always been there, we're just getting a better look now.

Because they are told to hate you, and they are spineless cowards.

Are you being facetious? Otherwise, that's an incredibly stupid statement. We're not going to get anywhere in this war on "terror" if we keep painting the other side as lunatic-cowards who hate freedom. It's asinine, and in fact, the reality is far, far worse than that.
posted by SweetJesus at 4:10 PM on September 23, 2005

So what's with all those people who film themselves and their loved ones fucking? Are they fancying themselves documentary filmmakers?
posted by bugbread at 7:09 PM EST on September 23 [!]

Verité cinema? I meant porn more in the animalistic sense of looking at dead bodies in a car crash or the like. Most probably wouldn't be titillated with dead pictures of significant others or family members, but are happy to metaphorically jerk off to pictures of anonymous Iraqi corpses.
posted by Rothko at 4:13 PM on September 23, 2005

A much larger number of people are being given memberships for ordinary documentary photographs than for pictures of dead bodies. It takes the wind out of the gore for porn outrage. And these are some of the best photographs of the war I have seen. Hit and miss yes, but the best are worthy of greater circulation.
posted by fire&wings at 4:14 PM on September 23, 2005

Also, only recently did the US JFC begin to screen and check packages coming in to the United States from Iraq. You should have seen some of the trophies that we smuggled out... Anything from trinkets to 50-cal machine guns that were formerly mounted on top of Iraqi tanks.
posted by SweetJesus at 4:16 PM on September 23, 2005

what ? no necklace of ears ?
posted by mishaco at 4:16 PM on September 23, 2005

bugbread writes "So what's with all those people who film themselves and their loved ones fucking? Are they fancying themselves documentary filmmakers?"

If you film yourself it's erotica. If your neighbors film themselves it's smut.
posted by clevershark at 4:17 PM on September 23, 2005

The scum has always been there, we're just getting a better look now.

Every war has had this kind of twisted morbid perversion. From head, digit, scalp and genitalia taking and the "spoils of war" to the open Japanese policy of creating thousands of sex slaves during WWII.

One could argue that, until the technology to spread barbarism so the "civilized world" could bare witness to it, wars have actually become much less barbaric. Before nobody but the victims cared.
posted by tkchrist at 4:20 PM on September 23, 2005

I thought this was an interesting quote (from waxfanatic on their forum):

Whoa.. Guys...
you see some fucked up shit in the sandbox. And this might seem like a helluva way to deal with it. In some ways it probably is. But, unless DOD re wrote the rule book and I missed it. Whats going on here isnt legal. Correct me if I'm wrong. Furthermore, we should hope that some thin skinned liberal asshat doesnt come across this site. You can all but guarnatee that when and if one of those scumbags does. You'll find this site and its contents being used by the likes of Cindy Sheehan to smear the entire military and its mission. If this is legal.. be smart. Create a private group amongst yourselves to share your experiences and work out what ever issues you need to work out because of them.

MetaFilter: thin skinned liberal asshats
posted by numlok at 4:22 PM on September 23, 2005

(ps. I meant that last bit in a sarcastic sense!)
posted by numlok at 4:23 PM on September 23, 2005

tkchrist: Exactly. In fact, I'd argue that wars have gotten "less violent" because of the proliferation of digital cameras, if that's possible from a macro-viewpoint. More digital cameras means more prying eyes, which means a war crime is more likely to be exposed, and at the far end of the logic chain it becomes less "easy" (for lack of a better term) to commit a war crime.

I think 15 years ago no one would have ever heard of Abu Garabe.
posted by SweetJesus at 4:27 PM on September 23, 2005

"This is what every Iraqi should look like." - US Marine laughing at dismembered corpse.

"I sent American troops to Iraq to make its people free..." - George W. Bush

In a way, perhaps Bush was telling the truth.
posted by cleardawn at 4:35 PM on September 23, 2005

SweetJesus: Are you being facetious?

How would you describe it?
posted by cytherea at 4:35 PM on September 23, 2005

Describe what? Being facetious or Al Queda's motives?
posted by SweetJesus at 4:37 PM on September 23, 2005

Because they are told to hate you, and they are spineless cowards.

Are you being facetious? Otherwise, that's an incredibly stupid statement. We're not going to get anywhere in this war on "terror" if we keep painting the other side as lunatic-cowards who hate freedom.
posted by SweetJesus at 1:10 AM CET on September 24

SweetJesus, I think you missed the point. The people we're talking about here are the US troops. They hate Iraqis because they are told to - by Fox News, by Anne Coulter, by their superior officers.

Are they spineless cowards, who travel only inside tanks? Who routinely call in air attacks or artillery bomardments against civilian apartment blocks which may contain a potential threat? Who crow over the corpses of their victims and take trophy photos?

You tell me.
posted by cleardawn at 4:43 PM on September 23, 2005

Bombardments. Excuse my spelling.
posted by cleardawn at 4:49 PM on September 23, 2005

cleardawn : "Are they spineless cowards, who travel only inside tanks?"

I dunno. I am definitely not the military type. And I oppose the war. But if I, for some reason, had signed up drunkenly for the military, and I got my marching papers, I would have run like hell for the nearest country I could hide in. If that weren't possible, I'd shoot my toe off or something. That's because I'm a spineless coward. At the point where a person is voluntarily riding in a tank, I think they cease to be spineless cowards, to some extent. I'm not saying that they're brave and stalwart dashing heroes or anything, but I know spineless cowards, and getting in tanks isn't something they do very often.
posted by Bugbread at 4:50 PM on September 23, 2005

If I kill someone for a laugh, can I use boredom as a defence?
posted by piscatorius at 4:51 PM on September 23, 2005

For the last year I've been managing Undermars.com which covers this same subject and I think was Mefi'd as well...
posted by glider at 4:51 PM on September 23, 2005

Eeeks...

(NSFW)This(NSFW) thread (with the, ahem, interesting title "What every Iraqi should look like") has some REALLY disturbing pictures.

They're as gross as all of the others (meaning EXTREMELY disgusting), but the weird thing is that the guy pictured on the ground/shot in the head has a rope and electrical wire "noose" tied from his neck to his hand...

I just wonder when and how it got there.

I mean, if this guy were an active insurgent, that's obviously an odd way to go into a fight, don't you think?

Dunno, maybe I'm just a bit amped up from last night's CSI.

