Tags: Unbecoming | Conduct

Unbecoming Conduct

Friday, 31 December 2004 12:00 AM

Punishing a general for sex is inconsistent with the macho "burn, kill and destroy" image being cultivated by the U.S. military in Iraq. Can a hegemonic army be commanded by saints?

Fiscus' punishment is unlikely to stifle sex in the military. His punishment can, however, be defended as an attempt to uphold rules against fraternization and conduct unbecoming an officer. However impractical these old rules might be in a military integrated with women and homosexuals, if these rules are not enforced, other rules will go by the wayside, and the rot of demoralization will take hold.

What jumps out from this reasoning is the extent to which the U.S. military, which abandoned the Geneva Conventions against prisoner torture and the U.S. War Crimes Act of 1996, is being a stickler at enforcing its rules against sexual affairs. Is the military clutching the rule against fraternization closely to its breast because it is the only rule the military has left?

Alas, such may indeed be the case. White House Counsel and Attorney General nominee Alberto Gonzales advised President Bush in January 2002 that all laws and conventions against torture could be swept away simply by declaring detainees to be outside the protection of law and international agreements. Gonzales advised Bush to turn his back on the "obsolete" and "quaint" requirements in the Geneva Conventions for the humane treatment of prisoners. A year later, a Pentagon task force reasoned that the president had the authority to approve any policy needed to protect the nation's security.

These are the "moralists" who are compelling Fiscus to retire at a lower rank because he misbehaved with a dozen women.

Numerous reports, including reports from the FBI, have made it clear that torture of prisoners is more widespread than the White House has admitted. Numerous reports have made it clear that U.S. troops, whether from confusion, fear or sport, have slaughtered Iraqi civilians. Marines destroyed the city of Fallujah, and the commander on the scene claimed no Iraqi civilians were killed.

But Fiscus has behaved unbecomingly.

President Bush, VP Cheney, Defense Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Wolfowitz lied about Iraq having weapons of mass destruction and being involved with the Sept. 11 terrorist attack on the United States. The consequences of these lies: tens of thousands of dead Iraqi civilians and countless others wounded; Iraq's infrastructure in ruins; 1,325 dead U.S. troops and another 21,000 maimed and wounded, and the toll is mounting; 150,000 U.S. troops tied down by a few thousand ragtag insurgents; U.S. alliances and reputation in tatters; and America roundly hated throughout the Middle East.

But Fiscus behaved unbecomingly for an officer.

Yes, he did. And President Bush behaved unbecomingly for a commander in chief. Dick Cheney behaved unbecomingly for a vice president. Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz behaved unbecomingly for civilian leaders of the military.

But no one is being held accountable except Fiscus.

Is this right? Is this what Americans want? Do we want to punish Fiscus for violating "obsolete and quaint" rules against consensual sex but not punish government leaders who tell us lies about Iraq and get our sons, fathers, husbands, brothers and daughters killed as a consequence? Do Americans really want to be led by people who believe in the efficacy of torture, military might and propagandistic manipulation of an unsuspecting public?

If so, where is the virtue that neoconservatives claim justifies American hegemony?

COPYRIGHT 2004 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.

104-104

© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

   
1Like our page
2Share
Pre-2008
Punishing a general for sex is inconsistent with the macho "burn, kill and destroy" image being cultivated by the U.S. military in Iraq. Can a hegemonic army be commanded by saints? Fiscus' punishment is unlikely to stifle sex in the military. His punishment can, however,...
Unbecoming,Conduct
571
2004-00-31
Friday, 31 December 2004 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.
 

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved