Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

[ArcticLight]

Army: Soliders charged in Afghan deaths kept body parts
By MARTHA KANG
KOMO-TV

At least two of the five Army soldiers charged in the deaths of three Afghan civilians had kept body parts taken from Afghan corpses, according to documents released by the Army on Wednesday.

Five soldiers -- Staff Sgt. Calvin R. Gibbs, Spc. Adam C. Winfield, Spc. Jeremy Morlock and Spc. Michael S. Wagon, II, Pfc. Andrew Holmes-- have been charged with premeditated murder. The soldiers are accused of killing three civilians using guns and grenades, even though they faced no immediate threat.

Gibbs, the most senior of the charged members, was found in possession of "finger bones, leg bones and a tooth taken from Afghan corpses," charging papers said, and Wagon was found with a skull taken from an Afghan corpse.

Investigators said Morlock and Gibbs, in an attempt to derail the investigation, displayed the finger bones while threatening to kill another man "if he spoke about hashish use within the platoon to command and law enforcement authorities," the document said.

Gibbs is also accused of instructing a soldier to "lie to CID investigators when questioned about (his) platoon's involvement in drug use and the unlawful killings of Afghan non-combatants," the document said.

Investigators said Gibbs also threatened the soldier by saying, "I'm going to send you home by dropping a tow bar on you." Holmes and Winfield have been charged with wrongful use of hashish.

Detectives allege Wagon tried to get rid of evidence in the case by "obtaining a computer hard drive, and asking another soldier to erase incriminating evidence from the hard drive," his charging paper said.

Gibbs' laywer has said Gibb denies having taken any part in the alleged conspiracy. Gibbs was deployed to the Forward Operating Base in Ramrod, Afghanistan, to find and dispose of fragmentary grenades.

A Joint Base spokeswoman has said charges filed against Morlock involve three separate incidents between January and May; however, it was not clear whether all charged soldiers are accused in all three incidents.

Seven other members of the Army unit based at Lewis-McChord have been under investigation for the Afghan civilian deaths, but only the five mentioned above have been charged with premeditated murder.

 

[High Binder]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

Would be cool if they weren't civilians. That's like keeping a feather from a chicken you ate, or the tail of a rattlesnake you found dead on the road, pretty weak trophy.

 

[CDiPrecision]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

The problem with a case like this is, whats a civilian over there?.. most are militants, and a threat.. technically the terrorists were killing are civilians too.. so its as clear as mud.

 

[1812]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: News Story</div><div class="ubbcode-body">...charged with wrongful use of hashish.</div></div>

As opposed to what? Wrightful use of hashish? Of course in today's Army I'm sure you can use that shit so long as you've got a prescription for it, seeing as they allow people on anti depressents and all sorts of other stuff to serve in theater.

Either way, I reserve judgement on these kind of cases untill all the facts come out, which they never do, so I have no opinion except to say my gut is to side with the folks over there trying to do the damn job despite a command that does whatever it can to hinder success.

If you're smoking drugs and killing people who aren't out to kill you then that's no bueno. We have nothing right now but charges, which mean little. Either way the media is the last place this story belongs.

 

[King-Kong]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

This pretty much a makes whole army look bad.

Not only army but whole western word. Its alway couple of guys that make stupid things and destroys pretty much everything that has been accomplished so far.

Its not a war that can be won whit guns only. Its a more about peoples minds.

Just my opinion like it or not.

 

[GunGal79]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

I am not so concerned about the smoking of a little hashish but carrying around body parts of your enemy is a bit strange is it not?

 

[Guest]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1812</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
As opposed to what? Wrightful use of hashish? </div></div>

It's possible.
Or at least it was in the 70's.

 

[Krav69]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: GunGal79</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I am not so concerned about the smoking of a little hashish but carrying around body parts of your enemy is a bit strange is it not? </div></div>

Not.

More than one serviceman has been known to carry around enemy body parts, especially ears.

I won't tell stories, but when you have a plethora of bodies, like in Somalia, and a buddy has a guy spanking his wife back home, well, a mailed ear or two generally gets the point across.

Mostly the left ears, too.

 

[Bob Shaver]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

Guess I better not wear that ear necklace around any more...

 

[shootist2004]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

there's a scene in Platoon with a guy cutting off an ear. didnt notice it till the 10th time I watched it! Its right after ssgt barnes gets shot by charlie sheen....

 

[ZLBubba]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

This story just keeps getting worse. Where was the PSG in all this? Was there no other viable NCO leadership here to step in and both stop hash smoking (no fucking way I'd take a high dude outside the wire with me), and the mutilation? Sure, the butter bar doesn't know what's going on, let alone have the balls to step in, but I'm surprised another NCO didn't intervene.

If the allegations against Gibbs are true, he's a disgrace to the NCO corps, and a sociopath.