(on preview: It's the same thread mentioned by cleardawn)
posted by numlok at 4:52 PM on September 23, 2005

War is hell, even optional ones with all volunteer armies.
posted by Max Power at 4:52 PM on September 23, 2005

It takes more bravery to say "No" to whomever is ordering you to kill.
posted by cytherea at 4:53 PM on September 23, 2005

Are they spineless cowards, who travel only inside tanks?

[rolls eyes] Like you WOULDN'T? C'mon.

"Pvt. Dawn! Get inside this armored vehicle!"

"Nah. No thanks Sarge. I'll walk to Faluhjah. I wouldn't want the enemy to get the idea I'm afraid of them."

It's a little nonpractical to walk everywhere. Though there are plenty of foot patrols as well.
posted by tkchrist at 4:57 PM on September 23, 2005

"They hate Iraqis because they are told to - by Fox News, by Anne Coulter, by their superior officers."
Or they don't. Or they're guys who signed up because it looked like an easy gig and a way to get some votech training. Or they couldn't pay for college.
So now they're there in a conflict that they didn't really want to be a part of in the first place, and all they know is that a bunch of the people there really like them, and a minority is shooting at them all the time. They're just trying to do their jobs and finish up their tours.
I bet there are far more people like that in the Army than there are cowards who look forward to riding in tanks and calling in airstrikes.
Iraq pretty much sucks for everyone who's there right now. And sending pictures out is a good thing, since it reminds us that war's not John Rambo. (Though I've never been in one, I always figured it was closer to Joseph Heller than Ernest Hemingway...)
posted by klangklangston at 5:00 PM on September 23, 2005

cytherea : "It takes more bravery to say 'No' to whomever is ordering you to kill."

I think it's one of those bounce-around things. To go bravely is brave (stupid, but brave). To not want to go but to go because you were ordered to is cowardly. To stand up to someone and say "No!" goes back to brave. To just flee or shoot off body parts to avoid going bounces back to cowardly.
posted by Bugbread at 5:02 PM on September 23, 2005

Ok, re-reading I misunderstood what you said, and cleardawn made me realize I was 180 degrees away. I thought you were referring to Al Queda/Iraqi Insurgents, not American troops. I agree with you, mostly.

SweetJesus, I think you missed the point. The people we're talking about here are the US troops. They hate Iraqis because they are told to - by Fox News, by Anne Coulter, by their superior officers.

Are they spineless cowards, who travel only inside tanks? Who routinely call in air attacks or artillery bomardments against civilian apartment blocks which may contain a potential threat? Who crow over the corpses of their victims and take trophy photos?

War sucks, man. It's probably the most psychologically destructive experience anyone will ever have to go through, and I'm not about to call anyone who's going through it a coward, on either side. The cowards are in the White House, those plutocrats who never served but freely move our troops around the world like a twisted game of Risk. But don't go calling people who are put in fucked-up situations cowards. That's ten-times more cowardly in my book, having never walked in their shoes.

The first thing they'll teach you a boot camp is how to dehumanize death. That's the army's job - they're killers. It's not a place for pacifists, and it's not a place where you can say "no" to someone giving you an order. It has nothing to do with courage, it has to do with simple bureaucracy - I out-rank you, do what i say. That doesn't mean you shoot up a school full of children if you're ordered too (most normal people have a conscience, even towards the "enemy) but that also doesn't mean you don't shoot back at someone who's shooting at you out of some misguided pacificism.

But, man, for every "we drop bombs on them - that's cowardly" there's a "they'll tie you up and slit your throat - that's cowardly". It's a zero-sum game, and you're never going to convince anyone of anything by calling them or their kid a coward because some rich man sent them to fight a war. That's just fucked up.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:03 PM on September 23, 2005

Am I wrong or are these mostly photos of the results from suicide bombings? They just illustrate again that there is a HUGE difference between the "foreign troops" and the "insurgents". The quotation marks are merely there to show that there are probably better (more true) descriptions of these.

As far as trading Snuff for Porn, man, there is a lot of down time when you are a soldier abroad. They can pray, read, write home or if you have digi-cameras and the internet, well, hell, there is a lot of diversion to be had.
posted by snsranch at 5:05 PM on September 23, 2005

"So now, you see," the brother explains, "the people can still see what the Americans have done."

Klangklangston said: all they know is that a bunch of the people there really like them, and a minority is shooting at them all the time.

Which explains a lot about KK's view of the world. He probably thinks most Vietnamese liked Americans, too.
posted by cleardawn at 5:05 PM on September 23, 2005

As to individuals being cowards or not... anyone in the US or UK military who is NOT a coward has the opportunity to say "No."

He or she can say clearly, to their superior officer, that they are no longer willing to participate in this war crime. That's all they need to do.

If they don't do that, at this stage, then I'm afraid 'coward' is a very mild epithet for what they really are.
posted by cleardawn at 5:12 PM on September 23, 2005

Which explains a lot about KK's view of the world. He probably thinks most Vietnamese liked Americans, too.

Your view seems a lot more narrow than his. From what I can glean, you seem to believe American troops are cowards who kill Iraqi's for sport, bomb apartments because we like taking pictures afterwards, and every native Iraqi over there from 2 to 200 is itching to kill us.

As to individuals being cowards or not... anyone in the US or UK military who is NOT a coward has the opportunity to say "No."

If they don't do that, at this stage, then I'm afraid 'coward' is a very mild epithet for what they really are.

Oh man, you have no idea what you're talking about... You're insulting a whole lot of people who don't deserve it in any way. It disgusts me. You should be ashamed of talking about poor 19 year old kids like that.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:16 PM on September 23, 2005

As to individuals being cowards or not... anyone in the US or UK military who is NOT a coward has the opportunity to say "No."

LOL. They should pass this stuff through you first. Just so they know.
posted by tkchrist at 5:17 PM on September 23, 2005

War is incredibly ugly, often beyond what words can say. For those of us fortunate enough to have lived our lives in peaceful regions of the world, it is difficult to understand the magnitude of misery that man can bring down upon his fellow man. One can only hope that this photographic message gets through to a citizenry desensitized by Mortal Kombat and Kill Bill.

