Iraqi security forces have had a growing impact on terrorist operations. This largely goes unreported, but the Iraqi police and soldiers, especially the elite counter-terror units, have interrupted many terror attacks, and arrested many terrorists. Aware of the corruption of the courts and regular police, the counter-terror units will often just kill key terrorists during raids, rather than risk the prisoner bribing his way to freedom. This is also an unofficial policy in some American operations, and official policy when missile armed UAVs are used.
We get enough intel and the risk of further friendly casualties is far enough above zero that we're just killing people out of hand when in the past we might have sought to capture them. Congratulations lawfare participants in the media and legal professions. Their blood is on your hands.
If you are trying to make a general point the Iraq situation could not be a worse example.
ReplyDeleteYou do understand there is serious Sunni/Shiite conflict with the old regime's Sunni minority rule in conflict with the Iranian backed Shiite government.
As to the general case I disagree that acting like lawless barbarians is preferable to laws governing the actions taken by combatants.
PenGun - Your comment is a great example of the problem and how the self-righteous ensure the body count is higher than strictly necessary. Within the laws of war, ie legitimate "actions taken by combatants" there is a lot of room for prudential judgment in the matter of capture v. killing. You can set up a raid scenario that is designed to generate prisoners or one that is designed to kill the enemy in preference to generating prisoners. Both scenarios are perfectly legitimate under the laws of war.
ReplyDeleteIf you have a justice system that is honest, honorable, and functional, soldiers will move away from the kill maximizing scenarios because the chance of further friendly casualties is small and the chance of useful intelligence outweighs the risk. If you have a corrupt, poorly functioning justice system, soldiers will move away from the capture scenarios. Who wants to voluntarily choose to put a prisoner into a system that will just let him go and put him back into the fight to be captured yet again?
This isn't a Sunni/Shiite thing. The capture/kill balance is changing for all encounters, as has been predictable for years.
As I said Iraq is not a useful example. The laws being made and enforced there are sectarian in nature. As is the conflict.
ReplyDeletePerhaps you have a useful example?
PenGun - You seem to be under the impression that the nature of the conflict matters. It does not.
ReplyDeleteNo matter how sectarian, how unfair a conflict is, a justice system where people are viewed as safely out of the fight is a positive in the propensity to take prisoners. You still get a change in behavior in favor of taking prisoners. The sectarian nature of a conflict may change the baseline behavior though and that might be confusing you.
"If you have a justice system that is honest, honorable, and functional, soldiers will move away from the kill maximizing scenarios because the chance of further friendly casualties is small and the chance of useful intelligence outweighs the risk."
ReplyDeleteAs I said the situation in Iraq does not reflect the above.
I think you are confused.
The other serious problem you have is you believe in good guys and bad guys. Further you believe you are the good guys.
ReplyDeleteYour fantasy is the killer.
PenGun- Are you attacking the statistical assertion that more kills and fewer prisoners are what's happening now? Are you saying that human beings don't act this way? What, exactly, is your beef with the post?
ReplyDeleteAnd, btw, whether people are good guys or bad guys has nothing to do with the phenomenon. Bad guys take more prisoners too when they have a secure system to hold them and they're convinced the prisoners aren't going to get out to fight again. The value of prisoner intelligence is distinct from the moral values and code of the soldier who has the opportunity to take a prisoner.
Is this why your forces murdered Bin Laden?
ReplyDeleteIt was almost for sure a war crime. His daughter is one useful source and she claims they captured him almost right away and shot him about 20 minutes later.
Summery execution of a POW. Very bad practice.
About what I expect from the USA, once a great nation. Not any more.
Amazingly ... it works both ways:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/07/07/poland_s_vietnam_syndrome_in_afghanistan