DebateGate
General Category => 3DHS => Topic started by: domer on May 17, 2007, 06:19:52 PM
-
In his floridly imaginative but unoriginal way, Michael has the knack down pat as to how to rankle a well-earned repose (mine) regarding matters of war and peace. Mixing a potent tonic of moral superiority and outrage, Michael condemns US and Israeli (mainly) military ventures with the indignation of the Avenging Angel herself. Her virtue threatened by the spectacle (one, indeed, any feeling person can find a full quota of revulsion in), the angel blasts away at what no one champions: the gore and horror of war. Yet this virginal attitude, transferred to responsible nations, would leave the world a sea of Auschwitz's in short order, for, like it or not, there is real evil in the world (and, beyond that, real heartache and pain no matter how grand a utopia one tries for). The angel of Michael's dreams simply wants to stamp her foot and make it all go away. Yet, a rudimentary appreciation of human nature and political science imparts the valuable lesson of mutuality to any elimination of threat, which often must be "negotiated" with recalcitrant "partners." We all know how that turns out: much more often than we like, in a shambles. That's why "Neanderthals" (in my book, a blood libel) have been celebrated since at least Plato's time as guardians of all that is treasured and true. In the exercise of their duties as God and nation can be construed as placing upon their shoulders, the crucial element of judgment is all-important, separating triumph from fiasco and the cause of goodd from the cause of evil. Only in a simpleton's mind can the most perplexing complexity render out to clear platitudes. The testament to our troops, and often to our leaders, is that in carrying their unprecedented burden, the "weight of the world," they so often get it right. And for their mistakes, short of the ones frankly criminal, the gift of human intelligence sees their actions for what they are: good faith execution of the terrible tasks they embrace, not perfectly but necessarily. Slower than most would like, when needed correction is slow to develop. But the self-scrutinizing system never ceases its rounds.
-
Angels are never female. There are only three mentoioned in the Bible, and all are male: Michael, Gabriel, and Lucifer. Della Reese and John Travolta are not strictly canonical. The Holy Mother Church tends to think that God (who knows all things) knew how many he needed (there are a lot of angels, at least enough to form a Heavenly Host, but only three are named), and made that number. Angels don't die or wear out, so there never was any reason female angels.
Although most theologians in the cultures mentioned above (Latter-day Saints excepted; see above) would agree that angels are technically genderless in the normal human sense, all references in the Jewish, Christian and other holy writings mentioned above give angels a masculine aspect; for example, angels are given tasks such as warrior, herald, guard (at the gates of Eden), wrestler (of Jacob), mover of large stones (at the tomb of Christ), which in traditional societies would all have been tasks typically performed by men. The few canonical names of angels (e.g., Michael, Gabriel and Lucifer) are recognized in most cultures as masculine names. In languages with gender markings for nouns, the word "angel" is uniformly a masculine noun, including in the original Hebrew, Greek and Latin texts referred to above. In cultures where the proper name "Angel" is given to children, the name "Angel" is typically given to boys (girl's versions of the name include "Angela" and "Angelica").[20] The word "angel" in English, French, German, Spanish, and many other European languages is derived from the Latin angelus, a masculine noun.
In art, however, angels are always beautiful, which tends to mean their features are often rather feminine - even for warrior archangels, their hair is usually long, and their figures somewhat slight. In European medieval and Renaissance paintings of the Annunciation the archangel is usually depicted as noticeably more attractive than Mary - she could not be painted in a way that might inspire lustful thoughts, whilst no such problem arose with a genderless angel. Angels in art become more sexually differentiated from the nineteenth century, after which breasts and masculine figures and haircuts appear. In modern Western culture, many angels are depicted as having female figures, facial features and names, and many New Age practitioners speak of masculine and feminine angels.
[edit] Other religions
Angel-like beings called Tennin and Tenshi appear in Japanese mythology.
There are a number of New Age -type books describing various ordinary people's encounters with angels or angel-like beings.
Occult tradition lists the seven Angels of Revelation and our Solar System as Gabriel (the Earth-Moon), Raphael (Mercury), Uriel (Venus), Michael (Sun), Samael (Mars), Zachariel (Jupiter) and Orifiel (Saturn). The Angel of the Earth is Melchizedek.
-
I guess since my manhood has been impugned once again (sigh!) for attacking war, killing, massacres, torture, etc., I ought first to direct myself to the obvious errors that beset this unconsciously hilarious tirade. The Avenging Angel, domer, is not a woman - - it is, by some wondrous serendipity, the Archangel Michael, usually depicted as the Angel with a Sword. (Mi - cha - el, who [is]called[by] God to give the literal Hebrew translation.) You can see a good representation of the Archangel at the Place St. Michel in the Latin Quarter in Paris, brandishing his sword over the fountain there. Although I'm somewhat flattered to be compared to the good Archangel, nothing feminine in him or in me (not that there's anything wrong with that!) and yet we're both 100% opposed to torture, murder, war (when it's based on lies) and massacres.