Motives by which these photos are coming back aside, the images themselves are a valuable reminder to U.S. citizens of what they, through the "democratic process," are inflicting upon other human beings a great deal like themselves.
posted by NucleophilicAttack at 5:17 PM on September 23, 2005

Also, only recently did the US JFC begin to screen and check packages coming in to the United States from Iraq. You should have seen some of the trophies that we smuggled out

Oh fuck. I'm re-reading some of this thread, and I made a big editing mistake. That should have read "we're" smuggled out of Iraq, not "we". I didn't mean to imply at all that I've been to Iraq, or that I am in the military. I wish I caught that earlier.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:22 PM on September 23, 2005

cleardawn : "If they don't do that, at this stage, then I'm afraid 'coward' is a very mild epithet for what they really are."

Well, then we've got a problem with defining "coward". You consider any instances of cowardice to define someone as a coward, whereas I tend to think of any instances of bravery/foolhardiness as defining someone as a noncoward.

After all, a person who is willing to risk their life in a war but unwilling to stand up to authority is pretty much 50% brave, 50% cowardly. The decision about which term is used seems to be our point of disagreement. Perhaps we could settle on "brave coward"?
posted by Bugbread at 5:22 PM on September 23, 2005

SweetJesus says: It disgusts me. You should be ashamed of talking about poor 19 year old kids like that.

These are the same 19 year old kids posting pictures of corpses who they've just killed, with captions saying "Every Iraqi should look like this."

My posting opinions is one thing. Them murdering people is slightly different.

I think your sense of disgust and shame is a little misplaced.
posted by cleardawn at 5:23 PM on September 23, 2005

Damn it. "were" smuggled.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:24 PM on September 23, 2005

"Which explains a lot about KK's view of the world. He probably thinks most Vietnamese liked Americans, too."
Which explains a lot about your worldview too. You probably think that most Vietnamese liked the Communist regime that followed.
posted by klangklangston at 5:25 PM on September 23, 2005

Cleardawn: "My posting opinions is one thing. Them murdering people is slightly different."
Yeah. Nobody wants to kill you for posting comments, even when you clumsily attempt to frame everything in your reductive demogogery.
posted by klangklangston at 5:26 PM on September 23, 2005

cleardawn, you can't just quit when you feel like it.

Unless a troop has a documentable physical or mental ailment that makes them unfit for duty, they are there for the duration. Today we have troops over there who DO have documentable mental illnesses who will NOT be relieved of their duty because they are already short-handed. It's fucked, but please don't call anyone a coward.

They are fucked no matter how YOU see it.
posted by snsranch at 5:27 PM on September 23, 2005

Bugbread: You're right, of course. "Coward' isn't a particularly useful real-world descriptor. There are all kinds of shades of grey (and indeed whole rainbows) around that.

I'm sure anyone in that situation is terrified, unless they're psychotic - which many are. I would rather be a coward than psychotic, myself, which is one reason I haven't volunteered for army training.

But I want people to realise that if we're going to call anyone cowards in this situaion, it shouldn't be the Iraqis.
posted by cleardawn at 5:27 PM on September 23, 2005

METAFILTER: Your Reductive Demogogery!

couldn't help it 'cus I'm gonna have to look that one up.
posted by snsranch at 5:29 PM on September 23, 2005

I would happily trade images of corpses for images of hot naked chicks. The only problem is that, once an image of a corpse gets into my head, there's no getting it out, just putting other nicer things to look at in front of it.

Well, it's not like you don't see it if you don't take a picture.
posted by delmoi at 5:29 PM on September 23, 2005

These are the same 19 year old kids posting pictures of corpses who they've just killed, with captions saying "Every Iraqi should look like this."

I know for a fact the other side does the exact same thing. Have you ever heard of the insurgent DVD's that they sell in the local markets? The ones of RPG attacks on American solders? They're used as recruiting tools (and set to Farsi music), arguably in a similar way to these photos. There is a localized analogue for everything.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:30 PM on September 23, 2005

"unless they're psychotic - which many are."
Any way to back this up that doesn't include a circular definition of psychotic?

"I would rather be a coward than psychotic, myself, which is one reason I haven't volunteered for army training."
Well, that and they don't tend to do everything on consensus. I hear there's very little twinkling in military decision making.
posted by klangklangston at 5:30 PM on September 23, 2005

Anyone want to hear a real-life combat coward story? I have one.
posted by snsranch at 5:30 PM on September 23, 2005

you know, i don't really see how any of this differs from what went on in vietnam. actually, it seems like that was even more horrific.
posted by muppetboy at 5:32 PM on September 23, 2005

But I want people to realise that if we're going to call anyone cowards in this situaion, it shouldn't be the Iraqis.

Nobody's calling the Iraqis cowards. The pressing issue is why you think the Americans and British are cowards... It's too loaded a term to toss around like that.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:32 PM on September 23, 2005

At this point, I'm quitting this thread. My opinions are getting in the way of the discussion, and I don't want to do that.
posted by cleardawn at 5:34 PM on September 23, 2005

And most troops are psychotic?

Why not turn down the hyperbole dial, just a bit.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:34 PM on September 23, 2005

(not that this isn't completely fucked up...)
posted by muppetboy at 5:34 PM on September 23, 2005

cleardawn : "I want people to realise that if we're going to call anyone cowards in this situaion, it shouldn't be the Iraqis."

Thanks for the response. It looks like we're in agreement, though I would say that if we're going to call anyone cowards in this situation, it shouldn't be the US military folks, because they're participating semi-voluntarily in dangerous activities, nor should it be the Iraqis, for the same reason, and, surprisingly, it shouldn't be the US government (because while there are plenty of vicious terms that apply to them, I don't think they're in this war due to fear, though they frame the whole terrorist thing in those terms), but to people like me (and also people with relatives in positions of power who can use this to avoid service) who would/do flee not so much out of opposition to the war (which I am opposed to), but utter fear of being shot at.

That is, people who are voluntarily in a war area are pretty much by definition not cowards. People who send people off to war may well be cowards, but the mere fact that they send others to war doesn't indicate anything either way. People who do (or would) flee from war not on principled stances but fear of death are cowards.
posted by Bugbread at 5:38 PM on September 23, 2005

SweetJesus; Can't you send all of the insurgents to purgatory even though they don't believe in you? Like a mini pre-apocolypse just for insurgent suicide bombers?
posted by snsranch at 5:39 PM on September 23, 2005

snsranch : "Anyone want to hear a real-life combat coward story?"

