Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

One-Third of Troops in Iraq Support Torture, Majority Condone Mistreating Innocent Civilians

By Winslow Wheeler, AlterNet. Posted May 24, 2007.


A recent study shows startling findings about the widespread abuse of Iraqi civilians by U.S. troops. When the "surge" fails, will we take a hard look at ourselves in the mirror?
Advertisement

Two weeks ago, the press reported on the findings of a five-month-old study dealing with soldiers' ethics and mental health from the Office of the Surgeon General of the U.S. Army Medical Command. Some accounts focused on an alarming statistic in the executive summary of the report: 10 percent of the Soldiers and Marines interviewed reported "mistreating noncombatants (damaged/destroyed Iraqi property when not necessary or hit/kicked a noncombatant when not necessary)." The articles raised the specter of widespread mistreatment of Iraqi civilians by U.S. troops -- an issue darkly hinted at by previous -- but seemingly isolated -- reports of rape and murder, such as in Haditha, Iraq.

Some of the press accounts of the surgeon general's study, "Mental Health Advisory Team (MHAT) IV; Operation Iraqi Freedom 05-07," also reported the more detailed findings from its chapter on "Battlefield Ethics." The information became more disconcerting; the problems were clearly more serious and pervasive than the executive summary indicated:

  • "Only 47 percent of soldiers and only 38 percent of Marines agreed that noncombatants should be treated with dignity and respect."
  • "Well over a third of soldiers and Marines reported torture should be allowed, whether to save the life of a fellow soldier or Marine … or to obtain important information about insurgents…."
  • 28 percent of soldiers and 30 percent of Marines reported they had cursed and/or insulted Iraqi noncombatants in their presence.
  • 9 percent and 12 percent, respectively, reported damaging or destroying Iraqi property "when it was not necessary."
  • 4 percent and 7 percent, respectively, reported hitting or kicking a noncombatant "when it was not necessary.
  • The study also reports that only 55 percent of soldiers and just 40 percent of Marines would report a unit member injuring or killing "an innocent noncombatant," and just 43 percent and 30 percent, respectively, would report a unit member destroying or damaging private property.

It is notable that these are the responses the survey team received; there are probably more soldiers and Marines who may have been reluctant to respond completely and accurately to an Army questionnaire on such sensitive topics. Therefore, the data recorded should be regarded as a floor, not a ceiling.

Regardless of just how frequent the abuse may be beyond the survey results, these are descriptions of behaviors that can only alienate the Iraqi population against the U.S. military presence there, and against any among that population, including its politicians, who welcome or even tolerate our presence. It is not just that we are not winning; we are helping the enemy. When the historians explain why America lost the war in Iraq, this study should be prominent evidence.

Reacting to the surgeon general's devastating study, our commanding general in Iraq, David Petraeus, said he was "very concerned" and that he had been writing "a memorandum to our leaders and to our troopers to discuss these kinds of issues and to note that we can never sink to the level of the enemy" ("General to 'Re-Educate' Troops on Values," UPI, May 9, 2007). It is the kind of reaction one might expect from a politician being careful to offend no one (except Iraqis), or perhaps a bureaucrat who believes memoranda make the world go around.

If he read the entire study from the surgeon general, Petraeus probably hopes that no one else reads it. The study seeks to explain the reasons for our troops' abusive behavior, and that explanation casts devastating illumination on the logic of this war. It also provides a prospective explanation for why the "surge" of American troops in Iraq, which Petraeus has accepted as his mission, can only make things worse.

Page 38 of the surgeon general's study states that "soldiers who screened positive for a mental health problem (anxiety, depression or acute stress) were twice as likely to engage in unethical behavior (i.e., abuse of Iraqi civilians) compared to those soldiers who did not screen positive." Subsequent pages make the same point about Marines.

What causes the "anxiety, depression or acute stress" that can result in the abuse? For Army personnel, deployment tempo is a major factor: "Soldiers deployed to Iraq more than once were more likely to screen positive for acute stress," notes the report. And perhaps even more significantly, given the rotation schedule in Iraq: "Long deployment length [described as one year] continues to be the top concern for … soldiers."

The study recommended extending the period of time soldiers spend at home with their families to 18-36 months, while also decreasing the length of deployments in Iraq to under one year.