Oh, and we (the Archangel and I) have no problem at all with the elimination of threats. That's what the Archangel's sword is for, after all. That's why I'm not a pacifist and that's also why I believe in the need to maintain an army of Neanderthal killers the same way a junkyard needs its dog. What you need to do is to stop your snake-oil sales routine and give up wholly and forever on convincing any rational individual that Iraq - - Iraq! - - constituted or ever could constitute a threat to the U.S.A. It's only the dumbest snake-oil salesmen who sell somebody else's snake oil. And try to remember, if you ever go into the scrap business, that it is you and not the yard dog who is supposed to be running the show.
Plato had to be dragged into this, I guess, sooner or later, given the level of intellectual pretension we are dealing with here it was inevitable, but, nevertheless, oy! And I say oy! with respect, for we all must respect Plato. However, Plato's appreciation of the armies of Greece was perfectly understandable, rooted as it was in the defence of Greece against the Persians, and the Persians, as we all know from watching 300, were seriously evil and outlandishly freaky-looking dudes, downright UGLY, in fact, and had to be, like, destroyed? So I'd leave Plato out of it, just on grounds of relevance, domer, because he wasn't really talking about an all-volunteer army of low-hanging fruit, Green Card wannabes and petty criminals. He had the citizen and/or aristocrat armies of classical Greece in mind, a different breed of army.
I also want to address the false issue of "complexity" raised in your little screed. There is nothing "complex" about a war of pre-meditated aggression. Country "A" has something that Country "B" wants; oil in this case; or maybe somebody just wants to score a point or two for Israel in the Israeli-Palestinian struggle. So Country "B" makes up the most outrageous bullshit lie it can think of, either the Gulf of Tonkin howler or the WMD fantasy, and the invasion is on. When the first lie is exposed another one (building Iraqi democracy) quickly replaces it. When that lie fails, there will be another. The lies come and go, the aggression and illegality continue. Complex? Only to those stupid enough to take the lies seriously and pursue their ramifications as intensively as one might have pursued the implications of Hitler's "reasons" for invading Poland or exterminating the Jews, had anyone been dumb enough to take them seriously.
Finally, I have to say it: the weaker and more tenuous the case, the heavier and more Olympian the pomposity of its defenders. domer, you just set a record.
-
The lecture on the provenance of the Avenging Angel is interesting but not germane. I made my points and stand by them. But your outrageous, bilious torrent of crap has to be called for what it is. Who else would term our fighting men and women "an all-volunteer army of low-hanging fruit, Green Card wannabes and petty criminals?"
-
When has there evr been an army with a higher advradge age, a better rate of education , a better record for behavior?
Never has ours been better than now , not by a long shot.
This may not seem so , but when a GI would punch up a Natzi for info it didn't make the papers .
-
<<When has there evr been an army with a higher advradge age, a better rate of education , a better record for behavior?>>
Bullshit.
<<Never has ours been better than now , not by a long shot.>>
Bullshit.
<<This may not seem so , but when a GI would punch up a Natzi for info it didn't make the papers .>>
And more bullshit.
-
<<When has there evr been an army with a higher advradge age, a better rate of education , a better record for behavior?>>
Bullshit.
<<Never has ours been better than now , not by a long shot.>>
Bullshit.
<<This may not seem so , but when a GI would punch up a Natzi for info it didn't make the papers .>>
And more bullshit.
I take it that you do not know of an army with a higher advradge age .
I take it that you do not know of an army with a higher rate of education.
I take it that you do not know how to find any army in any war , includeing this same one in previous times , more willing to prosicute misbehavior?
I take it this way because you have offered "bullshit" as your best answer.
-
<<The lecture on the provenance of the Avenging Angel is interesting but not germane.>>
Thank you. I was only making the important point that I am not now and have never been in touch with my feminine side. Honest. Swear to God. In case you were wondering.
<<I made my points and stand by them. >>
More accurately, you failed to make any of your points but stand by them nevertheless. Attaboy, domer. THAT'S determination.
<<But your outrageous, bilious torrent of crap has to be called for what it is. >>
Good idea, finally. You can call it irrefutable logic, then.
<<Who else would term our fighting men and women "an all-volunteer army of low-hanging fruit, Green Card wannabes and petty criminals?">>
I was only trying to be nice to them. I thought they'd appreciate a little flattery.
