Unfortunate Bi-product of War

[Purrybonker]

But it seems like justice has been somewhat less than served...

Pilot fined 2 months salary for disregarding direct orders and killing 4 Canadian soldiers in "friendly-fire incident"

It seems that the aspect of this that has been the most galling to many Canadians is the arrogance of Mr. Schmidt, both in the events of the incident itself, as well as his portrayal of himself as the "victim" in the proceedings against him.

My father was a very senior Air Force officer, and served on US and Canadian bases around the world. Mr. Schmidt's actions (and the response by the US military) seems very inconsistent with some of the tenets of either the Canadian or the US armed forces.

Whatever happened to taking responsibility for one's actions - or admitting and appologizing for one's mistakes?

[joeclarke]

Sheesh Bonker, I'm with you again - that's twice today.

JP made an excellent observation about an emerging "sense of entitlement" in today's society (can't remember the exact topic of the thread). That and a continuing decrease in the assumption of responsibility and/or accountability are amongst the two greatest and growing ills of our world.

Blatant denial of responsibility is now accepted as a creditable posture regardless of whether such posture is even vaguely credible.

[singpilot]

Joe;

You and I usually don't see things the same way. This one, we are exactly alike. This, of course begs the next question... "When did all this start?"

I figured it was Ollie North, or, more likely, our most recently impeached president.

It could probably even be traced back to Eve in the garden.

JP's argument about the "bottomless sense of entitlement" was from the 'Women are Monsters from Hell' thread.

I think that says it all.

[Rot 911]

Damn, I too am in agreement with Joe!

[singpilot]

Originally posted by joeclarke

Blatant denial of responsibility is now accepted as a creditable posture regardless of whether such posture is even vaguely credible.

In the spirit of today's political advertising...



"I am Singpilot, and I have approved this thread."

[joeclarke]

Sorry to let you guys down.

Sing - thanks for the reminder about the Monsters from Hell thread - that JP quote had me chuckling all day - he has never been so "bang on". Unfortunately that sense applies to a lot more than just women (teenagers are another handy example).

As to where this lack of willingness to be held accountable started - good question. But the difference used to be that we would hold such a posture in contempt and/or refuse to indulge it. Personally, I think that the OJ event tipped the scale in terms of our willingness to accept and even engage the now common tactic of wholesale hand washing.

[singpilot]

Joe;

The scary part is that there are a couple of new lows in process right at the minute.

-The 'trial' of Kenneth Lay.

-The 'trial' of Martha Stewart.

-The 'trial' of Slobodan Milosovich.

-The 'trial' of Scott Petersen.

-The 'trial' of Kobe Bryant.

These are just some of the trials actually going on. I am sure the trials of the prison guards in Iraq, the trials of the Yemeni terrorists that attacked the USS Cole could be added to this list. As could many more.

Fact is, none of these people are going to do any serious time.

The old deterrent of punishment for doing the crime is gone.

[techweenie]

singpilot: I don't know if it got much attention nationally, but in Orange County, three children of priviledge raped a 16-year-old they made unconscious (I will spare you the details) *on video.* And the pricey attorneys flummoxed the jury into 11:1 for acquittal (or so I heard).

It was a hung jury, and the case is being retried.

California law only requires that a woman be able to say 'no' in order for her *not saying no* to be consent. So you'd think this case would have been a slam dunk.

The woman (she's now 18) has been offered a $2.5 million settlement to drop the charges and she has refused. It's hard to imagine what it must be like for her to see that tape. But she's goig through with it.

Some of the three defense attorneys' comments have been mind-boggling. Dehumanizing and blaming the victim. Talk about sense of entitlement. These kids throught they could do anything (and maybe they were right).

:-/

[singpilot]

Yep, I had forgotten that one. A Deputy Sheriff's son among the 'accused'. Videotaping. Should fall under "Nature Weeding out the Stupid".

Not to forget the title of the thread. The pilot that failed to remember his ROE briefing, and then releasing weapons without all the qualifiers in place. Either lazy or stupid or both. Or, in this case, criminally negligent.

[techweenie]

singpilot: "The pilot that failed to remember his ROE briefing, and then releasing weapons without all the qualifiers in place. Either lazy or stupid or both. Or, in this case, criminally negligent."

All politics. ROE constitutes the top priority for what you "remember" in the field.

Rush and others made a huge howl that this pilot was even charged, and I'm sure it was the pressure of tens of millions of angry Americans that got the guy off with a tap on the wrist.

I find the whole thing beyond embarrassing. I feel terrible for the families of those killed. Sadly, I think the punishment would have been more severe if the victims were Americans.

[singpilot]

Tech's excellent assessment: "All politics. ROE constitutes the top priority for what you "remember" in the field."

I used to chuckle thru the ROE briefings. We always figured they were written by the JAG guys. Usually it was exactly as you postulated.

I AM embarassed by this "pilot's" actions.

I know a lot of time and money is being spent on ways to stop the 'friendly fire' deaths in the modern battlefield. The stats on FF deaths are staggering. Every time a system is developed to map the battlefield in real time, interservice rivalries ALWAYS stop the implementation of such a system. That and the possibility that the info could be compromised and actually used against us.