 

[ArcticLight]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KingKong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its not a war that can be won whit guns only. Its a more about peoples minds.

Just my opinion like it or not. </div></div>

That's the entire reason we are NOT winning over there.

Look, we bombed the living shit out of Germany and Japan and they surrendered, it WORKS if you are willing to ignore CNN and rally America.

If we got attacked again like 9/11 - Send the B52's night and day and let them remove the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Otherwise you simply CANNOT win under any circumstance - you cannot change an ideology and win a war against islam.

either they want their own freedom bad enough to fight for it or they go back to taliban rule, either way I don't give a shit - just bring our boys home.

 

[ZLBubba]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KingKong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its not a war that can be won whit guns only. Its a more about peoples minds.

Just my opinion like it or not. </div></div>

That's the entire reason we are NOT winning over there.

Look, we bombed the living shit out of Germany and Japan and they surrendered, it WORKS if you are willing to ignore CNN and rally America.

If we got attacked again like 9/11 - Send the B52's night and day and let them remove the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Otherwise you simply CANNOT win under any circumstance - you cannot change an ideology and win a war against islam.

either they want their own freedom bad enough to fight for it or they go back to taliban rule, either way I don't give a shit - just bring our boys home.

</div></div>

I usually like your posts, but this one is WAY off-base. The war in Afghanistan is vastly different from WWII. There's a difference between wars by nations (like WWII), and wars against non-state actors (terrorist groups, drug cartels, etc). Trying to fit a conflict like Afghanistan into your paradigm will not work. There's not a military planner in the world, not at the Pentagon, National Security Council, or in-country that would condone your approach. Here's why:

The biggest issue with your outlook on Afghanistan is that you're talking about it as a unified nation. It simply is not. Between the Uzbeks and the Tajiks in the north, the Hazaras in the west, the Pashtuns everywhere else, there's no common Afghan identity. It's not a nation the way we are. It's like looking at the American West in 1800 and talking about the Indians. Most aren't allied, most don't have any conception of unity, thus grouping them together makes no sense. Like the Indians of the West, most Afghans just want to continue their tribal way of life by their own laws and customs. That's why Al Qaeda made a safe haven in A-stan, they didn't bother the neighbors while they were planning 9/11, and many were old buddies from the Soviet resistance days. This idea of a unified Afghanistan is a western conception, not theirs. Hell, most Pashtuns don't even recognize the border between Pakistan and A-stan because to them, the whole region is the Pashtun homeland.

Afghanistan's a disaster, especially since it took eight years for us to give a damn about that war. No wonder, right? The vast majority of Afghans don't give a shit about justice, or freedom, or democracy because they've never had it, don't know what it is, or why it's worth fighting for. Those words are thrown around by political scientists and professors but mean very little contextually to people that are struggling to eat.

Furthermore, corruption is the real enemy in Afghanistan, and unless we're going to bomb Kabul and all of Karzai's administration to hell, nothing will change. So, in light of all this, don't promote a bombing campaign. That will only give us more dudes to help plant IEDs. Bombing will not win us anything, and will cost a hell of a lot of money and inspire the next generation of terrorists. I don't know if A-stan's got much of a chance anyway, but McCrystal and Petraeus' strategy is the only way it will happen without brokering a power-sharing deal with the Taliban. And let's be honest, earnest implementation and execution of Petraeus' strategy is spotty at best. You can't train a military to be warriors for decades and then expect them to become diplomats overnight.

 

[Mustafa]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ZLBubba</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: ArcticLight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: KingKong</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its not a war that can be won whit guns only. Its a more about peoples minds.

Just my opinion like it or not. </div></div>

That's the entire reason we are NOT winning over there.

Look, we bombed the living shit out of Germany and Japan and they surrendered, it WORKS if you are willing to ignore CNN and rally America.

If we got attacked again like 9/11 - Send the B52's night and day and let them remove the mountains between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Otherwise you simply CANNOT win under any circumstance - you cannot change an ideology and win a war against islam.

either they want their own freedom bad enough to fight for it or they go back to taliban rule, either way I don't give a shit - just bring our boys home.

</div></div>

I usually like your posts, but this one is WAY off-base. The war in Afghanistan is vastly different from WWII. There's a difference between wars by nations (like WWII), and wars against non-state actors (terrorist groups, drug cartels, etc). Trying to fit a conflict like Afghanistan into your paradigm will not work. There's not a military planner in the world, not at the Pentagon, National Security Council, or in-country that would condone your approach. Here's why:

The biggest issue with your outlook on Afghanistan is that you're talking about it as a unified nation. It simply is not. Between the Uzbeks and the Tajiks in the north, the Hazaras in the west, the Pashtuns everywhere else, there's no common Afghan identity. It's not a nation the way we are. It's like looking at the American West in 1800 and talking about the Indians. Most aren't allied, most don't have any conception of unity, thus grouping them together makes no sense. Like the Indians of the West, most Afghans just want to continue their tribal way of life by their own laws and customs. That's why Al Qaeda made a safe haven in A-stan, they didn't bother the neighbors while they were planning 9/11, and many were old buddies from the Soviet resistance days. This idea of a unified Afghanistan is a western conception, not theirs. Hell, most Pashtuns don't even recognize the border between Pakistan and A-stan because to them, the whole region is the Pashtun homeland.