As long as it's you, someone you know, or some other interesting story that isn't an attempt to make a political point on either side, hell yes.
posted by Bugbread at 5:40 PM on September 23, 2005

Well, you've got some strange opinions...

I've always been of the opinion that opinions can be wrong, but I'll refrain from saying that because my friends have convinced me that I sound like a gigantic asshole everytime I do.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:40 PM on September 23, 2005

Just for bugbread, in short.

I was in a Deuce and a half going though the Iraqi border from Saudi Arabia. Tanks and infantry had already taken out most of the opposition but we were still recieving fire.

My "shotgun" who was a Haitian national kid was curled up in ball on the floor in front of his seat. We were in black out conditions. I was trying to follow the "cat-eyes" on the truck in front of me while simultaneously returning fire and kicking the kid in the head. Had I lost the cat-eyes we would have been captured and killed. Maybe he wasn't really a coward, but I needed him and he wasn't there.
posted by snsranch at 5:50 PM on September 23, 2005

SweetJesus; Can't you send all of the insurgents to purgatory even though they don't believe in you? Like a mini pre-apocolypse just for insurgent suicide bombers?

If only...
posted by SweetJesus at 5:55 PM on September 23, 2005

Consider why so many Americans hated, so vehemently and blindly, the communists for so many years. Did they read Marx? Did they travel to Russia? Did they have relatives killed in the purges? Was there anything in their lives that remotely connected to them in any way besides paying the extra taxes to build nuclear weapons?

How could so many people come to hate an alternative economic system? It takes a great deal of courage to dissent from the society that surrounds you, and the people who have power over the quality of your life.

But I really have a hard time respecting someone who adopts an ideology because they're afraid of getting intro trouble, just as I have a hard time findind anything to admire about a person who kills, and not in self-defense, because someone told them to. I don't know how else to think of those actions but as cowardly actions.

Feel free to substitute Gay, or Black, or Muslim for Communist.
posted by cytherea at 5:56 PM on September 23, 2005

Cytherea: Read Clausewitz.
posted by SweetJesus at 5:57 PM on September 23, 2005

fixedgear - *makes note to recommend adding more saltpeter to their rations*

Wouldn't do any good.
posted by PurplePorpoise at 5:59 PM on September 23, 2005

Metafilter: My opinions are getting in the way of the discussion
posted by mr_crash_davis at 6:00 PM on September 23, 2005

SweetJesus: Read Chodron.
posted by cleardawn at 6:35 PM on September 23, 2005

Cleardawn: Chodron? "But let’s step back for s moment. Why should we win and the other team lose? The only reason is "My team is best because it’s mine." The other team feels the same way. Who is right? Competition based on such self-centredness isn’t productive because it breeds anger and jealousy."
Something tells me Chodron was picked last a lot.
posted by klangklangston at 6:40 PM on September 23, 2005

That's interesting, KK. Let's follow that thought. What, exactly, tells you that Chodron was picked last a lot?
posted by cleardawn at 7:04 PM on September 23, 2005

In my experience, it's often only after winning the game that one sees how pointless the game is.

Many spiritual stories start with the man/woman who has lots of wealth and power - has "won the game" - and then realises that this has not brought happiness.

To put this into context a little:
For Clausewitz (whose thinking I actually have a lot of respect for), the irrational, unconscious mind is a basically dark and evil force, while the rational, goal-pursuing mind is essentially good.

Buddhism postulates the opposite - that the irrational, unconscious mind, left to itself, is basically quite healthy, while the rational, chasing egotistical goals, tends to be a cause of unhappiness and conflict.

Both views have some good points, and I think we would all do well to try to integrate an understanding of both into our political discussions.
posted by cleardawn at 7:13 PM on September 23, 2005

cytherea : "I have a hard time findind anything to admire about a person who kills, and not in self-defense, because someone told them to. I don't know how else to think of those actions but as cowardly actions."

You just lack vision, then. They can be described as horrible, evil, execrable, immoral, unjust, unkind, cruel, vicious, craven, and a billion other probably more accurate words.
posted by Bugbread at 7:25 PM on September 23, 2005

Cleardawn: Why would you pick someone who doesn't know why competition is fun?
posted by klangklangston at 7:25 PM on September 23, 2005

But why won't they accept photos of American casualties? - cytherea

It's not porn if it's someone you know and love. - Rothko

And looking at these images, my first thought was that each of the pictured people is a person with families that would be devestated and enraged to see them so visciously hurt like this - and then put on display. Just like Americans (understandably!) get so worked up over seeing their own people die in videos with proud killers. The people on the other side of the war feel the same way when it's one of their own.

No matter if you call it brave or stupid or whatever, I don't think I could fight in any war. I see these images and I feel ill. My first and over whelming reaction is to connect with the human-ness of the victims on both sides.
posted by raedyn at 7:25 PM on September 23, 2005

KK: Do you really think competition is fun? Look again at those pictures. How much fun would you like?

Raedyn: Well said. In a way, a corpse is more human than a living person. You can't see them as a threat, or as the enemy - they're not dehumanised any more. All that's there is a person, a human just like me, dead.

My first reaction looking at them was to feel that one day, I'll die, and when I'm dead, I'll look like that. There's something very humbling about looking at a corpse.

(Then, sadly, I read the captions, and picked up on the context, and started getting angry about it. I wish I could avoid that reaction better.)
posted by cleardawn at 7:37 PM on September 23, 2005

The real world is rough, and no place for a pacifist. While you're off dealing with your anger, someone else is going to nail you with a rock to the head. We're humans - We're violent.

I don't know who the hell Chodron is, but he's not talking about nations. States aren't human beings, but they still act rationally and have a need to be violent. War isn't silly or stupid, but it is necessary. War is the continuation of politics though other means.

You chide people who don't read Marx and hate communism. They don't hate it, they just don't understand it. You know nothing of war (it's obvious), so read some Clausewitz and you'll learn. You won't like it, but you'll understand.
posted by SweetJesus at 8:23 PM on September 23, 2005

"War is hell." - General William Tecumseh Sherman, U.S. Army.
posted by davy at 8:33 PM on September 23, 2005

For Clausewitz (whose thinking I actually have a lot of respect for), the irrational, unconscious mind is a basically dark and evil force, while the rational, goal-pursuing mind is essentially good.