I suspect someone here could come up with the stats for the USA servicemen that were killed in just this conflict by Friendly Fire. We should all be embarassed by that.

[techweenie]

singpilot: "I suspect someone here could come up with the stats for the USA servicemen that were killed in just this conflict by Friendly Fire"

I've heard 30% in the initial attack on Iraq, but usually, this stuff is hard to uncover, or takes years to jell -- like the actual performance of the Patriot missle system. going from 90% to 80% to 20% in the 10 years following its Gulf War deployment.

-----------edit-----------

Some people are actually claiming 0% effectiveness for the Patriot. And we know of at least one FF incident, which -- taking the worst scenario -- would make Patriot the best weapon Saddam (didn't) have.

http://www.cdi.org/issues/bmd/Patriot.html

[techweenie]

One more factoid:

"According to the website of the American War Library, just over half of the coalition troops killed or injured during the 1991 Gulf War were victims of friendly fire incidents."

Clearly, we are doing much better in Iraq. most of the people we're accidentally killing are British and Afghani coalition forces. Not to mention the occasional jornalist...

[singpilot]

I don't know why, but those numbers do not surprise me.

Enough embarassment to go around for everybody.

[techweenie]

'Among the calamities of war may be jointly numbered the diminution of the love of truth, by the falsehoods which interest dictates and credulity encourages.'
-Samuel Johnson

[djmcmath]

I'm glad it's not just me -- I had some kid sitting in my office today explaining that his four (4!!!) DUI's are the Navy's fault. He's quite certain that his divorce and illegitemate children are also the Navy's fault. His money difficulties (he wasn't being paid while he was absent without leave, obviously) are also, of course, the Navy's fault. To make it fun, it's clearly my fault for not having helped him fix all his life problems.

It's rotten to hear that the whole world has gotten this bad. I had hoped that I had lived in a small microcosm of societal nastiness...


Dan

[joeclarke]

Did you catch the latest on this mornings wire?

Dear Mr. Schmidt has served notice that he will seek to appeal the Air Force decision. Talk about cruel and unusual punishment - two months salary - it's an abomination!

It appears that this fellow possesses out-worldly sized testicles, indeed!

And Americans continue to wonder why the world looks sideways at them. This is the treatment for one of America's closest allies and most important economic partner? Crap - if those troops had been Americans instead of Canadians, Mr. Schmidt would certainly have enjoyed a different kinda fate...

oops, someone said that already.

[304065]

Well, lookie here, the Radical Left finally wakes up to complain about the entitlement mentality!

Gentlemen, let me be clear: the increasing societal trend toward criminals, tort-feasors and other unsympathetic persons claiming status as "victims" themselves is nothing less than the fallout of the expansion of "protected group" status! These days, EVERYONE is a victim of something.

As you bring to our collective attention at every opportunity, the history of the United States includes slavery, native american genocide, gender discrimination, religious intolerance and economic exploitation. The legislative and judicial response has been to attempt to eradicate such practices by law. Now, before you reach back to the gun-rack of the your intellectual pickup trucks for a "label," let me anticipate you by saying that things like the 1964 Civil Rights act ARE A GOOD THING for the country and are CRITICAL to our efforts to unravel the last couple hundred years.

But here's the rub: now, EVERYONE has piled on to the concept that their ox has been gored, that they are worthy of special victim status, as though some benevolent keeper of the light at the end of the tunnel would see their plight and act to restore the balance of economic justice! Responsibility? Not mine, it's somebody else's!

Why did you shoot up the cafeteria? Too many twinkies!

Why are you morbidly obese? McDonalds!

Why do you live in poverty? Free Trade!

The ideology of the Left, that perceives the world in terms of class struggle, continually seeks to expand causes of action for "entitlement" as a form of wealth and power transfer!

This is YOUR intellectual creation, now coming home to roost!

[djmcmath]

Hear hear!

[techweenie]

John_Cramer:

While most folks agree in general with the notion of the growing perception of 'entitlement', it's hardly a 'liberal' thing.

It's a societal drift, and as many "conservatives" have taken advantage of it as everyone else.

The root cause is a bit difficult to pin down, but certainly, it's been endorsed by juries and by 'spectacle' TV like Jerry Springer.

The rich have always been a 'protected class' in that in the US, rich people rarely pay for their crimes. In a handful of instances, people who are not rich have worked (through lawyers) to create special circumstances in the mind of a jury that exempts them for responsibility for their actions.

A few luck ones have found susceptible juries -- like the cop you obliquely refer to who used the "Twinkie defense".

Sue McDonald's for your obesity? Well, that was thrown out.

And it's been worked the other way, as well, to create a 'lesser class' for the victim, so that the crime committed wasn't as serious as if it were committed against a white person, a heterosexual, etc.

Finally, free trade is, again, not a liberal thing. Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton all supported NAFTA.

So put your anti-liberal prejudice back in your pickup's gun rack and try to find another label to put on this thing you're compalining about.