Afghanistan's a disaster, especially since it took eight years for us to give a damn about that war. No wonder, right? The vast majority of Afghans don't give a shit about justice, or freedom, or democracy because they've never had it, don't know what it is, or why it's worth fighting for. Those words are thrown around by political scientists and professors but mean very little contextually to people that are struggling to eat.

Furthermore, corruption is the real enemy in Afghanistan, and unless we're going to bomb Kabul and all of Karzai's administration to hell, nothing will change. So, in light of all this, don't promote a bombing campaign. That will only give us more dudes to help plant IEDs. Bombing will not win us anything, and will cost a hell of a lot of money and inspire the next generation of terrorists. I don't know if A-stan's got much of a chance anyway, but McCrystal and Petraeus' strategy is the only way it will happen without brokering a power-sharing deal with the Taliban. And let's be honest, earnest implementation and execution of Petraeus' strategy is spotty at best. You can't train a military to be warriors for decades and then expect them to become diplomats overnight. </div></div>

Spot on except for two points, one very minor, one not so minor, but I think you'll agree. First, Hazara live in the center, not the west (they are my favorite because they don't shoot at me!). Second, Afghans really DO care about justice and freedom and democracy; we just don't see it because it is different from our model. In traditional Afghan society, the Shura is the basic governing body. They make decisions for the village, valley, tribe, or whatever area or group they represent. Shura members are elected though. Not through ballots and electoral colleges, but by getting everyone together at the local Friday mosque, sitting around the talking about it till consensus is reached. There is your democracy right there. As for freedom, they see freedom as the ability to work their lands, raise their children, worship how they want, and be free from outside interference and violence. They just don't see anyone as offering that. As for justice...that is a very big issue here. The Taliban is resurgent not because they are militarily strong, or super well funded, or the people are buying their idealogy, it is because they offer justice and security. The Afghan government (GIRoA) is notoriously corrupt, especially among the police and judicial system. That being said, people would rather go to the local Taliban shadow government to get a fair hearing that is over in a few days and costs nothing than spend months on GIRoA and a ton of money you can ill afford to waste on bribes, all for a judgement based on who gave the judge the best "gift."

I can't even begin to tell you how frustrating it is to be working out here at the RC level and KNOW that we are losing because of GIRoA and their corruption that they are completley unwilling to address. When do we decide to pull the plug on GIRoA and try a NEW gov't here? The Afghan National Army are the most respected organization in the country and they already have all the guns....I"m just sayin'.....

 

[ZLBubba]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

Apologies for the gross generalizations, I wanted to get beyond the geographical stuff to the real meat of the debate. The shura system is certainly a form of democracy, but democracy is not synonymous with justice or freedom. What I was trying to say, and what I think you agree with, is that the Afghans have had a functioning system for centuries that differs greatly from our own. Afghanistan thrives far better as a loose confederation than as a unified nation-state. The shura system, applied through clans and tribes, settles disputes and governs well in this environment.

The classic mantra of development work ("Do not promise what you cannot deliver") has come back to bite us. In 2002 after the destruction of Taliban 1.0, the Afghans looked to us with enormously high expectations. We began to make promises that the public wanted to hear: more jobs, better education, infrastructure, good governance. Then... Iraq happened. In the vacuum between our promises of 2002 and our rededication to A-stan in 2008, the Taliban re-grouped and secured large swaths of the country.

Dave Kilcullen attributes their success to their PSYOP/IO campaign more than any tactical changes. They capitalized on unfulfilled promises, settled local disputes, and used civilian casualties and GIRoA incompetence to gain public support. Where that didn't work, they used intimidation and violence since the ANA and the police were unable or unwilling to secure the people. That's a decisive tactic, and that's precisely why it's so hard to dislodge them now.

Afghanistan can't be won without a viable, legitimate host nation ally. That ally isn't the Karzai administration. We can have the best COIN strategy in the world, but that strategy will fail if the population cannot trust and support the governing body in Kabul.

 

[RJW]

Re: Soldier charged with keeping enemy body parts

Very simple, both are totally unacceptable. If I had ever caught any of my men mutilating or smoking that shit, jail time would have been the least of their problems, after I got done with them.