-
<<I take it this way because you have offered "bullshit" as your best answer.>>
I offered bullshit as my best answer because not only were your allegations unsubstantiated but I gave a specific example of an army which DID prosecute malefactors to the point of executing the bastards, and that army was the army of the United States of America in the Second World War, Franklin D. Roosevelt Commander in Chief. An example which, without any countervailing fact, you chose to flatly deny.
-
My points are plain, provocative and politic, the last of which you should try yourself. They will stand the test of both time and Michael Tee. And before I leave for the night, I feel compelled out of Christian charity and human kindness to advise you of this thunderbolt, of which you are evidently unaware: You're making an ass out of yourself.
-
<<My points are plain, provocative and politic . . . >>
Funny, I would have said they were turgid, conventional and . . .
politic? Is that a synonym for "sell-out?"
<<I feel compelled out of Christian charity and human kindness to advise you of this thunderbolt, of which you are evidently unaware: You're making an ass out of yourself.>>
Awww, shit! I'll never be able to express myself in pubilc again. Damn!!!
-
<<I take it this way because you have offered "bullshit" as your best answer.>>
I offered bullshit as my best answer because not only were your allegations unsubstantiated but I gave a specific example of an army which DID prosecute malefactors to the point of executing the bastards, and that army was the army of the United States of America in the Second World War, Franklin D. Roosevelt Commander in Chief. An example which, without any countervailing fact, you chose to flatly deny.
This was when? I missed that one sorry.
When has there ever been an army with a higher average age, a better rate of education , a better record for behavior?
The higher ad varage age is a fact, a demographic that helps explain the maturity of their behavior.
The better record is kinda subjective ,I take it as evidence that there are many fewer reported incidents though this doesn't indicate directly the number of potentially reported incidents since the eagerness to report might be very diffrent. I have spoken to a veteran of the Philippine campaign who told me that his unit took almost no Japanese prisoners , even when they were surrendering. I have read accounts of officers working for Patton who routinely punched German officers till they got information this was not considered much of a problem nor was it considered a problem when a captured general was forced to ride on the hood of his own captured staff car as the unit rolled into territory that was prone to ambush.
Our Army is now watched lot closer ,I expect it is a lot harder to get away with stuff than it used to be , so the high rate of prosecution of reported incidents may not indicate so much .
Never has ours been better than now , not by a long shot.
I was a member myself of the Navy , I am in constant contact with the Air Force , as far as this goes I am a direct source myself.
This may not seem so , but when a GI would punch up a Nazi for info it didn't make the papers .
I am pretty sure of this , if ever a GI ever did get a repremand for punching up a German or Japanese prisoner I imagine the public response would have been outrage at the repremand.
There were a lot of bad incidents involving prisoners of war that I could refer to , many that would approach the class of Abu Garab , have you heard of the Island of Prisoners revolt that happened during the Korean war?
I am not sure that either of us can actually prove these points since there are unfindable variables to be accounted for , mainly the difference that I ought to prove is that it is definitely harder to get away with much now than it was then.
-
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/csi_gebhardt_road.pdf
I have written this study to inform Army leaders, from platoon level to the Pentagon, about the Army’s history of detainee operations. Iraq is not the first war where the Army has struggled with applying the Geneva Conventions
to insurgents. A similar struggle occurred in 1965 as President Lyndon B. Johnson was sending increasingly larger forces to Vietnam, a situation then viewed by many as an insurgency. Operation IRAQI FREEDOM
is not the first war where EPW divided themselves into competing groups, rioted among themselves, and committed murder. That same phenomenon
occurred in the Korean prisoner-of-war camps in 1951. And Abu Ghraib is not the first detention facility where the MP and MI missions, detention and interrogation respectively, came into conflict. Similar tension,
albeit in a more subdued form, occurred on a smaller scale in a joint detention/interrogation facility in Haiti in 1994. This study explores these and other experiences in the interest of saying to the current generation of leaders, “The Army has been there and done that before. Now what can we learn from it?â€
-
Domer,
To address your original points and to stick with a more philosophical theme, I think there are a few schools of thought for which many come to their views of both war and importanly, their views on good and evil. These are the definitions of an acquaintance of mine for simplicity sake and are therefore somewhat simple in and of themselves, but I hope describe how many come to their conclusions.:
Modernism: the view that reality is accessible to the human mind in a manner unmediated by any tradition. Or, as Stanley Hauerwas would put it: "the story that you have no story except the story you chose when you had no story."
Relativism: the view that nothing is true in and of itself, but that everything may be true or false depending on the context, so that to assert any universal truth is both irrational and arrogant.
