Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Seeking comments on viral I/O video

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default Seeking comments on viral I/O video

    This video looks like something I've heard troops talk about, but not actually "do" in public. I'm posting a link, here, not remembering actually seeing it before (If so, I apologize.)

    I'm interested in possible impacts: My head says "not good" but my gut says "what the hell".

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=6d3b99daae

    Basic summary: A trooper dips his bullets in a can of "pork" and explains how he is going to send muslims fighting him "to hell", with flashcards.

  2. #2
    Council Member CPT Holzbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Ive heard of this as well. I always liked the way it uses the enemy's own beliefs against them. Their religious fervor is one of their greatest strengths. Converting an opponent's strength into a weakness is always a good idea. There's probably a passage in Sun Tzu that says so! But Im sure they could just issue a fatwa that will assuage any fear of this.

    There are undoubtedly many who would say that this is barbaric and not good "strategic corporal-ing". I would wager many of those people oppose the war in general, and live in the USA or Europe. But Im certain (unless there is already some religious principle that clears this up - Im no Imam) things like this will give the zealous insurgents pause.

    The bad guys could also spin it to their benefit, I suppose. Go around telling people - relatives of the dead - that their loved ones are in hell because of the Americans and have been robbed of their martyrdumb. Im sure that would put the fire in them.
    Last edited by CPT Holzbach; 02-18-2007 at 11:46 AM. Reason: Wasnt done talking yet...
    "The Infantry’s primary role is close combat, which may occur in any type of mission, in any theater, or environment. Characterized by extreme violence and physiological shock, close combat is callous and unforgiving. Its dimensions are measured in minutes and meters, and its consequences are final." - Paragraph 1-1, FM 3-21.8: Infantry Rifle PLT and SQD.

    - M.A. Holzbach

  3. #3
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi 120 and CPT Holzbach,

    Quote Originally Posted by CPT Holzbach View Post
    There are undoubtedly many who would say that this is barbaric and not good "strategic corporal-ing". I would wager many of those people oppose the war in general, and live in the USA or Europe. But Im certain (unless there is already some religious principle that clears this up - Im no Imam) things like this will give the zealous insurgents pause.
    I wouldn't say it was "barbaric", but I would say it's crude - it is about the same level of sophistication as burning Mickey Mouse in effigy, and about as effective as that would be on American troops. Part of the problem is that while pork is "unclean", the concept of ritual pollution requires intent on the part of the individual. Furthermore, many of the proscriptions in Islam are relaxed in certain specified situations, travel, jihad, etc. (check out al-Ghazali's Revivification of the Religious Sciences with an imam, notably the book on travel.)

    Quote Originally Posted by CPT Holzbach View Post
    The bad guys could also spin it to their benefit, I suppose. Go around telling people - relatives of the dead - that their loved ones are in hell because of the Americans and have been robbed of their martyrdumb. Im sure that would put the fire in them.
    Their relatives wouldn't be "in hell"; their bodies would have been desecrated, but that wouldn't affect their souls. Probably the closest analogy for a Christian would be to find that one or two of the people in your patrol had been killed and had inverted crosses carved into their foreheads. Their reactions would probably be the same as yours would be - a bit of fear and a lot of hatred and anger.

    Marc
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  4. #4
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Posts
    3,099

    Default

    ...I always liked the way it uses the enemy's own beliefs against them. Their religious fervor is one of their greatest strengths.

    It doesn't do that at all. As Marc tried to explain, it is based on a mistaken perception of their beliefs and is thus incapable of acheiving the intended effect.

    There are undoubtedly many who would say that this is barbaric and not good "strategic corporal-ing".

    Its not barbaric - but neither does it have anything to do with good or bad "strategic corporal-ing". Its just juvenile idiocy. It's already clear that it is a positive motivational tool for your average Snuffy "yeah, ####'em, send the bastards to hell!" However, the only effect on the bad guys would be similarly emotional - to piss'em off. Or perhaps they'll just be amused, and snicker to themselves about the stupidity of the infidel as they emplace their next IED ambush. As far as the general indig population - it only furthers their perception of our guys as ignorant westerners attacking a misunderstood aspect of the faith, rather than reaching a real solution to dealing with murderers and criminals.

