Friday, April 30, 2004
US soldiers charged over prisoner abuse, while their supervising officers go free
I’m no expert in military/war-crime law, but I always thought that the point of the Nuremberg Trials, et al was to nab those in charge – and the more senior, the better.
Like so much else in the life of GenX, though, it appears that the ground rules have now changed.
That the most senior person to be criminally prosecuted for the abuse is an army reservist should itself be a crime. But out there in US Army Officer Boomer-land (I’m guessing), they’ve sure finessed the art of the pre-emptive-strike-cum-legal-defence. The supervising officers did not – of course – authorise the torture etc. In fact, they did not do anything at all:
"We had no support, no training whatsoever, and I kept asking my chain of command for certain things, rules and regulations, and it just wasn't happening," [army reserve Staff Sergeant Chip] Frederick said.
But hey, that’s the boomer prerogative, isn’t it – getting handsomely paid for doing nothing, while others do the dirty work?
I’m no expert in military/war-crime law, but I always thought that the point of the Nuremberg Trials, et al was to nab those in charge – and the more senior, the better.
Like so much else in the life of GenX, though, it appears that the ground rules have now changed.
That the most senior person to be criminally prosecuted for the abuse is an army reservist should itself be a crime. But out there in US Army Officer Boomer-land (I’m guessing), they’ve sure finessed the art of the pre-emptive-strike-cum-legal-defence. The supervising officers did not – of course – authorise the torture etc. In fact, they did not do anything at all:
"We had no support, no training whatsoever, and I kept asking my chain of command for certain things, rules and regulations, and it just wasn't happening," [army reserve Staff Sergeant Chip] Frederick said.
But hey, that’s the boomer prerogative, isn’t it – getting handsomely paid for doing nothing, while others do the dirty work?