Post-modernism: the view that we can only know reality as constructed by some particular narrative. There is no neutral way to describe anything--at most, we can reach a consensus to some extent insofar as our rival narratives have points of contact. No one is unbiased, and anyone who claims to give you an objective description of anything is trying to pull one over on you (and perhaps also on themselves).
Radical post-modernism: postmodernism (as above) without any qualification. I.e., the view that all reality is "constructed"--nothing exists except as a part of some narrative, and there is no standard by which to judge that one narrative is truer than another. See "relativism."
Does that makes sense as an approach, the continuation would be to define the opposite views, which would be the non-relative schools of thought.
-
plane, no apology necessary, but I did point out in a previous post that the U.S. had hanged dozens of soldiers for crimes against civilians during WWII. You yourself made some kind of comment that I was the most pro-capital punishment Canadian you knew of.
I don't know if this story ever made it into the history books but I once worked with a vet who claimed to have been a prison guard in Quebec City during the war, when German prisoners transported to Canada were temporarily housed in old civilian jails before being shipped out West by rail. According to this guy's story, a prisoner spat on a guard who was bringing food to the cell. The guard immediately killed all three guys in the cell in revenge. This was considered a huge scandal, total security blanket over the prison, nobody allowed in or out and General Eisenhower himself came up to Quebec City to straighten out mess. Meaning that prisoner abuse was taken very seriously then. (The vet didn't know what punishments if any were meted out for this. He was transferred to Europe immediately afterwards and lost touch with everybody from his old unit. They were all split up.)
My dad's first cousin served in the Pacific as a private in the U.S. infantry and he says exactly the same thing about taking Jap prisoners. If you had any idea how those fucking bastards treated captured Allied soldiers, you'd understand why. A friend of mine was a Royal Marine Commando whose unit was the first to liberate POW camps in the Tokyo Bay area after the surrender. He's one of the toughest men I ever met, but I saw him break into tears when he described the condition of the prisoners as he found them.
There are instances of U.S. abuse of prisoners during WWII. The convictions of the German guards in the Malmedy massacre - - when American prisoners taken during the Battle of the Bulge were massacred by German guards - - were overturned on appeal because confessions had been beaten out of them. But there is nothing like the sadism and sexual humiliation, the use of electricity, waterboarding, dogs, anal rape and similar atrocities perpetrated on Arab prisoners by the U.S. military. It's unprecedented. And there is worse, stuff that is still under wraps - - the 90% of Abnu Ghraib photos and videos that the Pentagon refuses to release, the tortures being used in the secret torture chambers maintained around the globe by the CIA.
The final measure of official acceptance of torture and atrocity, of course, is in the punishment meted out for it. In WWII, Americans executed other Americans for their crimes. In the whole Viet Nam War, not a single American was executed (by Americans) for crimes against the Vietnamese people. Lt. Calley, convicted of 27 or 28 murders in the My Lai massacre, got off with a few months of house arrest. You will see no severe penalties today for America's crimes against the people of Iraq either. As the Human Rights First report that I linked to makes clear, FIVE MONTHS is the highest jail sentence imposed for torture and murder of prisoners (I think this must have come out before Charles Granger was sentenced for the high-profile Abu Ghraib abuse - - he got a few years, I believe.) NOBODY will be executed, not for rape, not for murder, not for torture. Nobody above the rank of major has even been prosecuted.
Your other comments about the age and education of the U.S. military arent' verified by any comparative data and are only tenuous indicators of their propensity to commit crimes. The chief factor is command control. When the very top of the command claims the right to decide for himself what is torture and what isn't torture (in other words, declares himself outside the law) then this is not a convincing precedent to set in fighting torture at lower levels. When the Attorney-General of the U.S.A. claims that the Geneva Conventions are "quaint and old-fashioned," it is ludicrous to expect the troops to ignore that opinon. A lawless administration has begat a lawless army. Contrary to your unproven speculation about G.I.'s punching Nazis, the FACT of the matter is that despite the millions of men who served, the enormous amount of time that has elapsed for whistle-blowers to come forward etc. there is no single shred of evidence to indicate that the army of Franklin D. Roosevelt committed any of the criminal acts and atrocities on its prisoners as does the army of George W. Bush, and further that no member of Bush's army has been or will be executed for rape and murder of civilians, whereas dozens of such executions were performed under FDR's command. So your claim that today's US army is the best-disciplined and least atrocity-committing of any army in history is pure HOGWASH.
-
"So your claim that today's US army is the best-disciplined and least atrocity-committing of any army in history is pure HOGWASH."
I accept that it is hard to prove , but I did include the best sorces I could find.
During WWII there was about one court martial for every eight service members. This is a huge rate compared to the present rate but I can't claim that the diffence is entirely because of better behavior because there was a major change in the rules with the UCMJ which we didn't have in WWII.
