FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Confusing the Face of the Enemy

by Ron Jacobs

 

During America’s war against the Vietnamese, one of the common plaints of the soldiers in the jungle was that one couldn’t tell the “enemy” from a “friend”. Eventually, this inability to differentiate turned to a frustration that changed the rules of engagement, at least unofficially. No longer were there enemies and friends among the Vietnamese. They all became the enemy to the GI in the field. It was this type of consciousness that led to atrocities like the one that happened in My Lai, where hundreds of women and children were massacred by Lt. Calley and his soldiers. Of course, many soldiers were never personally involved in slaughter on the scale of My Lai, but virtually every GI who fired a weapon in the jungle in Vietnam lives with the uncertainty of who he really killed-innocent or enemy.

As the war in Afghanistan continues, the likelihood of a similar scenario developing grows ever more likely. Already, US forces have mistakenly killed Afghanis involved in smuggling (a common way of making a living in the mountains of the region), thinking they were Taliban fighters intent on killing US soldiers. Other so-called mistakes have been made when villages were bombed because Taliban and Al-Queda fighters were believed to be residing there. When the dust had settled, however, it was discovered that only civilians had been killed by the US bombs. An American GI was recently quoted in the Washington Post when asked about his mission “That’s one of the frustrating parts of being over here,” Eddy said later with a sigh. “You can’t tell who’s who.”(5/18/02)

Besides a confusion based on the inability of foreign troops being unable to distinguish friend from foe due to the fact that they all seem to dress the same, there is the lack of understanding of local customs. A recent US helicopter attack on an Afghani wedding that killed several of the celebrants is one example. When asked about this action, the US military spokesman first tried to defend the action as a legitimate target because there had been gunfire and ” That kind of behavior is not indicative of a wedding.” When I was a kid in Pakistan, I went to a wedding of a Pakistani friend of the family and after the couple was married and the celebration begun, most of the men in attendance fired their weapons in the air several times. Indeed, it seemed that shooting weapons into the air was part of many a celebration in this part of the world.

Instead of acknowledging this, however, the US military is insisting that the target was legitimate and that “Taliban or Al-Queda” were killed. This uncertainty itself as to who was killed only emphasizes the potential of intentional mistakes such as these killings and others like it. Of course, in what can only appear even more callous than an admission that a mistake was made, the Pentagon stated that the military meant to kill the Afghanis identified as wedding celebrants by their relatives and friends. When one is on the ground in a war zone, the logic becomes one of survival. Politics do not matter much to a human who believes their life is in danger no matter what uniform s/he is wearing. The only thing that matters is killing the person who wants to kill you. Killer or corpse-neither is a desirable option.

If for this reason and no other, the US-led foreign forces must leave Afghanistan and every other place they currently roam in their attempt to keep the “natives in their place.” When US troops are not in foreign countries, they don’t get killed by fighters opposed to their presence there. It’s as simple as that. Similarily, if the United States stopped supporting the occupation of the Palestinian territories, the likelihood of a terror attack on the US by groups or individuals supporting the liberation of Palestine would decrease to virtually nothing. This is not a difficult dynamic, nor is it lacking in sense. Indeed, the current dynamic which insists on maintaining (and in some cases expanding) the US military presence around the globe and backing Israeli expansionist policies both morally and financially is the policy which lacks sense. There is little doubt that it is this imperial approach to the world that endangers us regular folks, whether we wear a uniform or not.

Ron Jacobs can be reached at: rjacobs@zoo.uvm.edu

 

 

 

Ron Jacobs is the author of Daydream Sunset: Sixties Counterculture in the Seventies published by CounterPunch Books. He lives in Vermont. He can be reached at: ronj1955@gmail.com.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

Weekend Edition
January 20, 2017
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Divide and Rule: Class, Hate, and the 2016 Election
Andrew Levine
When Was America Great?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: This Ain’t a Dream No More, It’s the Real Thing
Yoav Litvin
Making Israel Greater Again: Justice for Palestinians in the Age of Trump
Linda Pentz Gunter
Nuclear Fiddling While the Planet Burns
Ruth Fowler
Standing With Standing Rock: Of Pipelines and Protests
David Green
Why Trump Won: the 50 Percenters Have Spoken
Dave Lindorff
Imagining a Sanders Presidency Beginning on Jan. 20
Pete Dolack
Eight People Own as Much as Half the World
Roger Harris
Too Many People in the World: Names Named
Steve Horn
Under Tillerson, Exxon Maintained Ties with Saudi Arabia, Despite Dismal Human Rights Record
John Berger
The Nature of Mass Demonstrations
Stephen Zielinski
It’s the End of the World as We Know It
David Swanson
Six Things We Should Do Better As Everything Gets Worse
Alci Rengifo
Trump Rex: Ancient Rome’s Shadow Over the Oval Office
Brian Cloughley
What Money Can Buy: the Quiet British-Israeli Scandal
Mel Gurtov
Donald Trump’s Lies And Team Trump’s Headaches
Kent Paterson
Mexico’s Great Winter of Discontent
Norman Solomon
Trump, the Democrats and the Logan Act
David Macaray
Attention, Feminists
Yves Engler
Demanding More From Our Media
James A Haught
Religious Madness in Ulster
Dean Baker
The Economics of the Affordable Care Act
Patrick Bond
Tripping Up Trumpism Through Global Boycott Divestment Sanctions
Robert Fisk
How a Trump Presidency Could Have Been Avoided
Robert Fantina
Trump: What Changes and What Remains the Same
David Rosen
Globalization vs. Empire: Can Trump Contain the Growing Split?
Elliot Sperber
Dystopia
Dan Bacher
New CA Carbon Trading Legislation Answers Big Oil’s Call to Continue Business As Usual
Wayne Clark
A Reset Button for Political America
Chris Welzenbach
“The Death Ship:” An Allegory for Today’s World
Uri Avnery
Being There
Peter Lee
The Deep State and the Sex Tape: Martin Luther King, J. Edgar Hoover, and Thurgood Marshall
Patrick Hiller
Guns Against Grizzlies at Schools or Peace Education as Resistance?
Randy Shields
The Devil’s Real Estate Dictionary
Ron Jacobs
Singing the Body Electric Across Time
Ann Garrison
Fifty-five Years After Lumumba’s Assassination, Congolese See No Relief
Christopher Brauchli
Swing Low Alabama
Dr. Juan Gómez-Quiñones
La Realidad: the Realities of Anti-Mexicanism
Jon Hochschartner
The Five Least Animal-Friendly Senate Democrats
Pauline Murphy
Fighting Fascism: the Irish at the Battle of Cordoba
Susan Block
#GoBonobos in 2017: Happy Year of the Cock!
Louis Proyect
Is Our Future That of “Sense8” or “Mr. Robot”?
Charles R. Larson
Review: Robert Coover’s “Huck out West”
David Yearsley
Manchester-by-the-Sea and the Present Catastrophe
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail