Troops Pose with Body Parts of Insurgents (here we go again...)

[Wolf424]

https://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-afghan-photos-20120418,0,6471010,full.story

The paratroopers had their assignment: Check out reports that Afghan police had recovered the mangled remains of an insurgent suicide bomber. Try to get iris scans and fingerprints for identification.

The 82nd Airborne Division soldiers arrived at the police station in Afghanistan's Zabol province in February 2010. They inspected the body parts. Then the mission turned macabre: The paratroopers posed for photos next to Afghan police, grinning while some held — and others squatted beside — the corpse's severed legs.

A few months later, the same platoon was dispatched to investigate the remains of three insurgents who Afghan police said had accidentally blown themselves up. After obtaining a few fingerprints, they posed next to the remains, again grinning and mugging for photographs.

Two soldiers posed holding a dead man's hand with the middle finger raised. A soldier leaned over the bearded corpse while clutching the man's hand. Someone placed an unofficial platoon patch reading "Zombie Hunter" next to other remains and took a picture.

The Army launched a criminal investigation after the Los Angeles Times showed officials copies of the photos, which recently were given to the paper by a soldier from the division.

"It is a violation of Army standards to pose with corpses for photographs outside of officially sanctioned purposes," saidGeorge Wright, an Army spokesman. "Such actions fall short of what we expect of our uniformed service members in deployed areas."

Wright said that after the investigation, the Army would "take appropriate action" against those involved. Most of the soldiers in the photos have been identified, said Lt. Col. Margaret Kageleiry, an Army spokeswoman.

The photos have emerged at a particularly sensitive moment for U.S.-Afghan relations. In January, a video appeared on the Internet showing four U.S. Marines urinating on Afghan corpses. In February, the inadvertent burning of copies of the Koran at a U.S. base triggered riots that left 30 dead and led to the deaths of six Americans. In March, a U.S. Army sergeant went on a nighttime shooting rampage in two Afghan villages, killing 17.

The soldier who provided The Times with a series of 18 photos of soldiers posing with corpses did so on condition of anonymity. He served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne's 4th Brigade Combat Team from Ft. Bragg, N.C. He said the photos point to a breakdown in leadership and discipline that he believed compromised the safety of the troops.

He expressed the hope that publication would help ensure that alleged security shortcomings at two U.S. bases in Afghanistan in 2010 were not repeated. The brigade, under new command but with some of the same paratroopers who served in 2010, began another tour in Afghanistan in February.

U.S. military officials asked The Times not to publish any of the pictures.

Capt. John Kirby, a Pentagon spokesman, said the conduct depicted "most certainly does not represent the character and the professionalism of the great majority of our troops in Afghanistan.... Nevertheless, this imagery — more than two years old — now has the potential to indict them all in the minds of local Afghans, inciting violence and perhaps causing needless casualties."

Kirby added, "We have taken the necessary precautions to protect our troops in the event of any backlash."

Times Editor Davan Maharaj said, "After careful consideration, we decided that publishing a small but representative selection of the photos would fulfill our obligation to readers to report vigorously and impartially on all aspects of the American mission in Afghanistan, including the allegation that the images reflect a breakdown in unit discipline that was endangering U.S. troops."

The photos were taken during a yearlong deployment of the 3,500-member brigade, which lost 35 men during that time, according to icasualties.org, a website that tracks casualties. At least 23 were killed by homemade bombs or suicide bombers.

Suicide attacks on two bases of the brigade's 1st Battalion, 508th Parachute Infantry Regiment killed six U.S. soldiers and four Afghan interpreters. The platoon whose soldiers posed for the photos was part of the battalion.

The soldier who provided the photos, and two other former members of the battalion, said in separate interviews that they and others had complained of inadequate security at the two bases.

An Army investigation into a July 2010 suicide attack in Kandahar that killed four U.S. soldiers found that senior members of the battalion had complained about security. But it concluded that force protection measures were "reasonable and prudent" in the face of limited resources.

Virtually all of the men depicted in the photos had friends who were killed or wounded by homemade bombs or suicide attacks, according to the soldier who provided the images. One paratrooper on the mission wore a bracelet bearing the name of a fallen comrade.

On the first mission, to the police station in the provincial capital of Qalat, Afghan police told the platoon that the severed legs belonged to a suicide bomber whose explosives detonated as he tried to attack a police unit, according to the soldier who provided the photos.

On the second mission, to the morgue in Qalat in late April or early May 2010, Afghan police told the platoon that explosives had detonated as three insurgents were preparing a roadside bomb.

The platoon was able to obtain some fingerprints from the corpses for a database maintained by U.S. forces, the soldier said.

The soldiers felt a sense of triumph and satisfaction, especially after learning that the insurgents had been killed by their own explosives, he said.

"They were frustrated, just pissed off — their buddies had been blown up by IEDs" — improvised explosive devices — the soldier said. "So they sort of just celebrated."

The Qalat photos were circulated among several members of the platoon, the soldier said, and soldiers often joked about them. Most of the soldiers in the photos were low-ranking — including six specialists or privates.

Col. Brian Drinkwine, then-commander of the 4th Brigade, and Lt. Col. David Oclander, then-commander of the 1st Battalion, said they were not authorized to comment on the photos.

The Pentagon declined a Times request that Army officials contact all active-duty soldiers in the photos to provide an opportunity to comment. The Times sent requests for comment by email and Facebook to seven soldiers in the photos. One, now serving in Afghanistan, declined to comment. The others did not respond.

The photos were taken during a tumultuous period in the brigade's deployment.

In January 2010, the commander of the brigade's 2nd Battalion and the battalion's top noncommissioned officer were relieved of duty and ordered home after slides with racial and sexist overtones were shown during daily PowerPoint briefings.

Separately, an Army investigation criticized Drinkwine for failing to prevent his wife from threatening and harassing some unit officers and their spouses during the deployment.

Ft. Bragg's commanding general, Lt. Gen. Frank Helmick, told the Fayetteville Observer in June 2010 that Drinkwine had created "a dysfunctional situation" in the unit. Drinkwine remained in command until after the deployment ended that August.

[BattleRattle]

And the hits just keep on comin'.

[Guest]

Snap steerpoint 0.

[SuperWSO]

Standing by for the "Not Posing with Enemy Body Parts" CBT with 15 sections and an associated classroom component. Maybe they can tie it in with the "Not contesting your Hooker bill in the hallway" CBT.

[Hacker]

I haven't even seen the "don't urinate on the dead" or the "don't have your unit flag insignia be the same as a notorious Third Reich organization" CBTs yet. These new ones must still be way down the road.

[guineapigfury]

Perhaps we should condense all of these into a "If you're not PA, make sure you stay out of the ######ing news" CBT.

[LockheedFix]

Part of me gets aggravated every time I see our guys doing dumb shit they know is against the regs for no reason. The othe part of me says, if you don't want pictures of your mangled body taken with our troops, don't blow yourself up.

[nrodgsxr]

At least the pictures are funny

[TrainerModel]

Snap steerpoint 0.

Unfortunately this is looking like the best course of action.

That said, I'm as glad as the 82nd dudes that the enemy was kind enough to dispose of themselves for us

[guineapigfury]

Edited: Decided that the pics might be NSFW.

Edited April 18, 2012 by guineapigfury

[Danger41]

It pisses me off that the LA Times felt the need to release these photos of an incident that took place nearly 2 years ago. I definitely don't think that the military should be exempt from the press, but I think they shouldn't hide behind the "we were just doing our first amendment duties" crap that will probably get Americans killed in the name of selling papers.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/wh-disappointed-la-times-published-photos-two-years-after-incident_640402.html

W.H. 'Disappointed' L.A. Times Published Photos 'Two Years After the Incident'

1:41 PM, APR 18, 2012 • BY DANIEL HALPER

Single PagePrintLarger TextSmaller TextAlerts

White House spokesman Jay Carney reacted to the publication of photos in the Los Angeles Times of U.S. soldiers posing with corpses in Afghanistan by saying the Obama administration is "disappointed.. [with] the decision to publish two years after the incident," according to a pool report.

Carney is suggesting, it would seem, that the photos might put at risk U.S. soldiers fighting the war in Afghanistan. And that, since the photos were taken two years ago, there would not seem to be pressing need for the Los Angeles Times to publish the photos while the soldiers are in that war theater.

Carney also blasted the photos themselves--at least, the actions of those American in the pictures. "[The] conduct depicted in those photographs is reprehensible and does not in any way represent the high standards of the US military," Carney told the press aboard Air Force One. "And the president certainly shares in the defense secretary's opinion that this should be investigated and those held responsible will be held accountable."

The spokesman said he was unsure whether the president had actually seen the photos in question, though Carney is sure that Obama is aware of the scandal.

[Dupe]

Separately, an Army investigation criticized Drinkwine for failing to prevent his wife from threatening and harassing some unit officers and their spouses during the deployment.

I find this far more disturbing. I can understand the macabre pics of someone actively trying to kill you in a war zone. It obviously doesn't help the cause...but I understand. I don't understand the equivalent of the WG/CC's wife going batshit crazy while the unit is away.

[Swizzle]

Yeesh, political ammo (or arrow roulette) to entice hasty withdraw upon terms not "chosen" by us?

Or troops are getting bored and doing dumb $h1t to pass the time...

[MooseAg03]

It pisses me off that the LA Times felt the need to release these photos of an incident that took place nearly 2 years ago. I definitely don't think that the military should be exempt from the press, but I think they shouldn't hide behind the "we were just doing our first amendment duties" crap that will probably get Americans killed in the name of selling papers.

I agree. If this was truly newsworthy on its own merit, why did it not come to light sooner than 2 years after the fact? Everyone is out there digging now for any bit of dirt to blow open the 'next big Afghan scandal.' All its going to do is undermine what the guys on the ground are trying to do over there and get more people killed, both our guys and Afghans. The soldier who turned to photos over says he did it to highlight a dangerous breakdown in discipline that will endanger troops? Bullshit, the only reason they are in danger is because he made these pictures public.

The "media" is such a joke these days. They are grabbing at any straw they can to make themselves relevant.

Edited April 19, 2012 by MooseAg03

[bagasticks]

digital media's a bitch.... I think my dad still has an ear from vietnam but he didnt pose with it on facebook when he removed it with his ka-bar...

The solution is not sensitivity training, rather; digital media collection training.

[StainedClass]

"The soldier who provided The Times with a series of 18 photos of soldiers posing with corpses did so on condition of anonymity...."

NS....

[guineapigfury]

"The soldier who provided The Times with a series of 18 photos of soldiers posing with corpses did so on condition of anonymity...." NS....

GO 1B should be amended to state "No cameras or snitching."

[Learjetter]

GO 1B should be amended rewritten to only state "No cameras or snitching."

FIFY

[BolterKing]

I find this far more disturbing. I can understand the macabre pics of someone actively trying to kill you in a war zone. It obviously doesn't help the cause...but I understand. I don't understand the equivalent of the WG/CC's wife going batshit crazy while the unit is away.

There was a pretty big write up on this dude and his wife a while back, he lost his command for her hijinks. She's a real piece of work.

https://www.armytimes.com/news/2010/06/ap_drinkwine_wife_bragg_bct_061110/

[DirkDiggler]

digital media's a bitch.... I think my dad still has an ear from vietnam but he didnt pose with it on facebook when he removed it with his ka-bar...

The solution is not sensitivity training, rather; digital media collection training.

LOL awesome

[SurelySerious]

Much Ado About Afghan War Photos: Sometimes men do dumb things. This is one of them, little more.

By ANN MARLOWE

Last week's U.S. military "scandal": Some young enlisted men from a platoon in the 82nd Airborne, most barely old enough to vote, posed for photos in 2010 with the remains of Afghan suicide bombers.

In some of the photos, Afghan National Police officers posed alongside U.S. troops. This group has taken the heaviest losses from suicide attacks. No American in the photos committed any atrocity or required subsequent military discipline. In fact, according to Col. Dave Oclander, who commanded the battalion that included the platoon in question, this unit was one of his best, and many of the men in the photos had performed acts of humanitarian service while deployed.

Military investigators have found that the men might have violated General Order No. 1, intended to "identify and regulate conduct which is prejudicial to good conduct and discipline of forces." Section 2f prohibits photography of "human casualties."

No one had published the photos anywhere until last week, when the good people at the Los Angeles Times decided that the world would be best served by doing so. The Pentagon had requested that the newspaper refrain since some of the men in the photos are currently deployed in Afghanistan.

By now, every bien-pensant commentator has weighed in with self-righteous indignation at this manufactured story. It symbolizes a breakdown in command, the effects of overly long and frequent overseas deployments. And somehow, although it took place two years earlier and under different senior leadership, it is of a piece with last month's alleged shooting spree by Staff Sgt. Robert Bales.

In polite circles today—meaning circles in which few people under 60 have served in uniform—the American military is seen through distorted lenses. One lens exaggerates the good characteristics of those who serve, making even the most indifferent truck mechanic or supply-chain manager a "hero." This does little for the real heroes, who have received less recognition in our Afghan and Iraq engagements than in any previous war. The other lens, measuring ordinary men and women against this impossible standard, labels every ordinary lapse of judgment as a grave indicator of the failure of a chain of command, a moral blemish, and a comfort to our enemies.

These young men should never have taken those photos. But that is the extent of their "crime."

Was the picture-posing culturally insensitive? Probably less so in Afghanistan than it would have been here. Afghans themselves have often denied Islamic burial to suicide bombers. When I was embedded with U.S. troops in Khost province several years ago, the Afghan governor allowed one bomber's body parts to be left in tree branches as a deterrent to others. The Afghan National Police—who lost 1,555 men between mid-2010 and mid-2011, according to figures reported by the Washington Post, most to improvised explosive devices and suicide attacks—hate suicide bombers as no one else does.

Afghan civilians mainly feel the same way. Like the police, they don't drive around in armored vehicles that can withstand bomb blasts. In 2011, according to United Nations figures, the Taliban killed about 2,600 civilians, 431 in suicide bombings. Just about the only Afghan to get on his high horse about the publication of the photos was the feckless president, Hamid Karzai.

Part of the issue here is also the accelerating feminization of American culture, which has caused the increasing demonization of relatively normal male behavior. Men at war demonize their enemy and enact their triumph over him symbolically. That is part of the psychology that makes them able to kill.

No, it isn't pretty, but it's not that different from the way football teams psych themselves up for games or the way that (with less physicality) a big company's sales force revs up for a new product introduction. Male aggressivity serves a purpose in a healthy society—as many of us realized for the first time when the U.S. had to fight back after 9/11.

And sometimes, men do dumb things. This is one of them, and not much more.

Ms. Marlowe, a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute, blogs at World Affairs.

A version of this article appeared April 23, 2012, on page A13 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Much Ado About Afghan War Photos.

This sounds almost too sensible.

Edited April 24, 2012 by SurelySerious

[pcola]

Part of the issue here is also the accelerating feminization of American culture, which has caused the increasing demonization of relatively normal male behavior. Men at war demonize their enemy and enact their triumph over him symbolically. That is part of the psychology that makes them able to kill.

DING DING. We have a winner.

Male aggressivity serves a purpose in a healthy society—as many of us realized for the first time when the U.S. had to fight back after 9/11.

"Male aggressivity serves a purpose in a healthy society"-- NFS. That's like saying "female compassion serves a purpose in a healthy society," or "male/female interaction serves a purpose in a healthy society."

"as many of us realized for the first time when the U.S. had to fight back after 9/11"-- Obviously not enough people realize this. Too many idealists living in lala land wishing that the world could be a better place without "male aggressivety."

And sometimes, men People do dumb things. This LA Times article is one of them, and not much more.

FIFH