MarkBenjamin

Rolling Stone’s Grisly “Kill Team” Photos: The Tip of the Iceberg?

Rolling Stone has published a trove of grisly photos from a now infamous case of a small group of U.S. soldiers who allegedly murdered Afghan civilians early last year.

This case made headlines last summer when the Army charged five soldiers in the murders of three unarmed Afghan civilians. In a particularly morbid twist, the alleged ringleader in that case, Staff Sgt. Calvin Gibbs, is accused of severing the fingers off at least one of the corpses and keeping the digits as war trophies.

The Army found out about the murders last May, when one member of the unit told investigators about the killings and alleged drug use among his fellow soldiers. The troops served in B Company, 2nd Battalion, 1st Infantry Regiment, 2nd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division.

Last week, one of the soldiers, Spc. Jeremy Morlock, was sentenced to 24 years in prison for his role in the killings. He is expected to testify against several others, including Gibbs.

At least according to the Army, this was a case of Gibbs and a small band of comrades going rogue and murdering civilians in cold blood. The Army says Gibbs devised cover stories and used so-called drop weapons to cover his tracks after shooting unarmed civilians or blowing them up with grenades.

Watch for the headlines to change, however, as the case progresses against Gibbs and the others. The press will start to ask tough questions about how superior officers managed the unit, and whether failed leadership might have contributed to what happened in Afghanistan.

Related Topics: Afghanistan
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / White House

    Obama’s Persuasive Powers on Gay Marriage Manifest in Maryland

    When President Obama endorsed gay marriage earlier this month, the media grappled with two basic political questions: Was his personal “evolution” a case of  a politician transparently following a national trend toward accepting same-sex unions (accelerated, perhaps, by his chatty number two), and would it hurt his re-election chances by alienating socially conservative voters like black churchgoers? Sure, there was a recognition that it marked a gratifying moment for gay marriage advocates—as well as some grumbling about the President’s view that it remains a state issue, not a federal one. But by and large, there were few suggestions that one man, even the President, would shift public opinion on the issue or affect public policy. Based on a new Public Policy Polling survey out of Maryland, it seems this possibility was underestimated.

    Lewis Eisenberg, Major Romney Donor, Accuses Obama Of Demonizing Wall StreetHuffPost Politics

    Cherokee Zero

    Apparently, Massachusetts voters don’t mind that Elizabeth Warren foolishly identified herself as a Native American early in her academic career–it was, apparently, a case of family pride and wishful thinking about a Cherokee ancestor. That’s good. Warren may be the best public figure when it comes to explaining the depredations of the financial industry and [...]

  • nflfoghorn

    How much of this is W’s fault and how much is BO’s?
    .
    Don’t play that game.
    .
    Gutless wonders with soldiers’ uniforms did it.
    .
    Thank you for your service. Now enjoy your jail cell.

  • allthingsinaname

    I wonder how much the all-volunteer Military has to do with these kinds of things. I know there are tremendous young men and women who joined, but the military, I think, must be accepting applicants that they probably wouldn’t otherwise accept.

  • nflfoghorn

    Tiny amount of priests are pedophiles – same thing.

  • libssd

    We shouldn’t be surprised — disappointed, yes — when people trained to kill sometimes step over the line.
    .
    To the credit of our military, these perps are being prosecuted. I am sure they are far from alone, and I hope that they are an aberration, but even in the mostly highly disciplined force, things like this are going to happen, as they do in every conflict. Behavior like this is never acceptable, but always predictable.

  • afguy

    Or, allthings, they assume like some here do that, because it is an “all-volunteer” force, the people are by definition “professionals” and do not need the oversight they would have needed previously.
    .
    There’s a moral component that seems to be missing. I didn’t need a superior to tell me that certain things were just “wrong”.
    .
    And I can’t believe that something like this would have gone “unnoticed” by those above.
    .
    Has the thresh-hold of “acceptability” changed somewhat during this hellishly-long war, without anyone really noticing?

  • http://www.124monkeys.com Sean DeCoursey forgot his password

    It’ll stop with Gibbs. Abu Ghraib ended with an E6 taking the hit for the Bush/Cheney torture doctrine. The guy who covered up and lied about Pat Tillman’s tragic death ended up getting command of Afghanistan for awhile (McChrystal). Accountability for senior military leaders just doesn’t exist right now.

  • Jim Putnam

    libssd, if it’s predictable, it’s also preventable if the officers and senior NCO’s of the organization are a) doing their job, b) care, and c) aren’t involved in it themselves. At some point there has to be some senior person held responsible before acts such as these will stop.

  • afguy

    Jim,
    .
    Career-wise, one can NEVER admit one knew about it, because, once you do, you know what the next question would be…
    .
    WHY didn’t you do something about it?
    .
    I’ve even run into senior NCO’s and officers who, when you tried to tell them about something that was NOT right, just threw up their hands and said “I don’t wanna hear about it”.
    .
    Stuff like that happens more when the events are still not publicly known and the machinery of the unit is otherwise running smoothly.
    .
    No one wants to upset any organizational “apple carts”, especially their own.

  • formerlyjames

    Isolated or not, of course it is predictable, and that predictability is derived from actual experience in every war. The greatest failure is insufficient emphasis on the issue in training. Same with Abu Ghraib. In every case, even though isolated, it just takes a spark and there’s serious problems. Any commander in war who isn’t aware of it is either a fool, or morally bankrupt.

  • libssd

    Jim, much as I would like to, I can’t agree that this sort of thing is preventable. Institutions can minimize, but can not eliminate barbaric behavior by rogue soldiers. All it takes is for the enemy to be dehumanized; once you cross that line, anything is possible. This is a very deep-seated behavior in our species, and the military can inculcate ethical behavior through frequent instruction or repetition, but with some people it’s just not going to stick. The best that I can hope for is that when atrocities occur, they will not be swept under the rug — which is the natural reaction of any institutional bureaucracy (e.g., McChrystal/Tillman).

    My father was an infantry private in North Africa and Italy during WWII, and had similar stories of fellow soldiers collecting “souvenirs,” usually, but not limited to ears. And, compared with what both sides did to dehumanize each other in the Pacific theater, our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq have been, overall, amazingly well behaved while trying to survive in cultures that are very alien to them.

  • gysgt213

    Jim:

    There is also the problem with senior leadership not wanting anything to come to light that might reflect poorly on the unit. Not saying that is what happen here, because there is always incompetence. I think these are some of the same problems police forces go through when the leadership is almost afraid to punish bad behavior by officers.

  • apr2563

    Vietnam was composed of a non-volunteer and volunteer army. We had Mai Lai.

  • apr2563

    What does war mean but cruelty and a loss of civilized behavior? We create a war machine and are shocked when it has nasty reprucussions.

  • afguy

    apr,
    .
    THIS is what worries me when young people have spent nearly ALL of their adult lives around death. Either killing or trying to keep from being killed.
    .
    We are in uncharted territory here due to the length of the war and the repeated deployments. I think libssd’s comment about the “dehumanization” of the enemy is spot on, and THAT’s partially to blame for this (as well as the recurring cases of accidental civilian deaths). They’re just not THAT important to us.
    .
    Vietnam was a “one tour and done” conflict as a rule. And we still had a William Calley.

  • apr2563

    Agreed afguy.

blog comments powered by Disqus