Buddhism postulates the opposite - that the irrational, unconscious mind, left to itself, is basically quite healthy, while the rational, chasing egotistical goals, tends to be a cause of unhappiness and conflict.

Again, I spoke too soon. I read your Chodron link and went off a little.

But I think you take too much of a philosophical view of war. Naturally, war is hell and life would be much better with out it. I think it boils down to a much more of a realist ideal. That being - man is greedy, and will step over whomever he needs to in-order to get what he wants. I don't think any amount of spiritual thinking will change that.

But I just don't want to blame the solider for an officer's fight. It's not fair.
posted by SweetJesus at 8:33 PM on September 23, 2005

I don't think many americans are really aware of the makeup of their armed forces. These are people who come from small towns in the midwest and south that have been economically devestated for decades where there is no hope or opportunity except through dangerous, dead end jobs that will wear you out if not kill you before you're forty. Kids who grow up in these families are frequently treated brutally by fathers and mothers and take the first opportunity to escape to the military, where they practice those same coping mechanisms on girlfriends, wives and children.
Reading about life in the soviet military during the cold war similar lifestyle patterns existed, and still do, as they do in the british military and probably militaries around the world.
To some who are in the military there's the attraction of the military life, but I think for the majority it's an escape from something far worse.
As far as reveling in the deaths of others, I think that many of us, as disgusting as it is to think about it, would react in a similar way. I've read many books about the world wars and armed conflicts throughout the ages and it seems to be how those who are exposed to such situations cope: sometimes with humor, other times with horror or as in most cases, just numb acceptance.
Of course, those who come back from such experiences and enter civilian life find a hard time coping and some simply cannot, which leads either to going back into the military, engaging in violent or illegal activities resulting in prison or death.
I grew up a military brat and in the last year or two before my 18th birthday was looking forward to joining the military, but as I have all my life did a lot of research and reading in those last two years that changed my mind. During that time I became very aware of how the military was no longer a 'heroic occupation' but a dumping ground for ex convicts and those who had been rejected by society. During those years in the late 1970's and early 1980's there was a prevalence of drug abuse and murder in the military that was finally reeled in (for the most part) during a massive cleanup that resolved a lot of those issues (but far from all of them), which is why they instituted the mandatory drug testing, etc. Now with the Iraq war and other 'adventures' around the world the military seems to be taking another look at accepting anyone who can stand on two feet and carry a gun.
So there you have it, the world subjugated at the hands of criminal, thuggish rednecks with parenting issues, rejected by society and eager and capable of getting back at it with full military force. Mad Max had nothing on this.
In addition, part of the military culture is a form of brainwashing where those in the service know more about 'how the world really operates' than civilians ever will. This leads to those in the service looking at civilians as a nation of sheep. Civilians tend to look at those in the military as a bunch of dead-end losers. And so it goes. I think there is more of an effort now on the part of the civilian population to try to understand it's military, but there is much that needs to be done on both sides to repair the cultural damage between the two sides. Part of that problem is the division of 'liberals' and 'conservatives'. Both sides have their strengths, both sides have their weaknesses. The key is to embrace and appreciate both sides while ignoring attempts to alienate and divide.
posted by mk1gti at 8:59 PM on September 23, 2005

The horror, the horror......................
posted by Joeforking at 8:59 PM on September 23, 2005

By the way, I'm not exactly a pacifist. I condemn imperialist war, I'm against just about every kind of organized physival conflict, and I shun personal violence -- until I'm attacked and pissed off. So though armed struggle may someday be a regrettable necessity, self-defense is FUN. The stupidest thing you can do to me is to make me feel just fine about wanting to jam a shovel up your ass (and I don't mean handle first). For this reason, while I can see myself not opposing a war of self-defense and liberation, I can't imagine going to war for money or loot. As with sex, when it becomes a job it's just not fun anymore.

As for what is or is not base or disgusting, when it comes right down to it refined aesthetics and/or sensitive morals are an artificial luxury: there are peoples out there who began eating bugs from necessity and kept on because they came to like it. However, as very few people will choose to eat shit when there's still roadkill around, taking those photos and posting them seems a tad de trop: if you don't have to go that low you should probably avoid it. Some luxuries are necessary props to pretending that "being human" involves more than opposable thumbs and a bipedal stomp.
posted by davy at 9:08 PM on September 23, 2005

Well, I see why the search didn't find my earlier mention of this, since I pointed to a secondary source. Last comment in this thread.
posted by hank at 9:35 PM on September 23, 2005

You can not read a book to learn about war. You can read a book to learn about the concepts of war. You can read a book to learn what another human being thinks about war. You can even learn what another human being who has been in a war thinks about it. The only way to actually learn about war is to be in a war. Everything else is theories.

Yes, we have an armed service that gets the G.I Bill for honorable completion of their voluntary service, however the large majority of people who sign up and take the oath, do so because there is an emotional connection with this country. You may go so far as stating that they have a love for their country. That is why they enter the service.

There are occaisions when this patriotic sense of duty crosses the border into machismo, which is evident in the speech of those who say things such as "liberal asshats." Yet, there is a certain air of gallant valiancy in a person who takes an oath of service seriously enough to sacrifice their own life. This is not just in the physical act of death- four years of service to the military is one helluva committment to make and keep.

The reasons why we sent the troops into this fray are not honorable "beyond a reasonable doubt." However, that does not allow the troops to option out of this conflict. The civilian legal system which you and I of the blogosphere may enjoy is one in which the prosecution has the burden of proof, the Uniform Code of Military Justice ( the legal system underwhich the armed forces operate) does not place the same burden of proof. If charged with treason or sedition, it is up to you to prove that you are innocent.

That is enough said for now- should there be a greater need for discourse, further discussion can be entertained.
posted by N8k99 at 9:38 PM on September 23, 2005

Well, making your army all-volunteer isn't exactly selecting for brains, is it?
posted by signal at 9:59 PM on September 23, 2005

N8k99

The larger majority of those who sign up for service do it to get out of dead end lives. You need to do more research before you jump on that flag waving nonsense high horse.
You sound like someone who's never been around the military much less been in it. I admit there are some who are in it for the applie pie and chevrolet aspect of things, but the majority are there to get out of their crappy dead end civilian lives. Witness those troops that were captured at the beginning of Gulf War II. Witness those who were put on trial for prisoner abuse. My father joined the military to get out of a small town in North Dakota. Growing up a military brat I had many opportunities to talk to friends of my father who did it for the same reason. Not much has changed since then. The military is an escape from a country who's government and businesses have abandoned it's poor and immigrant population. Now they have to put their lives on the line as well. Prior to that they at least had hope of learning a skill they might be able to take back to the civilian world. Now they are lucky if they can make it out alive with ten fingers and ten toes.
Please remember, the majority of the military are supply clerks, mechanics and other support personnel, very few are soldiers and even less still are professional soldiers which is what I believe you're refering to.
posted by mk1gti at 10:12 PM on September 23, 2005

I just saw the most horrorifying photos of the the war on terror on a porn site.
posted by PHINC at 10:37 PM on September 23, 2005

mk1gt1 - the majority of the military are supply clerks, mechanics and other support personnel, very few are soldiers and even less still are professional soldiers which is what I believe you're refering to.

Anyone know where I can find a breakdown?
posted by daksya at 10:52 PM on September 23, 2005

PHINC, see this.

(I'm deliberately pointing to a literary biography from delicacy; if anyone wants to explore the subject there are links to follow -- but if that stuff turns somebody on please don't move to Kentucky.)
posted by davy at 10:57 PM on September 23, 2005

SweetJesus: I know for a fact the other side does the exact same thing. Have you ever heard of the insurgent DVD's that they sell in the local markets? The ones of RPG attacks on American solders? They're used as recruiting tools (and set to Farsi music), arguably in a similar way to these photos.

Now there's the yardstick we should use to measure ourselves.

N8k99: You can not read a book to learn about war. You can read a book to learn about the concepts of war. You can read a book to learn what another human being thinks about war. You can even learn what another human being who has been in a war thinks about it. The only way to actually learn about war is to be in a war. Everything else is theories.

Indeed. And I suppose that unless I've actually burglarized a house, I have no business offering an opinion about burglary? Because that would be "theories"?
posted by boredomjockey at 11:05 PM on September 23, 2005

davy posts:
I shun personal violence
and
self-defense is FUN

????????
posted by papakwanz at 11:08 PM on September 23, 2005

"I just saw the most horrifying photos of the the war on terror on a porn site."

...And so now we know exactly why the next War fostered by this administration is - a War on Porn!

It all kind of makes sense...if you're sympathetic to sociopathy for Jesus' literal sake, dunnit?

Oy.

Forget the handbasket... America, you've just been handed your frogmarching Monopoly orders:

"Go To Hell. Go Directly To Hell. Do Not Pass GOPAC, Do Not Collect $200 Billion In Porkbarrel Spending."
posted by objet at 12:35 AM on September 24, 2005

Wow. This turned out sounding like a Katrina thread. What's going on here?
posted by VulcanMike at 8:07 AM on September 24, 2005

Well, I hope any jerk with one of those stupid "Support Our Troops" stickers on their car takes the time to read the comments on that board as well as look at the pretty pictures. What nice boys they are. Oh but wait... they only joined up because they were poor and wanted to pay for an education, right?

Fuck the troops.
posted by Decani at 8:07 AM on September 24, 2005

One thing I don't get is why "they're only in it for the money" is seen as a form moral justification.
If anything, that makes it all the more disgusting.
posted by signal at 8:14 AM on September 24, 2005

signal: absolutely. I get real tired of hearing people using poverty to justify slaughter, war crime and brutality. My family was poor too but they didn't feel that justified checking their personal morality at the door of the nearest army recruitment office.
posted by Decani at 8:17 AM on September 24, 2005

"KK: Do you really think competition is fun? Look again at those pictures. How much fun would you like?"
Right. Because those deaths are the logical outcome of competition, Cap'n Non Sequitor.
Care to advance an argument that's not absurd on its face?
posted by klangklangston at 8:50 AM on September 24, 2005

I vote 'barbarism'.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 8:56 AM on September 24, 2005

I joined the Army because I wanted to kill something. Luckily I grew up before I did. I certainly was not the only person with this mindset, but I was one of very few who realised their error and quit before stealing somebody's future. I am extremely conflicted on the issue of the military - so much of what I have seen is horrific and stupid but within the military you find some of the greatest instances of bravery and self sacrifice in history. It's not black and white and whilst I find myself agreeing with several people within this thread I can't hate either the soldiers who take these pictures or the people who are supposedly their enemy.

My hate is reserved for the motherfuckers who thought this debacle was a good idea or would in any way improve the state of the middle east. Such blindness and incompetence is more of a crime than 100,000 sick photographs or pornographic images. Whilst the pictures are disturbing they would never have been possible if the soldiers were not acting out the stupid orders given by those who would never dare put themselves in harm's way.
posted by longbaugh at 9:15 AM on September 24, 2005

I vote 'barbarism'.
And there we have it. The poor, living in desperate situations such as in ghettos, public housing projects, 'the rough part of town'. I think this is what happens when a society turns it's back on those in need: they take a way out, the military and in peacetime it works out well for them. In this particular instance it has worked out very badly for them with extended service tours leading to depression, suicide, substantial amounts going AWOL and the well-known recruitment problems in replacing troops that have left, been killed or maimed (using the word 'wounded' is inaccurate, these people are for the most part permanently disabled), leaving another burden on society.
If this country, and other countries wants to create a 'kinder, gentler military' it could start by getting the poor out of the desperate dead-end situation they find themselves in instead of crapping on them and blaming them for every societal problem (welfare, as an example).
Give the poor a chance, a *real* chance to make a better life for themselves, a reason to have dignity and earn respect and I don't think you'll have these issues with people with stress-induced emotional problems going into the military and taking them out on civilians.
Of course, the current government is doing nothing but creating more problems for the poor by vilifying them and the democrats are too timid to do anything lest they offend their 'conservative masters'. Two party government? In a pig's eye. . . Just two political parties of the same stripe. Neither of which give a real damn about improving society, improving cities and towns, improving the lives of it's citizens.
posted by mk1gti at 9:18 AM on September 24, 2005

SweetJesus: I know for a fact the other side does the exact same thing. Have you ever heard of the insurgent DVD's that they sell in the local markets? The ones of RPG attacks on American solders? They're used as recruiting tools (and set to Farsi music), arguably in a similar way to these photos.

boredomjockey : "Now there's the yardstick we should use to measure ourselves."