But we are definaely talking about the same Army , Navy with the personell being the grandchildren of the previous generation.
Why do you think the present US Army is less couth ?
Is it the segregation it gave up? The women it allowed in?
You really can't blame it on Bush , FDR did nothing to discourage misbehaveior that Bush did not also do.
While I am accepting that I haven't proven my case with certainty , I assert that neither have you , the entire diffrence between the earlyer and the later being spin.
-
<<You really can't blame it on Bush , FDR did nothing to discourage misbehaveior that Bush did not also do.>>
You GOTTA be kidding. I must have referred to it in at least two or three posts - - FDR saw to it that those bastards who crossed over the line were EXECUTED for it. Got it? EXECUTED - - as in hung, strung up, terminated with extreme prejudice, removed from the situation for the foreseeable future. Is there some part of EXECUTED that you do not understand?
-
<<You really can't blame it on Bush , FDR did nothing to discourage misbehaveior that Bush did not also do.>>
You GOTTA be kidding. I must have referred to it in at least two or three posts - - FDR saw to it that those bastards who crossed over the line were EXECUTED for it. Got it? EXECUTED - - as in hung, strung up, terminated with extreme prejudice, removed from the situation for the foreseeable future. Is there some part of EXECUTED that you do not understand?
Got a link for that?
If there were a lot of executions for mistreating prisoners , would that prove your point or mine?
-
<<Got a link for that?>>
Nope, that just comes out of my vast storehouse of useless personal knowledge.
<<If there were a lot of executions for mistreating prisoners , would that prove your point or mine?>>
Actually, I think most if not all of the executions were for robbing, raping and/or killing civilians, not for mistreating prisoners. Far as I know, in the European theatre of operations anyway, there was very little abuse of prisoners. (Punching doesn't count - - they were Nazis, for Christ sake!) I would think, given the passage of time and the number of men involved, any abuse comparable to Abu Ghraib or the secret torture chambers of the present day America, anything comparable would have come to light long before now if it had ever existed.
-
"(Punching doesn't count - - they were Nazis, for Christ sake!) "
This is the very core of the point I am intending to make.
Everything counts now , we are more sensitive, more prone to posicute , more likely to apprehend , not less in any respect.
-
List of individuals executed by the United States military
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The military of the United States has executed 135 people since 1916. The last execution was in 1961.
Contents [hide]
1 Crimes punishable
2 Sentencing and execution
3 Executions during World War II
4 See Also
5 Executions after World War II
6 USS Somers mutiny
7 References
[edit] Crimes punishable
Currently, under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, 14 offenses are punishable by death. Under the following sections of the UCMJ, the death penalty can be imposed at any time:
94 - Mutiny or sedition
99 - Misbehavior before the enemy
100 - Subordinate compelling surrender
101 - Improper use of countersign
102 - Forcing a safeguard
104 - Aiding the enemy
106 - Espionage
110 - Improper hazarding of vessel
118 - Murder
120 - Rape and carnal knowledge
Four provisions of the UCMJ carry a death sentence only if the crime is committed during times of war:
85 - Desertion
90 - Assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer
92 - Failure to obey order or regulation
113 - Misbehavior of a sentinel or lookout
[edit] Sentencing and execution
Capital cases are tried in courts-martial before a panel of at least five military members. If the defendant is an enlisted man, he may opt for at least one third of the panel to also be of enlisted rank. The defendant cannot plead guilty to the charges. The panel must be unanimous in conviction, that the government has proven necessary aggravating factors, that the aggravating factors outweigh the mitigating factors, and that death is the only sentence applicable. All death sentences are automatically appealed first to the appropriate Court of Criminal Appeals for the military service, then to the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces. The sentence must be personally confirmed by the President of the United States.
Death Row is located at the United States Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas and the method used is lethal injection. There are currently nine inmates on Leavenworth's Death Row, all of whom have been convicted of premeditated murder or felony murder.
[edit] Executions during World War II
This table is based on the handwritten list that was discovered at The Pentagon in December 2003. It was entitled "Executed Death Cases Before 1951" and the names and dates that have an Asterisk indicate that the original was only partly legible. It has been supplemented by these tables of U.S. Soldiers executed during World War II's European Theater and Pacific Theater. The offense in parentheses for some is where further information is available for the actual crime.
Executed person Date of execution Location Method
Rowe 17 October 1942
David Cobb 12 March 1943 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Sykes 19 January 1943 Hanged
Brandon 26 January 1943 Hanged
Knapp 19 March 1943 Hanged
Charles H. Smith 25 June 1943 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Bohn July 1943* Hanged
James E. Kendrick July 1943* Hanged
Smith September 1943* Hanged
Walter Beyer (P.O.W.) 1944* Hanged
Arthur E. Davis 1944* European Theater
Hans Demme (P.O.W.) 1944* Fort Leavenworth Hanged
James Hendricks 1944* European Theater
Charles H. Jordan 1944* European Theater
Jones 1944* Hanged
Edward J. Leonski 1944 Hanged
Hans Schomer (P.O.W.) 1944* Fort Leavenworth Hanged
Willie Scholz (P.O.W.) 1944* Fort Leavenworth Hanged
Berthold Seidel (P.O.W.) 1944* Fort Leavenworth Hanged
Bell 31 January 1944 Hanged
John H. Waters 10 February 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
J. C. Leatherberry 16 March 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
George Green, Jr. May 26, 1944
Wiley Harris 26 May 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Alex F. Miranda 30 May 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Shot
Willie Johnson June 1944* European Theater
Eliga Brinson & Willie Smith (double execution) 11 August 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Watson 29 August 1944 Hanged
James W. Peoples 2 September 1944 Hanged
Beven 26 September 1944
Paul Kluxdal October 1944* European Theater Hanged
Arthur T. Brown 2 October 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Andrew Gibson 2 October 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Leroy E. Greene 2 October 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Charles A. Horn 2 October 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Eugene A. Washington, Jr. 2 October 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Lloyd L. White, Jr. 2 October 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Madison Thomas 12 October 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
James B. Senders* 25 October 1944
Ray W. Anderson 25 October 1944 European Theater
Oscar N. Newman November 1944* European Theater
Leo Valentine, Sr. November 1944* European Theater
Willie Wimberly, Jr. 8 November 1944 European Theater
Joseph Watson 8 November 1944 European Theater
Aveline Fernandez 15 November 1944 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Richard Scott 18 November 1944 European Theater
William D. Pennyfather 18 November 1944 European Theater
Theron W. McGran 20 November 1944
Benjamin Pygate* 28 November 1944 Shepton Mallet, England Shot
William E. Davis December 1944* European Theater
Williams 18 December 1944 Hanged
John D. Cooper 1945* European Theater
Harold Crabtree 1945* Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Otis B. Crews 1945* European Theater
William T. Curry 1945* Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Erick Gauss (P.O.W.) 1945* Hanged
Benjamin F. Hopper 1945* European Theater
Rudolph Straub (P.O.W.) 1945* Hanged
J. P. Wilson 1945* European Theater
Waiter J. Baldwin January 1945* European Theater
Augustine Guerra & Ernest L. Clarke (double execution) 8 January 1945 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Mervin Holden January 1945* European Theater
Elwood J. Spencer January 1945* European Theater
Davis 5 January 1945 Hanged
O'Conner 15 January 1945 Hanged
Aniceto Martinez 15 January 1945 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Arthur J. Ferrell 18 January 1945 Hanged
James W. Twiggs 22 January 1945 European Theater
Samual Hawthorne 29 January 1945 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Eddie Slovik 31 January 1945 Sainte-Marie-aux-Mines Shot
William C. Downes February 1945* European Theater
Waiters Yancy 10 February 1945 European Theater
William Mack 15 February 1945 European Theater
Amos Agee March 1945* European Theater
Henry Baker March 1945* Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Tommie Davidson March 1945* European Theater
General L. Grant March 1945* European Theater
John C. Smith March 1945* European Theater
Frank Watson March 1945* European Theater
Olins W. Williams 9 March 1945 European Theater
Cubia Jones* 11 March 1945 European Theater
H. Perry 15 March 1945 Shot
Kinney Jones 20 March 1945 European Theater
Mock 20 March 1945
Robert L. Pearson & Parson Jones (double execution) 17 March 1945 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
John W. Taylor 20 March 1945 European Theater
Swalls 29 March 1945
Boswell April 1945* Hanged
Thomas April 1945* Hanged
Gill April 1945* Hanged
William Harrison, Jr. 7 April 1945 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Mileert Bailey 18 April 1945 European Theater Hanged
James L. Jones 18 April 1945 European Theater Hanged
Jewin Williams 18 April 1945 Hanged
Richie 21 April 1945 Hanged
William McCarter May 1945* European Theater Hanged
Haze Heard May 1945* European Theater
Shelton McGhee, Sr. 4 May 1945 European Theater
George E. Smith, Jr. 8 May 1945 Shepton Mallet, England Hanged
Robert L. Donnelly 31 May 1945 European Theater Hanged
Alvey R. Rollins 31 May 1945 European Theater
Matthew Clay, Jr. June 1945* European Theater
Tom E. Gordon July 1945* European Theater
Fred A. McMurray July 1945* European Theater Hanged
Louis Till July 1945* European Theater: Italy Hanged
Beshense 5 July 1945 Hanged
Davidson 5 July 1945 Shot
Charles H. Jefferies 5 July 1945 European Theater
John T. Jones 5 July 1945 European Theater
List 5 July 1945 Hanged
Henry W. Nelson 5 July 1945 European Theater
Helmut Fischer (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Fritz Franke (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Guenther Kuelsen (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Heinrich Ludwig (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Bernard Reyak (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Otto Stengel (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Role Wizoy (P.O.W.) 28 July 1945* Hanged
Davis August 1945* Hanged
Reid August 1945* Hanged
Boston 1 August 1945 Shot
Thomas 1 August 1945 Hanged
Reichl* 2 August 1945 Hanged
Harris 9 August 1945
Clarence Whitfield 14 August 1945
Ellis McCloud, Jr. 20 August 1945 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Robert Wray 20 August 1945 European Theater
Waltens 31 August 1945
Henry C. Philpot 10 September 1945 Hanged
Hurse 20 September 1945 Hanged
Gibson 24 September 1945 Shot
Thomas 25 September 1946
Charles M. Robinson 28 September 1945 European Theater
Blake W. Mariano 10 October 1945 European Theater
Sidney Betterman 15 October 1945
Louis 15 October 1945
Woodrow Parker 15 October 1945 European Theater
Charlie Ervin, Jr. 19 October 1945 European Theater
Mansfield Spinks 19 October 1945 European Theater
Harvey W. Nichols 28 October 1945 Milne Bay, New Guinea Hanged
Williams 28 October 1945
Lee 9 November 1945
Lee A. Davis 14 December 1943 or 1945 European Theater Hanged
Ellsworth Williams 5 January 1946 European Theater
Abney
Armistead
Lee A. Burns European Theater
Stevenson Hanged
Line Hanged
Martinez
Mickles Hanged
Norman Hanged
[edit] See Also
Shepton Mallet Military Prison
Plot E - "The Dishonored Dead"
[edit] Executions after World War II
These are those executed by the military after World War II
Executed person Date of sentencing Date of execution Crime
Bernard J. O'Brien 19 June 1952 31 July 1954 Premeditated murder
Chastine Beverly 10 October 1951 1 March 1955 Robbery, premeditated murder
Louis M. Suttles 10 October 1951 1 March 1955 Robbery, premeditated murder
James L. Riggins 10 October 1951 1 March 1955 Robbery, premeditated murder
Abraham Thomas 15 April 1954 8 February 1957 Four counts premeditated murder
Thomas J. Edwards 1 April 1953 14 February 1957 Premeditated murder
Winfred D. Moore 19 August 1953 14 February 1957 Murder, assault with intent to commit robbery
Ernest L. Ranson 5 June 1953 3 April 1957 Lifting weapon against superior officer, premeditated murder, rape, robbery, 2 counts of assault with dangerous weapon
John E. Day, Jr. 1 October 1951 23 September 1959 Murder, premeditated assault with attempt to do bodily harm with dangerous weapon, assault
John A. Bennett 8 February 1955 13 April 1961 Rape, premeditated attempted murder
-
Holy shit! What'd those guys do?
(I know what the P.O.W.s did. They organized the "executions" of anti-Nazi Germans in the POW camps.)
-
"The times they are a-changin'," said Lt. Calley to himself sometime in 1967 or 1968.
-
Andrew Jackson was famous (infamous?) for executing deserters as a general on campaign.
During WWII there was a single execution for desertion.
Execution seems to be on a long slow slide toward rarity on which we are near the end.
I really was looking for the list of GIs executed during WWII for mistreating prisoners , I have not found it yet.
But I have decided how to treat it when I do find it.
If it is a long list it stands alone as proof of many instances of mistreatment.
If it is a short list then it may be construed as evidence of lax enforcement.
Unacounted for variables can be favorable assumptions can they not?
-
<<Unacounted for variables can be favorable assumptions can they not?>>
Only for sloppy thinkers or those looking to validate their otherwise insupportable prejudices. What you should be doing is comparing - - how many GI's executed for rape and murder of civilians in (a) WWII, (b) Viet Nam and (c) Iraq.
What you will find is that under the leadership of FDR, there were executions for these, under LBJ, Nixon and Bush - - no executions. What FDR would not tolerate, LBJ, Nixon and Bush would.
As far as executions for mistreatment of prisoners - - in the first place you won't find any mistreatment. Sure Nazis got punched out. Lucky they were ONLY punched out, considering what they'd done. In the Pacific, few prisoners were taklen. Considering how the Japs treated Allied prisoners, that is perfectly understandable. Again, no torture by Americans in either Pacific or European theatres. Nothing comparable to Iraq. So not only will you not find executions for prisoner torture, you won't find any prisoner torture.
