Can you believe this?

[Hipshot]

Pentagon Mental Health Study Surveys Battlefield Ethics in Iraq
05-04-2007 10:29 AM
By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (Associated Press) -- A new Pentagon survey of troops in Iraq found that only 40 percent of Marines and 55 percent of Army soldiers would report a member of their unit for killing or wounding an innocent civilian.

In the first internal military study of battlefield ethics in Iraq, officials said Friday they also found that only a third of Marines and roughly half of soldiers said they believed that noncombatants should be treated with dignity.

The study also found that long and repeated deployments were increasing troop mental health problems. And it showed that more than 40 percent of Marines and soldiers said torture should be allowed to save the lives of troops.

The study was the fourth since 2003. Previous studies were more generally aimed at assessing the mental health and well-being of forces deployed in the war.

In the latest study, a mental health team visited Iraq last fall and surveyed troops, health care providers and chaplains.

"The Marine Corps takes this issue of battlefield ethics very seriously," said Lt. Col. Scott Fazekas, a Corps spokesman. "We are examining the study and its recommendations and we'll find ways to improve our approach."

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

You know I read the same thing and found it very disturbing but after I thought about it I concluded that the survey was just that, a survey. You know troops, when someone asks them a stupid question they are likely to give back a stupid answer. You also have guys that let their alligator mouths overload their tadpole -you know the rest- but when it comes to the nut cutting they do what is right. Who exactly did these "surveryors" talk to? How many times has someone come up to you and asked you to answer a few questions and you blew them off because you didn't want anything to do with them? We all have come out of situations where we were on the edge, but when things settled down reason and leadership prevailed. When I read things like the "Pentagon did this and that" I have to remind myself that those that run that five sided concrete sphincter are civilians and many have agendas.

[CPTAUSRET]

I recall a large scale op I was on in 1966, three VC were snatched and interrogated immediately, what was being done was not producing results...The three were then loaded into an ARVN helicopter, (H-34) I believe, it departed, landed not long afterwards, and the two remaining VC were talking!

I do not know if the intel received was of real value, I do know that if it was of value, American lives would have been saved! I remember it pretty vividly, so it obviously left an impression; but I rationalized it with the fact that the ARVN's conducted the interrogation, and it was after all their country!

[booker]

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

You know I read the same thing and found it very disturbing but after I thought about it I concluded that the survey was just that, a survey. You know troops, when someone asks them a stupid question they are likely to give back a stupid answer. You also have guys that let their alligator mouths overload their tadpole -you know the rest- but when it comes to the nut cutting they do what is right. Who exactly did these "surveryors" talk to? How many times has someone come up to you and asked you to answer a few questions and you blew them off because you didn't want anything to do with them? We all have come out of situations where we were on the edge, but when things settled down reason and leadership prevailed. When I read things like the "Pentagon did this and that" I have to remind myself that those that run that five sided concrete sphincter are civilians and many have agendas.

Excellent points, sir. The statistics used by the researchers will only show the differences between two groups, but will not illustrate how much each group varies. With the large sample size the signifcant results are not surprising. In order to increase the validity of this study, they would need to do additional statistical comparisons (for those stats nerds out there, Cramers v). A sample of ~ 2,000 people doesn't seem to me to be representative of the greater deployed population (as Col. Moroney said), and without a baseline prior to the start of OIF, how much can the researchers say has changed, or if differences actually exist in the non-deployed vs. deployed military population? The comparison to the rest of the military population does not allow anyone to draw sensible conclusions from the study, but hey, someone has to have an agenda. There are a lot of holes in the survey design, and given that some of the findings were "duh" findings (more marital problems related to deployment lenght ) what is the actual value of this?

[x-factor]

The survey also doesn't seem to differentiate between intentional and accidental killing of a civilian and that may have skewed the numbers. It seems to me that any given person would be much less likely to report their comrade for an accidental shooting in a firefight than for some kind of malicious or psychotic act.

[CoLawman]

One other consideration is "bravado." It seems to me, particularly with the age group consideration, that the code of silence is the expected reaction. When actually faced with something other than a hypothetical question, experience tells me that most will react contrary to this survey.

There is no consequence for answering a poll question......."I ain't no snitch!"
Our prisons are chock full of people who believed their buddies/partners would hold true to the code.

Since childhood we have been inundated with "Honest Abe", George chopping down the cherry tree, Pinocchio, and other subliminal tales and truths. (People raised as Catholic the effect is compounded due to weekly confessions) We are hardwired with the compulsion to confess!

[Scimitar]

People raised as Catholic the effect is compounded due to weekly confessions

Yip, when I was a kid Father Robert had an almost magical way of getting me to caugh up all kinds of stuff I thought I had tied down. He was always nice about it though and never got me to do to many Hail Marys, Our Fathers etc.

[Jack Moroney (RIP)]

Originally Posted by CoLawman

(People raised as Catholic the effect is compounded due to weekly confessions)

Ahh, I tease my wife about this all the time and tell her that the reason for the early baptism was not to wash away original sin but to install the "guilt" gene

[Gypsy]

From General Petraeus, posted at http://www.michaelyon-online.com/wp/values-message.htm

Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen serving in Multi-National Force-Iraq:

Our values and the laws governing warfare teach us to respect human dignity, maintain our integrity, and do what is right. Adherence to our values distinguishes us from our enemy. This fight depends on securing the population, which must understand that we—not our enemies—occupy the moral high ground. This strategy has shown results in recent months. Al Qaeda’s indiscriminate attacks, for example, have finally started to turn a substantial proportion ofthe Iraqi population against it.

In view of this, I was concerned by the results of a recently released survey conducted last fall in Iraq that revealed an apparent unwillingness on the part of some US personnel to report illegal actions taken by fellow members of their units. The study also indicated that a small percentage of those surveyed may have mistreated noncombatants. This survey should spur reflection on our conduct in combat.

I fully appreciate the emotions that one experiences in Iraq. I also know first hand the bonds between members of the ” brotherhood of the close fight. ” Seeing a fellow trooper killed by a barbaric enemy can spark frustration, anger, and a desire for immediate revenge. As hard as it might be, however, we must not let these emotions lead us—or our comrades in arrns—to commit hasty, illegal actions. In the event that we witness or hear of such actions, we must not let our bonds prevent us from speaking up.

Some may argue that we would be more effective if we sanctioned torture or other expedient methods to obtain information from the enemy. They would be wrong. Beyond the basic fact that such actions are illegal, history shows that they also are frequently neither useful nor necessary. Certainly, extreme physical action can make someone “talk;” however, what the individual says may be of questionable value. In fact, our experience in applying the interrogation standards laid out in the Army Field Manual (2-22.3) on Human Intelligence Collector Operations that was published last year shows that the techniques in the manual work effectively and humanely in eliciting information from detainees.

We are, indeed, warriors. We train to kill our enemies. We are engaged in combat, we must pursue the enemy relentlessly, and we must be violent at times. What sets us apart from our enemies in this fight, however, is how we behave. In everything we do, we must observe the standards and values that dictate that we treat noncombatants and detainees with dignity and respect. While we are warriors, we are also all human beings. Stress caused by lengthy deployments and combat is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign that we are human. If you feel such stress, do not hesitate to talk to your chain of command, your chaplain, or a medical expert.

We should use the survey results to renew our commitment to the values and standards that make us who we are and to spur re-examinat ion of these issues. Leaders, in part icular, need to discuss these issues with their troopers—and, as always, they need to set the right example and strive to ensure proper conduct. We should never underestimate the importance of good leadership and the difference it can make.

Thanks for what you continue to do. It is an honor to serve with each of you.

David H. Petraeus,

General, United States Army

Commanding

[groundup]

A couple of thoughts on this: troops in a stressful situation will probably say anything to keep bravado up. They aren't saying what they believe, they are saying it to keep them in the mindset that they are "bulletproof" ie manly men. That is just from what I have seen in stressful situations with Soldiers and Marines. Exactly what CoLawman said.

Next, Soldiers aren't taught the value of good intelligence unless they are in a designated intelligence role. We get frustrated to not see the progress - especially in this day in age of instant gratification. We - the younger folk - have grown up watching war movies where all you see is torture as a means of intelligence gathering. After all, talking to a prisoner is not a very good way to get ratings and keep the thrill in a movie. We want to think that if we were in that situation, we would act in the wrong way. Yet, we know what is right and what is wrong. In the end, we do what is right. We (the military) stress integrity through and through. I can't stand it when that is questioned

Lastly, I wonder how the left has taken this survey. Given past incidents where troops have or have not done something that puts them in the media spotlight for grotesque acts. I am sure there are many that see this as proof of something.

[The Reaper]

I was never in an designated intelligence role and I understand the value of intel. So did my teammates.

Don't make gross generalizations without a factual basis, young man.

TR

[RetPara]

Originally Posted by groundup

Next, Soldiers aren't taught the value of good intelligence unless they are in a designated intelligence role.

Bullshit. I spent a good part of my so-called adult life providing intelligence to the hi-speed low drag Operator types down to Spt Bns with a Mech Inf Bde. I've NEVER run across troops that weren't interested in learning more about the opposition. I have run across a number of company grade officers that thought they knew it all, they were the exception, not the rule. You make an unsupported generalization about the troops that I find very demeaning.