Justice Served in Afghanistan?


The New York Times recently reported that Staff Sgt. Robert Bales will plead guilty to the murder of 16 Afghan civilians. It is believed to be part of a plea bargain arrangement worked out between his lawyer and the US government. The Army had been seeking the death penalty, and it is understood that a plea of guilty will spare Sgt Bales his life.

The murder of 16 local Afghans is believed to be the worst case of civilian slaughter blamed on a single U.S. soldier since the Vietnam War. At a pre-trial hearing, the prosecution stated that on the evening of March 10-11, 2012, Sgt. Bales went from house to house firing his weapon with intent to kill. Children were shot through the thighs or in the head. At one point during the massacre 11 bodies, mostly women and children, were “put in a pile and put on fire.” The prosecutor said that the carnage was so violent that when Sgt. Bales finally returned to base the blood of his victims had seeped all the way through his uniform and down to his underwear.

John Henry Browne, Sgt. Bales’ lawyer, said his client was “crazed” and “broken” when he walked off base in Kandahar Province in southern Afghanistan and attacked the residents of two quiet nearby villages.

How a lone sergeant was able to walk off an army base in the middle of the night and in the middle of a hostile zone, unmolested and unnoticed, fully armed and fully loaded, attack a nearby village and murder several civilians, return to the army base, wake up a fellow soldier, confess to what he had done, leave the base for a second time, once more unmolested and unnoticed, go to a different nearby village, murder even more Afghan civilians, and then return to the base without anyone knowing or suspecting that anything was wrong has never been fully explained.

Sgt Bales was on his fourth combat tour. His defense attorney says that he was suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and had suffered a traumatic brain injury. Witnesses from the camp also reported that Sgt. Bales, a decorated veteran of combat tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, had been upset over an incident that occurred 2 days earlier when an improvised explosive device (IED) exploded, resulting in one US soldier losing the lower part of a leg. Unfortunately for Sgt. Bales, his attorney said that his mental state at the time did not rise to the level of “legally insane” and thus wouldn’t help him avoid a possible death sentence.

There are also reports that Sgt. Bales was drinking alcohol, snorting Valium and had been taking steroids before the attack. Once more, how this behaviour (if true) was allowed to happen on an army base in the middle of a hostile zone has never been fully explained.

So in the end one sergeant will plead guilty to the murder of 16 Afghan civilians. Clearly a case of justice being served, is it not?

The US is in its 12th year of war in Afghanistan (longer than the Soviet Union’s campaign). A key component of US strategy in the Afghanistan / Pakistan theatre, or “AfPak” as the area is commonly known, is drones. The Pentagon has about 7,000 at its disposal, with not all of them being for attack purposes. For several years now, a sustained targeted drone campaign has been carried out in an effort to weaken the “insurgents” (i.e. local Afghan resistance). Since 2010 alone, at least 1100 weapons have been fired from drones in Afghanistan (as of February of this year the US military no longer gives out data on individual drone strikes in Afghanistan). The CIA even has its own private fleet of attack drones. Estimates put the number of strikes carried out by the CIA in Pakistan at 369 (317 carried out during the Obama presidency). These have reportedly killed anywhere from 411 to 884 civilians and between 168 and 197 children.

A question can be asked. Who is being held accountable for the deaths of literally hundreds if not thousands of civilians killed in drone attacks carried out by the US government?


If we lived in a correct and just society, and respected the principles put forth in the founding charter of the UN, Sgt. Bales would not be the only one going to prison.

He would be joined by President Obama and his administration as well as President Bush and his administration.

All of whom could easily be considered as war criminals.

It appears that once more America’s varying standards of justice are blindingly on display.

In what can only be called the “Inverse Nuremberg Principle,” if a front line US soldier massacres innocent civilians he can expect to be executed or spend the rest of his life in prison.

If the President of the United States massacres innocent civilians he can expect to have a library named after him or win a Nobel Peace Prize.

Tom McNamara is an Assistant Professor at the ESC Rennes School of Business, France, and a Visiting Lecturer at the French National Military Academy at Saint-Cyr Coëtquidan, France


“AF removes RPA airstrike number from summary” by Brian Everstine, March 8, 2013, Air Force Times. Accessed at:


“Army Seeks Death Penalty in Afghan Massacre” by Kirk Johnson, November 13, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:


“Bales to plead guilty to Afghan massacre” By Gene Johnson, May 30, 2013. The Associated Press, reported in Navy Times. Accessed at:


“Death from afar” The Economist, November 3rd-9th, 2012. Accessed at:


“Erased US data shows 1 in 4 missiles in Afghan airstrikes now fired by drone” by Alice K. Ross, March 12th, 2013, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Accessed at:


“Get the Data: Obama’s terror drones” by Chris Woods, February 4, 2012, The Bureau of Investigative Journalism. Accessed at:


“Predator Drones and Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)” September  26, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/u/unmanned_aerial_vehicles/index.html

“Pretrial Hearing Starts for Soldier Accused of Murdering 16 Afghan Civilians” by Kirk Johnson, November 5, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:


“Prosecutors seek death for U.S. soldier charged in Afghan rampage” by Bill Rigby, November  5, 2012, Reuters. Accessed at:


“Prosecution Cites Revenge as Motive for Afghan Massacre” by Neal Karlinsky and Luis Martinez, November 5, 2012, ABC News. Accessed at:


“Principles of International Law Recognized in the Charter of the Nüremberg Tribunal and in the Judgment of the Tribunal, 1950” Report of the International Law Commission covering its Second Session, 5 june – 29 July 1950, Document A/1316. Accessed at:


“Soldier Is Expected to Plead Guilty in Afghan Massacre” by James Dao, May 29, 2013, The New York Times. Accessed at:


“The Moral Case for Drones” by Scott Shane, July 14, 2012, The New York Times. Accessed at:


“The Charter of the United Nations” June 26, 1945. Accessed at:


“U.S. hearing on Kandahar massacre to include video testimony from Afghans” by Laura L. Myers, October 12, 2012, Reuters. Accessed at:


Tom McNamara is an Assistant Professor at the ESC Rennes School of Business, France, and a former Visiting Lecturer at the French National Military Academy at Saint-Cyr, Coëtquidan, France.

November 24, 2015
Dave Lindorff
An Invisible US Hand Leading to War? Turkey’s Downing of a Russian Jet was an Act of Madness
Mike Whitney
Turkey Downs Russian Fighter to Draw NATO and US Deeper into Syrian Quagmire
Walter Clemens
Who Created This Monster?
Patrick Graham
Bombing ISIS Will Not Work
Lida Maxwell
Who Gets to Demand Safety?
Eric Draitser
Refugees as Weapons in a Propaganda War
David Rosen
Trump’s Enemies List: a Trial Balloon for More Repression?
Eric Mann
Playing Politics While the Planet Sizzles
Chris Gilbert
“Why Socialism?” Revisited: Reflections Inspired by Einstein’s Article
Charles Davis
NSA Spies on Venezuela’s Oil Company
Michael Barker
Democracy vs. Political Policing
Barry Lando
Shocked by Trump? Churchill Wanted to “Collar Them All”
Cal Winslow
When Workers Fight: the National Union of Healthcare Workers Wins Battle with Kaiser
Norman Pollack
Where Does It End?: Left Political Correctness
David Macaray
Companies Continue to Profit by Playing Dumb
Binoy Kampmark
Animals in Conflict: Diesel, Dobrynya and Sentimental Security
Dave Welsh
Defiant Haiti: “We Won’t Let You Steal These Elections!”
November 23, 2015
Vijay Prashad
The Doctrine of 9/11 Anti-Immigration
John Wight
After Paris: Hypocrisy and Mendacity Writ Large
Joseph G. Ramsey
No Excuses, No Exceptions: the Moral Imperative to Offer Refuge
Patrick Cockburn
ISIS Thrives on the Disunity of Its Enemies
Andrew Moss
The Message of Montgomery: 60 Years Later
Jim Green
James Hansen’s Nuclear Fantasies
Robert Koehler
The Absence of History in the Aftermath of Paris
Dave Lindorff
The US Media and Propaganda
Dave Randle
France and Martial Law
Gilbert Mercier
If We Are at War, Let’s Bring Back the Draft!
Alexey Malashenko
Putin’s Syrian Gambit
Binoy Kampmark
Closing the Door: US Politics and the Refugee Debate
Julian Vigo
A Brief Genealogy of Disappearance and Murder
John R. Hall
Stuck in the Middle With You
Barbara Nimri Aziz
McDonalds at 96th Street
David Rovics
At the Center of Rebellion: the Life and Music of Armand
Weekend Edition
November 20-22, 2015
Jason Hirthler
Paris and the Soldiers of the Caliphate: More War, More Blowback
Sam Husseini
The Left and Right Must Stop the Establishment’s Perpetual War Machine
Mike Whitney
Hillary’s War Whoop
Pepe Escobar
In the Fight Against ISIS, Russia Ain’t Taking No Prisoners
Ajamu Baraka
The Paris Attacks and the White Lives Matter Movement
Andrew Levine
The Clintons are Coming, the Clintons are Coming!
Linda Pentz Gunter
Let’s Call Them What They Are: Climate Liars
Paul Street
Verging on Plutocracy? Getting Real About the Unelected Dictatorship
Nur Arafeh
Strangling the Palestinian Economy
Patrick Howlett-Martin
The Paris Attacks: a Chronicle Foretold
Vijay Prashad
Rebuilding Syria With BRICS and Mortar
Brian Cloughley
Why US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter is the Biggest Threat to World Peace