In Viet Nam, you will find torture and murder of prisoners. Many kinds of torture, many kinds of murder. No punishments. Calley got house arrest for a very short time. 28 murders he was convicted of - - - although the My Lai death toll was over 700. Calley was at least charged and put on trial. Bob Kerrey got a Silver Star and if one of his men hadn't opened his mouth late in the day, nobody would know of his crimes. Common sense tells us there were probably ten or 20 Kerreys for every Calley. Toledo Blade ran a series on the Tiger Brigade (or similar name) and its atrocities - - nobody even charged. Human Rights First in its study showed that 5 months was the heaviest sentence passed for murder of prisoners. (Probably written before the Chuck Granger sentence of several years for Abu Ghraib, another slap on the wrist.)
-
I note that each of the points ou make includes an assumption .
I still havent found the proof for any of your points , why should I accept your assumptions ?
-
<<I still havent found the proof for any of your points , why should I accept your assumptions ?>>
If they don't make sense to you, don't accept them. In short - - I accept them because they make sense. They make sense to me because they accord with what I know of life. They're much more likely than any alternative assumptions. Obviously there is some exaggeration to make a point - - not even in the Nazi armies could you find 100% brutal thugs - - but I like my assumptions on the whole. I know what's exaggerated to make a point and I think most thinking people can figure it out, get past the rhetoric and deal with the issues raised. The brutality and violence crop up all over the map, again and again. In the sixty-two years since WWII ended, there has not been ONE single incidence of torture alleged against U.S. troops. It's simply ludicrous to claim it was as common as torture in America today. Your assumption - - it was all over the map but not one person of the millions who served ever blew a whistle. Not one victim ever surfaced. That's bullshit and you know it too.
I'm very comfortable with my assumptions. I think most people agree with them but are afraid to say so. It doesn't look good to call "our fighting men and women" (domer's phrase) what they truly are: undisciplined losers with guns. Bastards. And their top leadership what it truly is: morally bankrupt. Cowards. Torturers. It only looks good to vilify the other side. So people go along with the bullshit. Take the line of least resistance. "It only suffices for evil to triumph if good people do nothing." And I don't think there's any doubt about it: evil has triumphed.
-
In the sixty-two years since WWII ended, there has not been ONE single incidence of torture alleged against U.S. troops.
I guess vivisection of living American POWs doesn't count as torture? Other medical experiments (which usually killed the subject) that were conducted on American POWs doesn't count, either?
-
<<guess vivisection of living American POWs doesn't count as torture? Other medical experiments (which usually killed the subject) that were conducted on American POWs doesn't count, either?>>
My point was that nobody accused the U.S. of torturing their WWII prisoners.
You seem to be saying that somebody tortured U.S. prisoners - - vivisected them, medically experimented on them (with usuallly fatal results) . . .
Are we talking at cross-purposes? There's a certain ambiguity in the phrase "American POW" - - are you referring to prisoners OF the Americans or to American troops who happen to be prisoners of somebody else?
In any case, I don't get the reference. Who allegedly vivisected who? Where? When?
-
My point was that nobody accused the U.S. of torturing their WWII prisoners.
I guess I read it wrong. Need more coffee.
However, on that side, there are the (disputed by the US) claims of mistreatment at the Rheinwiesenlager.
-
Rheinwiesenlager, according to Wikipedia, was severe overcrowding due to rapid influx of prisoners that the Allies weren't able to cope with, poor sanitation, shelter and hygiene aggravated by official incompetence and an unwillingness to face up to the situation - - sort of a Hurricane Katrina with Nazi victims. No allegations of torture as far as I could see.
-
Many of them were reclassified as "disarmed enemy forces" - so they no longer qualifed as POWs under the Geneva Conventions - and were used as slave labor. Many were also distributed to other allied countries for use as slave labor there.
It was a bit more than just a "sort of a Hurricane Katrina."
-
Rheinwiesenlager, according to Wikipedia, was severe overcrowding due to rapid influx of prisoners that the Allies weren't able to cope with, poor sanitation, shelter and hygiene aggravated by official incompetence and an unwillingness to face up to the situation - - sort of a Hurricane Katrina with Nazi victims. No allegations of torture as far as I could see.
I had not heard of that one , is it no worse then ,than Andersonville?
-
<<Many were also distributed to other allied countries for use as slave labor there.>>
Great idea !!! considering all the death and destruction they caused there in the first place. I hope at least some of them realized how lucky they were not to be subjected to the rigors of Auschwitz, Sobibor or Treblinka, to name just a very few of their own Nazi death camps.