Er...no, that's SweetJesus's whole point: Some people were saying the Americans are cowards and Iraqis aren't, because Americans revel in trophy photos. However, the insurgents are doing the same thing, so it's not the standard that should be used to determine who is more or less cowardly.
posted by Bugbread at 9:21 AM on September 24, 2005

mk1gti : "Give the poor a chance, a *real* chance to make a better life for themselves, a reason to have dignity and earn respect and I don't think you'll have these issues with people with stress-induced emotional problems going into the military and taking them out on civilians."

The only folks I knew in high school who joined the military were middle class folks with stress-induced psychological problems, and they were scary motherfuckers who I could easily see taking these pictures and bragging about whacking sand-niggers. I think giving the poor a *real* chance to make a better life for themselves is a great thing, but I don't think it would make a significant impact on people in a volunteer army having a higher likelihood than we would like for doing things like revelling in trophy photos.
posted by Bugbread at 9:27 AM on September 24, 2005

And of course, this country has the highest rate of mental illness in 14 countries. . . We're Number One! We're Number One!

Now don't you feel better about our boys and girls overseas behaving in a responsible and civic manner?

My personal theory is that mental illness is caused or aggravated by stress. The more stress, the worse mental illness becomes. Hence the greater rates of mental illness among the poor and homeless.

So, if you structure society to shun the poor and disadvantaged and blame the powerless and defenseless, winning power is a shot in the bucket! Alienate the classes, alienate the population from each other by interjecting that old bugaboo about differences in politics (hell, they don't even like my sports team! Die Commie Scum! Die!) and everybody loses! (except the rich few who profit off all the pain and suffering, and need for an entrenched security state, of course.)
posted by mk1gti at 2:39 PM on September 24, 2005

States aren't human beings, but they still act rationally and have a need to be violent. War is n't silly or stupid, but it is necessary ...to the state.

That's better.
posted by mwhybark at 5:16 PM on September 24, 2005

Y'know something bugbread, I appreciate your personal experience, but perhaps you could take a look at a movie that was representative of life in the military around the time I was getting ready to go into (and my father was retiring from before it got too deep) Buffalo Soldiers. Better yet, pick up the book 'cause one thing the guy who made the film confessed to was that everything you see in the movie was very toned down from the reality of life in the military at that time. So if you think things in the movie are pretty fucked up, baby you ain't seen nothing yet. . .
The military here and all over the world is a pretty screwed up existence and any middle-class white boy going in with the idea it's all about patriotism and apple pie would have their ass handed to them in a new york minute in the real military. If they made it out alive that is.
posted by mk1gti at 7:03 PM on September 24, 2005

mk1gti: Er...You use the word "but", but I'm not clear what you're disagreeing with me about...
posted by Bugbread at 7:29 PM on September 24, 2005

The larger majority of those who sign up for service do it to get out of dead end lives. You need to do more research before you jump on that flag waving nonsense high horse.
You sound like someone who's never been around the military much less been in it. USN ET3 (NEC 3383) OTH '93 But yeah you are right, I have no idea what it is like to be in the Army. My statements are about the experience of service, not the specifics of branch, division or rank.

oh yes, it does sound a bit like my angle is flag waving and proud, however, before patriotism was usurped by the corporate oligarchy it was not a terrible attribute to love the land of your birth. Or maybe it wasn't. As I grow older and more knowing ( and I mean by that I now know more about scoop of the areas in which I don't really know anything at all, than anything which I actually know) of the way the world works and is; it really does not matter. The entire entrophy of the universe, this planet, all human affairs will continue to rise and fall, decline and progress in the manner which it always has.

I wish, I wish, I wish...

You know, it just really doesn't matter. I have not seen anything which leads me to believe that this or any country runs the way that we were taught as children. So what, our soliders take pictures of dead bodies and post them so that they can jerk off in their spare time, which there is plenty of in the service, whether you are a clerk or shopkeeper, gunnersmate, jet-engine tech, Officer of the Line, boatswainsmate or nuclear technichian ( and if I spelled that wrong it's because I really don't care anymore.)

I wish, I wish, I wish...

It's really nice to think that I am going to get outraged by anything anyone says on MeFi, or that I will get scared by the more intellectual posters, or the postings that are slanted one way or the other. Frankly, none of it trully matters in grand scheme of things. This world has always seen progress and regression in these matters. So one day it all ends. Big deal.
For now, I can only say that what really matters is that you have your rights, not that I have my false sense of security based upon the actions of my government(sic).

I wish, I wish, I wish...

It would be nice to believe in the Constitution as a working document worth protecting. It would be nice to belive that the US can play nicely with others. It would also be nice to believe that the people could govern themselves instead of having the insulting choice of red state vs blue state.

I wish, I wish, I wish...

BTW breaking into someone's home and stealing something and selling it would indeed take you out of the realm of theory when it comes to burglary, and no it does not mean you have to actually carry out the action to have an opinion but until you do, it remains an opinion. Granted there are plenty of instances where the moral or legal codes of society are created from opinions (ie the Supreme Court) by people who have not actually taken the plunge into action in the area of questioning. I was not discounting this. The statement was intentioned to scrape away any spurious notions of expertise based up on the knowledge gained in a book particularly when the root of this discussion is about people who are in the mindnumbingly dull position of active engagment of combat. People who for one reason or another sign up for service with a branch of the Armed Services.

I wish, I wish, I wish...

I wish I had a pony.
posted by N8k99 at 10:39 PM on September 24, 2005

Metafilter: I joined the Army because I wanted to kill something.
posted by davy at 11:22 AM on September 25, 2005

papakwanz writes:

davy posts:
I shun personal violence
and
self-defense is FUN

????????

I don't see why you don't get it: as a cerebrally-developed organism capable of such things who has learned to do so and to value its doing, I shun personal violence because it offends the personal ethical and aesthetic sensibilities that I have learned and cultivated; however, when under enough stress -- and "self-defense" implies being attacked, which, if you're lucky enough not to know, is stressful -- my "higher brain centers" get sidestepped and I become more in tune with my "animal nature" that enjoys smashing, stomping, chomping and ripping what has threatened and angered me. If you from your own experience still have no idea what I'm talking about, either you have no inhibitions on your "animal violence" (and are truly scary) or you're some kind of angel or robot who has no "baser impulses".