As the study noted, Marines typically deploy to Iraq for six or seven months, and the study found that "because of shorter deployments, Marines tend to have fewer deployment concerns" and the resultant stress from that cause (16). But the Marines engaged in the same "unethical" behavior toward Iraqi civilians. The study made it clear that Marines share other conditions with soldiers, especially involvement in combat.

The study categorized three levels of combat involvement: high, medium and low, as determined by how much time soldiers and Marines spent "outside the wire" of base camps, garrisons or the infamous "Green Zone" in Baghdad. The study found a "linear relationship between combat level and screening positive for anxiety, depression, acute stress and any mental health problem."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: iraq, troops, mental health, ethics

Winslow T. Wheeler is the director of the Straus Military Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information in Washington, D.C.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Time for a GENERAL STRIKE on Democrats
Posted by: Rune on May 24, 2007 1:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The smug Democrats who promised to hold Bush accountable and bring the troops home (and this article makes clear how long past time for that it is) are on the verge of sending another blank check for more war in the Middle East. They think that is the safe thing to do. Safe for their election prospects next year. Safe for their campaign contribution hustling this summer. Not safe for our troops, Iraqis, Iranians (more aircraft carriers started heading to the Gulf as soon as the Democrats announced the deal), and certainly not safe for the future of this country.

ENOUGH!

It's time to stop feeding these wolves in sheep's clothing until they learn to do our bidding, not that of war profiteers. That means:

No more campaign contributions
No more volunteering for them
No more cooperating with MoveOn, which acts as their echo chamber
And following and picketing them everywhere until they BRING THE TROOPS HOME!

They had their chance to lead. They failed us. They failed the country. And they have certainly failed our troops, even as they made self congratulating comments about making sure the troops have "their money." The money is not for the troops, it's being used to further fatten war profiteers that have already been handed billions upon billions in no bid contracts while our troops and private contractors come home in boxes or in broken condition. SHAME ON THEM.

Let's boycott these cowards until they get some backbone or we get rid of them in November 2008. Lives and what remains of our democracy are at stake.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hear hear! Except.... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Hear hear! Except.... Posted by: Truth_seeker
» RE: Hear hear! Except.... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» RE: Hear hear! Except.... Posted by: DeltaDawn
» RE: Hear hear! Except.... Posted by: SatanicJamboree
» Right wing? Posted by: Illiteratilumen
Resign your commission
Posted by: AndyF on May 24, 2007 4:32 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
From your postings it is obvious that you don't have a clue as to what the mission of the military is or how wars are really won. Killing people does not equal winning a war. You need to resign your commission and find a job that you are better qualified for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: What would Sun Tzu do?
Posted by: nebgirl on May 24, 2007 4:52 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is true you were not sent to Iraq to fix the open sewage, feed children or even to bring democracy, you were sent there to steal their oil. That makes you a thief. Stop blaming the Iraqis for the situation you are in and blame the true culprits, the U.S. government. You are being used by our government. If you don't like it then quit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: mostacks
» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: braxxian
» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: mostacks
» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: herdless
RE: What would Sun Tzu do?
Posted by: nebgirl on May 24, 2007 4:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is true you were not sent to Iraq to fix the open sewage, feed children or even to bring democracy, you were sent there to steal their oil. That makes you a thief. Stop blaming the Iraqis for the situation you are in and blame the true culprits, the U.S. government. You are being used by our government. If you don't like it then quit.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Do you know anything at all? Posted by: Conservasaurus
Armed with Candy - flowers anyone!
Posted by: Conservasaurus on May 24, 2007 5:26 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is nothing new in this article at all..These kinds of behaviors have been going on for as a long as man waged war. You will find the same or worse actions in other wars. It's not a product of IRAQ

How could one expect a 20 year old marine or soldier to say lets not torture this poor soul even though he has info that might save one of our own.. Ask the mom of that poor soldier just found murdered how she feels about torture if it would have saved her son.

To use this study to suggest that this war is causing these feeling among our military is nonsense. We should be pulling out of Iraq because American lives should not be wasted on a country unwilling to help themselves. Not becasue this study suggest that not every soldier is Mother Teresa.

You send in military to "FIGHT" a war.. send in humantarians to help the population and pass out good will.. Dont degrade out military for doing what they are trained to do! - fight!

We cannot and should not be the policemen of the world - we should not be the first country people turn to when a crises demands enormous financial resources and aid. Our military should not be wasted in a conflict with no resolution and an outcome that in 10 years everyone will not even remember..

Liberals as well as Bush are at fault here.. OUR GREATL LEADERS - all of them - went on the war path and Bin Laden is still floating around and making threats to this country. THAT is where our military should be! Let the Iraqi's continue to kill each other if they so desire..it's not our concern!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Armed with Candy - flowers anyone! Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Armed with Candy - flowers anyone! Posted by: Conservasaurus
RE: What would Sun Tzu do?
Posted by: leafsong1 on May 24, 2007 6:03 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hey, moron, nobody sent you there in the first place. If you were the slightest bit competent as a soldier you would already know that. There is no legal authority anywhere in the world to order you to participate in this massive warcrime. You weren't sent; YOU VOLUNTEERED. If you don't like it, come home yourself. But you won't come home because you do like it. You like shooting innocent people in the face; you think that's "fighting". On second thought, don't come home. You're not fit to be among us. Next time you get the urge to shoot somebody in the face, find a mirror.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: richholland
It's true, America is too soft to fight and win a war, look at the responses you've received!
Posted by: ateo on May 24, 2007 7:05 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What a bunch of cowards living in a Barney the Dinosaur fantasy world. In the real world the way you win a war of occupation is by breaking the will of the people by whatever means possible. How do you do that? You start killing people.

That is war, that is the whole reason we have a military. Do you think war doesn't involve killing people?

Well, guess what, history has shown us that in war there should be no rules if you want to win.

Americans are soft psychologically (and physically of course, what a bunch of fat bodies) and America will never win another war because of that psychological weakness.

Do you think the terrorists that wantonly kill civilians around the world give a shit what you think? Do you think red China will give a shit what you think as they are spraying America down with ethnically targeted bio-weapons?

The number one reason to flee the U.S. is not because our half assed attempt to fight our enemies has produced even more enemies, it is because when a real enemy does appear on the horizon Americans will be too fat and too psychologically soft to do anything about it other than say, "oh well" and die in the streets.

What a disgustingly weak nation.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» So, victory by genocide? Posted by: brunowe
RE: What DID Hermann Heidrich do ...
Posted by: BenCaxton12 on May 24, 2007 7:53 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
SS-Obersturmbannführer Hermann Heidrich held very similar view on getting cooperation and tactical information from the French, the Poles, the Russians, and other conquered peoples whose Resistance movements didn't know when to quit.

For his troubles, someone blew him up with an improvised explosive device.

But, the armies of the Reich persissted with his (and your) so-easily comprehensible programme for promoting Victory -- and let History judge how well THAT all worked out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: Hey Army, aren't you part of the problem?
Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive on May 24, 2007 8:10 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah yes... White Middleclass Male (amazingly bigoted!). Aren't you the same really brave soldier who related how you launched an answering mortar strike at a suspected launch point and smirkingly pointed out that it fell short and obliterated an Iraqi family. Ha,ha,ha.

I don't think we're talking to a hero here, people. This creep is exactly what this article is talking about. A psychotic KILLER! The marines would be proud to have him. KILL, KILL, KILL!
That's what it's all about...huh, hero!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"America used to win wars" - but the wars then had a POINT
Posted by: karma_ran_over_dogma on May 24, 2007 9:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Stop the pointless war & go home. Problem solved!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Typical overcompensating fake-tough "soldier"
Posted by: amatullah on May 24, 2007 11:17 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Feeling inadequate, this punk tries to make up for it by bravely attacking the unarmed and lesser-armed. Typical of the strutting micro peni who so often join the military, he can only be tough when he has 100 times the weaponry and backup forces of those he attacks. Place him on equal footing with those he fights, and he'd curl up in a fetal position and pee in his manly camo pants.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What would Sun Tzu do?
Posted by: White middleclass male on May 24, 2007 2:41 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
America used to win wars. Now we give filthy children soccer balls.

Every unit knows who the shady people are in their area. We lost those soldiers that were abducted because we did not round the resisters, shoot one in the face, and point to the muslim next to him and say “Produce our men. You have one hour”.

If America wants to deploy the military, let us fight. We are not humanitarians. I did not come to Iraq to try to fix the open sewage dike that has been in Hussianiaya (it has multiple spellings) since Nebacanezer or here how “Baby has no milk” because a sunni can not leave his neighborhood to go to the market without a shitte killing him.

If we are not needed to fight send us home.


1LT L US Army

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: Hey Army, still posting this bullshit? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» RE: What would the U.N. do? Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: What would Sun Tzu do? Posted by: LadyBoru
A recent Pew poll
Posted by: ISlamIslam on May 24, 2007 3:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A recent Pew poll found that as many as one-third of all American Muslims are supportive of al Qaeda and believe that suicide bombings can be justified. When are American Muslims going to look themselves in the mirror and quit asking why we infidels perceive them the way we do?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ACLU supports Muslims right to terrorism??? Posted by: LeftCoastProgressive
» Sickening liar Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Sickening liar Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Sickening liar Posted by: Joshua Holland
» Just to be clear ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: Just to be clear ... Posted by: zorro
» RE: STOP SHOUTING Posted by: Ghoulman
» RE: Just to be clear ... Posted by: Conservasaurus
» RE: Just to be clear ... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» So show the link to the poll Posted by: fanny666
» RE: A recent Pew poll Posted by: YogiBear
» The Pew poll was poorly done Posted by: ISlamIslam
» RE: The Pew poll was poorly done Posted by: soulrebeljc
Watch out for the goons when they do come home.
Posted by: colinmeister on May 24, 2007 3:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So we are seeing a bunch of uncaring psychotics prancing around Iraq in US uniforms, killing and torturing non-combatants without shame.

When these goons come home, watch out for the crime wave which they bring with them!

"Support our Troops"? Yeah - right...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Putting words in my mouth. Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» I wonder how many of these people Posted by: xconservative
» Very intriguing question... Posted by: Illiteratilumen
» zorro Posted by: gdonald
how bad governments bind people into intolerable situations
Posted by: Suzon on May 24, 2007 3:47 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
When George W Bush was "elected" president in 2000, war became "inevitable" for unacceptable reasons. Oil and Haliburton come easily to mind, but binding the population into supporting what they would not otherwise approve of may be even more significant.

Bad government (cruel and repressive) needs more support than good government does. Asking for a favor makes a person more supportive of you. The more you ask, the greater his or her investment in you. What more can a bad government ask than that you do bad things for it or see and not report bad things? That is probably more of a sacrifice than giving up life or limbs.

Under the guise of a war against terror, our troops were asked to become terrorists. The denial of this reality takes a lot of psychic energy. These men and women have been duped into accepting cruelty and torture as ok, but none of them have been isolated from other ideas, such as being your brother's keeper.

Forget Clinton's sexual adventures. Impeachment is not the model to follow. The Nuremberg trials are.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ideological manipulation and ignorance equals clueless remarks
Posted by: Universal on May 24, 2007 3:54 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Both whitemale and islamislam writers denigrate the Arab population with superficial and might makes right rot.
IslamIsalm, does not even realize how the corporate media and its class whores manipulate questions, relations. Therefore he easily falls for this superficial class rot, class ideology, class nationalism behind it.

If you conflate several issues within a general question, you get ambiguous answers. I am surprised that the percentage of Arabs who were willing to use terrorism was so low. You see, war itself is terrorism, and what does not get sorted out, is the fact that resistance to the occupation, whether Israeli Nazis of Palestinians, or Amerikan of Iraqis, will use guerilla style tactics, terrorism, to defeat these know nothings who come over and make false judgements.

In fact you do not go to war to go after criminal terrorists, you treat the issue as a law enforcement issue. Once you bomb innocent people as the Amerikan fascist forces are doing routinely in both Afghanistan and Iraq, and hundreds, and tens of thousands die from this fascist criminal approach, then everyone will start to resist this occupation, of course labled Al Qaida, or a terrorist.

Can you imagine some white supremacists from Germany bombing Amerikan facilities, and we go bomb France, its population, a country that not nothing to do with the event. Then the stupid rednecks justify it by saying, well they are all Arabs, (transaltion they are all Europeans), ragheads, (white crackers) so they are the same and guilty. We are creating more terrorists, more resistance to our fascism, racism, and stupidty, that both whitemaile and IslamIslam fell for. If I was an Arab, I would justify counterterrorism to the Nazi, fascist state terrorism of Amerikan Empire and Israeli Nazis.

Racism, class ideology, class manipulation of history, facts, imposed on a knownothing culture of rednecks produces these clueless remarks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Old veteran of anothe war
Posted by: RDVSR on May 24, 2007 4:00 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do the libs want to dress troops in pink, and make the wear lots of perfume to fingt a war? They should get their heads out of never never land, and realize we are at WAR! War is hell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]