Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(37,548 posts)
14. Yes and no.
Sun Jan 15, 2012, 11:56 PM
Jan 2012

I honestly don't think that most Americans care. Piss on a dead enemy's body? Eh. Not my tribe.

A lot of people consider American soldiers only "in their tribe" if it's useful. They kill Afghans, they're bad little fascist Neandertals. After all, they volunteered to join the military almost certainly *after* 9/11/01 or even 3/03 at this point.

The sensitivity is assumed. While an Afghan man is a warrior, he's a fighter. To kill him is a bad thing, but we're not about to say that we have to consider all Afghans inviolate even if they try to kill Americans. That's a bridge too far.

But by pissing on them the American soldiers allowed the inference--certainly not the implication--that this is intended to humiliate everybody in those Afghans' "tribe". "Tribe" is variously the actual clan, the actual tribe, all Pakhtuns, all Pakhtuns+Pakistanis, or all Muslims. Since it's vitally important that this not be perceived as an anti-Muslim war-let, well, we have to take great pains to respect the bearers of those particular cultures.

I still think that few Americans would give it a moments' notice--including DUers--if there wasn't some political skin in the game.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»I'm Confused: It's Okay t...»Reply #14