Almost half of Marines surveyed favor tortureBy Kimberly Johnson - Staff writer
About 44 percent of Marines in a survey believe torture should be allowed if it would save the life of a fellow Marine, according to a 2006 military mental health assessment.
In addition, only slightly more than one-third of the nearly 450 leathernecks polled in Iraq last year — 38 percent — told members of the Mental Health Advisory Team that they believe all non-combatants should be treated with dignity and respect. That finding was notably lower than the 47 percent of soldiers who were asked that same question, according to briefing slides presented by the team of Army medical officers to Commandant Gen. James Conway on April 18.
The team was commissioned by U.S. Central Command. A copy of the study’s results was obtained by Marine Corps Times.
A Corps spokesman did not dispute the team’s findings. “We are convinced that in broad outline this is an honest, sincere and faithful effort that attempts to accurately capture what our Marines think and do in combat,” said Corps spokesman Lt. Col. Scott Fazekas. “It is one more set of data in a series that has taken on tough issues. We will closely consider the report and its recommendations.”
The study also found that 39 percent believe torture should be allowed to gather information about insurgents, and 17 percent said all non-combatants should be treated as insurgents.
About one in 10 Marines reported mistreating non-combatants, the briefing slides said.
At the same time, Marines are racking up considerable combat experience, the study found. More than half of Marines, or 58 percent, polled have experienced roadside bombs or booby traps, and about the same amount found themselves on the receiving end of small-arms fire.
Troops with high levels of combat were more likely to engage in unethical behaviors than troops with low levels of combat, the briefing slides said.
The study’s findings go against Corps basics, said one retired general.
“Treating people with dignity and respect is a value taught to Marines from the time they enter their initial training and throughout their careers, so this result, to me, is inexplicable,” said retired Lt. Gen. Paul Van Riper, who formerly commanded Marine Corps Combat Development Command at Quantico, Va.
The study also found that only 40 percent of Marines said they would report a unit member for injuring or killing an innocent non-combatant, whereas 55 percent of soldiers affirmed that they would turn in a fellow soldier for wrongdoing.
Such statistics could indicate “a misplaced loyalty to other members of the unit vice a higher loyalty the Corps expects with regard to regulations,” Van Riper said. “If so, this is not a difficult problem to overcome with proper training.”
The three-month study began in August 2006, just two months after the Corps made “Warrior Ethics” refresher training mandatory for those deployed in Iraq, following allegations of battlefield misconduct in Hadithah and Hamdaniya.
The real impact of those classes, however, probably isn’t reflected in the study, Van Riper said.
“It takes longer than [two months] for that to take hold,” and effects likely wouldn’t be seen until after months of training, he said.
The study’s findings did not surprise at least one military legal expert. “It’s only natural that people are going to support and defend each other, with their life if they have too,” said Matthew Freedus, adviser for the Washington, D.C.-based National Institute of Military Justice.
What is troubling, Freedus noted, was the base-line account that at most, only half of soldiers would be willing to turn in a fellow soldier for injuring or killing a non-combatant. “There needs to be better training at the front end so people don’t think it is inconsistent to report,” he said.
Freedus acknowledged that there are significant challenges in going up against that “circle the wagons” attitude. “It’s a cultural thing to some degree, and you can’t train that out of people,” he said.
The study’s findings underscore the need for on-site counseling and R&R, said retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales. Issues raised, however, don’t necessarily reflect leadership, but instead the need for attention to the psychological and human element of combat readiness, Scales said.
“Marines are prepared physically, but there’s not enough that’s being done for mental conditioning,” going into combat, he said.
The study’s findings point to a larger issue, he added.
“If you read through the lines here, you will see the crucible of battle. It tells you, when you fight the long war, regenerating that crucible of courage and morale has to be done more and more,” Scales said.
“Every soldier and Marine knows what’s right, but once combat fatigue sets in, that starts to fall away,” he said. “The more rotations into Iraq, the more likely he was to give the wrong answers to those questions, and that is significant.”
Do you believe torture should be allowed if it would save the life of a fellow Soldier?
Do you believe all non-combatants should be treated with dignity and respect, or should everyone be treated like a potential insurgent?
____________________________________________________
"All Soldiers are entitled to OUTSTANDING leadership; I will provide that leadership."
The NCO Creed
ArmyStudyGuide Community 