For example, in real life I'm pretty close to pacifistic: I will occasionally holler and I might even break things, but it would take an awful lot for me to actually hurt anybody -- and I'm usually not that great at it when I do become so moved. However, last night I was clunked in the back of the head and had my hearing aid yanked out of my ear by some stupid demon-teen (one of a gang of four) who wanted to hurt somebody just for kicks; as the right hearing aid broke a couple weeks ago, I am now too hard of hearing to have a oral conversation with my "SO" that does not hurt her throat from having to yell, and because I have to manage to survive on SSI payments of $579 per month as a result of several mental and physical disabilities and afflictions, and because Medical Assistance does not cover hearing aids, I'm not sure how in the fuck I'm ever going to be able to afford to get this broken one fixed and/or replace the stolen one without scrimping and saving for many many months, as I do not come from a well-to-do family and I'd already had to bum $300 from my very poor old crippled mother to get my hearing aids reprogrammed earlier this year. Several years ago it took me a year apiece to save up the ~$1000 cash price.

So, as a result of this attack, which I was unable to foresee because I was clunked from behind, and which I would have had a hard time defending myself from anyway because I'm a middle-aged, slightly overweight, asthmatic and arthritic fruitcake who does not carry death-dealing weapons and has no great martial arts skills that would prevail against four healthy teenagers, I quickly found myself frothing in fury, and had I been able to catch one of them I know I would have really enjoyed poking his eyes out, whether it happened to be the one who'd yanked my hearing aid from my ear or not. But I still can't imagine posting a photo of that hypothetical blinding to the Internets though, even if I had carried a camera; after I'd calmed down enough to use the camera I'd have found the results of my violence too yucky too focus on, and I can even imagine feeling sorry for the vicious little shit.

One thing y'all should count on though: I'd take most of my meals at our local St. Vincent's Dining Hall before I surrendered my internet connection, because I'm too damn deaf to converse easily with anybody who does not have or affect a loud low-toned voice, the free musical events that added delight to my existence would be largely lost on my now, and I find computer-mediated communication much easier and more effective than trying use even the loudest setting on my amplified telephone. So y'all Mefites will still have davy to be amazed at a while longer.
posted by davy at 12:35 PM on September 25, 2005

I'm not the worst little boy in the playground nor am I the best little boy. The example you gave from your own personal experience with teenagers demonstrates the power of physicality which they are in command of, as well as the lack of wisdom or intelligence which resides within their heads and hearts. this is how indeed the photos in question end up on a porn site, "because it seemed like a good idea at the time."

The police have been taking photgraphs of crime and accident scenes since photograph was invented. The difference is they are not driven to dehumanize the subject of their photographic arts through extensive training driven by the raw emotions of patriotic duty. The armed services uses this as a psychological tool to mold it's servants to be able to do whatever is asked of them. In fact, there is a very specific day in training, very, very early on, in which you learn how to exceed the physical limitations of your body and are relieved of the pain of mental existence through these very same emotional triggers. It is throughly frightening the precision which this technique is employed. As the reservists attend the very same boot camps, I am quite certain that they receive this 'upgrade'.

I take pride in not actually ever firing a gun during my four years in the service. Yes it was a fluke that the firing range was closed for renovations while I was in boot. This does not mean that I do not know how to use a gun. I never have had to use a gun for anythng more than target practice- nor do I hope to ever need to shoot at more than a piece of paper or a milk jug. However, I did learn some fundamental self-defense techniques which where embedded beneath the level of thought and at times when I have been face to face with the raw animalistic nature of a man-child on the rage, I have not been injured. I prefer the concepts of world peace and harmony, yet I am quite aware that there are many, many places on the globe where I can not just walk because I think I should. There are independent Warlords and Pirates which operate in the world at large. There are also nations with armies that have malignant intentions towards their neighbors and the world community at large. There is indeed the occaision where fighting is necessary.

Finding the underground network of 'Bad Guys' who blew up 3 million square feet of buildings in my neighborhood, is reason to fight. Searching for revenge or profit, behind the guise of riding the world of a tryant may not be. Now matter how well and how thoroughly the military may train their people, when soliders are sent quite far away from home to occupy another territory, their behavior on the fringes degenerates. Primarily due to the dehumanization of the enemy before the troops have even arrived on foreign soil.
posted by N8k99 at 11:46 PM on September 25, 2005

Online Journalism Review has some background on the site.

I joined the Army because I wanted to kill something.

Thank you, Private Joker:

I wanted to see exotic Vietnam...the crown jewel of Southeast Asia. I wanted to meet interesting and stimulating people of an ancient culture...and kill them. I wanted to be the first kid on my block to get a confirmed kill.

posted by kirkaracha at 2:53 PM on September 27, 2005

...There is something very disturbing about the images of sexual torture we've seen and heard about in this war, generally. The forced masturbation, the pyramids, the female interrogators and the fake menstrual blood, the constant nudity, all of it. Violence against prisoners in the new Human Rights Watch report is expressed as "fucking" instead of beating. Not "fucking up" or "fucking with" --- just plain "fucking" as in "I walking in and saw him fucking the prisoner."

I cannot help but think that something has gone terribly wrong here. From the top of the hierarchy ordering sexual humiliation techniques, to obscure web-sites selling war gore and pictures of girls next door together, this is a very sexualized war and it's damned strange, particularly coming from a regime that pretends to be an arbiter of strict sexual morals. ...
posted by amberglow at 8:43 PM on September 27, 2005

The owner of the site (Christopher Michael Wilson) has just been arrested on obscenity charges and is being held under a $151,000 bond.

Via Reuters: Iraq-corpse Web site operator held for obscenity
posted by numlok at 3:30 PM on October 8, 2005

"The Pentagon has said it found no evidence any of the photos were posted by soldiers."

Those "men wearing what looked like U.S. military uniforms, standing over charred corpses, mutilated bodies and severed body parts" must be US tourists who travel to Iraq and dress up as soldiers only to get free access to a US porn site.
posted by funambulist at 2:05 AM on October 9, 2005

I just read that this morning - crazy.
posted by Marquis at 1:49 AM on October 10, 2005

Chris Wilson released after paying through the nose.

You know, I'm no big fan of the porn for gore thing, but I also don't think he should be in jail over this.
posted by Joey Michaels at 8:28 PM on October 12, 2005