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Washington, Texas
    Posts
    305

    Default Morale

    I agree that the activity has little impact on the enemy.

    However, I think it is more about building our guys morale by disrespecting the enemy. In World War II one admiral said he was going to see that the only place the Japanese language was spoken was in Hell. Gen. Patton talked about going to kill "those purple pissing Japs." Neither statement would pass the political correctness test today, but they did give voice to the anger felt toward the enemy and they probable did inspire the effort to defeat the enemy.

    Sometimes political correctness saps the heat from the battle and makes the whole conflict look more cold blooded which also helps the enemy.

  6. #6
    i pwnd ur ooda loop selil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Belly of the beast
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Merv Benson View Post
    Sometimes political correctness saps the heat from the battle and makes the whole conflict look more cold blooded which also helps the enemy.

    I've been thinking about the political correctness movement in language (semanticism?) and the ethereal euphemisms applied to battle and war.

    My hypothesis is that restrictive ROE's and political correctness are a "glad handing" corollary in the political spectrum of combat. I think there is likely a direct correlation between the two and as you see one increase you see the other also increase. I would further hypothesize that there is a direct inverse correlation between effectiveness in combat and the political correctness describing the combat.

    I think in describing war as "peace keeping" and further "humanitarian" we've created an environment where the expectations of a soldier and general is skewed and the politics increases the risks for all in the theater of combat.

    In the restrictive mental cubicle of political correctness and euphemistic dialog those who aren't boxed in by the politics will squeak through the cracks and videos as posted above will leak through. The politics and likely history will say the war in Iraq was ill advised and horribly justified, but the political history of the Iraq war and WW2 were and are so different. Imagine the message differences to the public.


    There isn't much humanitarian in this WW2 poster.


    Religion as a tool of war never by western civilization? Imagine this being said about Islam today. "You can be an Iraqi or Muslim but not both?" Yes I know that the corollary isn't complete, but it still is a remarkable contrast to the politics of today.


    Just for MarcT......


    All posters borrowed from Collectibles.Com
    Sam Liles
    Selil Blog
    Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
    The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
    All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.

  7. #7
    Council Member jonSlack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Its not barbaric - but neither does it have anything to do with good or bad "strategic corporal-ing". Its just juvenile idiocy. It's already clear that it is a positive motivational tool for your average Snuffy "yeah, ####'em, send the bastards to hell!" However, the only effect on the bad guys would be similarly emotional - to piss'em off. Or perhaps they'll just be amused, and snicker to themselves about the stupidity of the infidel as they emplace their next IED ambush. As far as the general indig population - it only furthers their perception of our guys as ignorant westerners attacking a misunderstood aspect of the faith, rather than reaching a real solution to dealing with murderers and criminals.
    I agree, this is juvenile idiocy and in a perfect world it would stop there.

    However, videos of this nature can and will be used in by the enemy in their IO/PsyOp releases to continue to characterize coalition forces, especially American forces, as Christian crusaders who are targeting all Muslims and who do not respect the Muslim faith, no matter where it falls on the secular to fundamentalist spectrum.

    While I do not think it will spread to the same level, I am reminded of the Enfield rifle cartridge fun the British had in India.

  8. #8
    Council Member Bill Meara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Jedburgh's right. This video is idiotic and juvenile. It reminded me of one of the main reasons that I always opposed the use of US conventional forces in Central America: When you bring in large numbers of conventional troops, you will inevitably be creating a lot of cross-cultural friction and, eventually, hatred. Even in Central America -- a region relatively close to us culturally --in exercises our troops had begun to refer to the locals as "Hondos" and "Salvos" and in one case "LBGs" ("Little Brown Guys" -- See what I mean?)
    Of course, we had it relatively easy as PSYOPers -- we didn't have to compete with thousands of angry E4s armed with video cameras, internet connections... and cans of pork.
    Check out my book: http://www.contracross.com

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •