In the
latest survey, younger Americans are rather more likely than their elders to approve of committing war crimes: torturing enemy soldiers, killing enemy prisoners, taking civilian hostages.
The Atlantic
blames Bush and Abu Ghraib. I'd be reluctant to draw that conclusion without having a bit of time series evidence. It would not surprise me at all if there's been a level shift upwards in Americans' acceptance of torture post 9/11. But the age patterning suggests less to me about cohort effects (the folks for whom 9/11 has always been a part of adulthood) and more about lifecycle patterns in aggressiveness.
It worries me a lot more that a straight majority of those surveyed, whether adult or youth, said that it is ok to deny prisoners visits from neutral third parties (like the Red Cross) and that torturing enemy combatants for military information is just fine. Anybody still surprised that Obama hasn't closed Guantanamo or allowed folks to visit Bradley Manning?
HT:
Cheryl Cline
I guess as long as that goes both ways thats ok. If folk in the states are happy when a US combatant is captured and then tortured or otherwise mistreated while in captivity then thats fine. You reap what you sow.
ReplyDeleteHmm, that post was meant to have a fake html tag on the end that indicated that I was ending the sarcasm, but it didn't show.
ReplyDeleteRaises a point, Lats. If your soldiers are being tortured etc, you are much more likely to be ok with your own side doing it.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, but at the same time US govt policy on human rights takes a firm stance against such behaviour - http://www.state.gov/g/drl/hr/
ReplyDeleteObviously there is a gulf between federal policy and public opinion. I suspect there is a similar gulf between policy and action by the US military. Hypocritical?
Combine these attitudes with high youth unemployment and we have a recipe for warmongering... It creates jobs right?
ReplyDeleteAnother point is the ethical implications of using remote controlled ground robots to do the killing. If someone can do control these from home, is the enemy justified in attacking civilian targets?
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/technology/military-killer-robots-raise-moral-debate-54133.html
Nobody's justified in attacking civilian targets.
ReplyDeleteThe chart seems to imply that our militia should optimally recruit child soldiers. Seeing that the jihadis can recruit not-so-smart bombs I say why not.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't argue, however what does using remote controlled robots do to the cost of waging war for those using them?
ReplyDeleteKeeping an eye on Pakistan is going to be informative in this regard.