Air Force Trainers at Lackland AFB Accused of Rape

[Sensia]

Originally Posted by OliviaHoward

In Iraq, the female soldiers were raped with such frequency after dark as a whole the women didn’t any liquids after about 3:00 or 4:00 p.m. in an environment with no A/C and 120 heat because going to the latrine was too dangerous and many women died of dehydration in their sleep. The army’s response was to not allow dehydration as a cause of death and not to mention that the deceased were women.

http://www.vermontguardian.com/daili...6/020806.shtml

Why am I not shocked at some of the responses on this thread.

Originally Posted by WTF

We have decided to shut down the Air Force for four years...that'll show'em!

No it doesn't surprise me either. I would be more shocked if there was a guy who posted with real concern, outrage and disgust and who showed some intelligence in this matter. I won't hold my breath..

[CuteOldGuy]

Well, I apologize, Sensia. This is an outrage, and needs to be addressed. In my case, I was sidetracked by WTF taking the opportunity of this revelation to turn the argument into a defense of Joe Paterno. It deflected from the real issue.

Another question is determining where the outrage should lie. These aren't your typical rapists. I think that I would be more shocked if something like this didn't happen.

Just consider, our government has sent a bunch of young people into a land where they are not wanted, they have no clear idea of their mission, their terms of engagement are limited, they face death by shooting or explosion every time they go out on the street, there is no clear method to determine who the enemy is, or who the ally is, they are removed from their support system, family, friends, church, whatever, and sent into this hellhole with other people who facing the same situation.

Some soldiers can handle this, and come home with few ill effects. Others bottle the pressure up and come home suffering from PTSD, and engage in domestic violence, suicide, and other things. Others will release their frustration in ways that are descried in the post about Iraq.

Rape has nothing to do with a woman's appearance, or a desire for sex. It is a response to a person's perceived lack of power over his/her own circumstances. It relieves the pressure to exert power over someone else, commonly as rape, but it can take other violent forms as well. The idea that a woman is raped because she is "cute" is ridiculous. It is a violent usurpation of power.

I'm not at all excusing what happened. It is terrible, and outrageous. The perpetrators should be prosecuted and punished, severely. But it was also predictable. The only way to prevent it is to make sure when we send our military on a mission, they have a clearly defined mission, a clear objective, a reasonable definition of victory, the ability to achieve those objectives in the quickest, most decisive manner possible, and in the shortest amount of time. I think military history will show that when those criteria are met, there are much fewer of these type of incidents.

The rapes at Lakeland fall into the more typical rapist category But it is still an exertion of power on the part of someone who feels they lack power in other areas.

Absolutely outrageous. Yes. But the only similarity between this and what happened at Penn State is that those in charge didn't want anyone to find out. And instead of losing a few games, or ruining a reputation, this is our national defense. This is our government. Our soldiers, and the rest of us deserve better.

[theaustinescorts]

My point is that although there's a lot of nice guys in the military it doesn't matter a shit because the assholes always get away with whatever they want because the higher ups don't care one lick about anything except their careers and the image of the service.

The public needs to wake up and stop lionizing the military with all their "wounded warriors" and "thanks for your service...." crap.

The military is an ugly place and it's no place for women. There's nothing that can be done to ever make it safe because the mentality that will always persist there is authoritarian, aggressive, non-humanitarian, violent, egotistical, sadistic, etc...

That's not true of all armed forces, like the military of Israel is totally the opposite when it comes to these issues.

But in the US it will always be EVIL.

Why? It's because the US military has always been about going overseas and killing in far away, foreign places where there's no clear safety of our homes or families involved. In most countries militaries are about preparing to defend their homelands from attack, and they don't need any aggressive or malicious culture to beat people into killing machines so they'll kill just anyone they're ordered to kill. But in the US the need for a force of people who will go anywhere and kill anyone on command is why it's such an abusive culture.

[CJ7]

accused?

oh.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Sensia

No it doesn't surprise me either. I would be more shocked if there was a guy who posted with real concern, outrage and disgust and who showed some intelligence in this matter. I won't hold my breath..

WTF is real concern?

Where is your intelligence in this matter?

People abuse power at all levels in all fields for the history of mankind...WTF is your solution?

I am only using this thread to point out how nonlinear many posters are in their posts.

They want to shut down Penn St Football for losing institutional control but lack the same conviction when it comes to speaking out against the military for, drum poll please losing institutional control...... We have laws against WTF happened in both cases. People's heads will roll but that is not enough for some.

Bad things happen to good people, you will never change human nature. Let me play Devil's advocate, should all the power be shifted to the women trainee's? Any time they claim sexual harassment , That is it, no investigation , nothing , just off with the alleged officers pecker? We have a system of Justice, though you may not like it, it has to consider all sides POV, not just yours. Go live on a deserted island if you can not tolerate others POV's.

[JD Barleycorn]

I'm not excusing forcible rape but there has to be a determination if it was forcible rape or if the woman was a willing participant up to a certain point. I try to imagine a good guy with stripes on his shoulder seduces a young woman into a sex act. No force, no lying, no over use of alcohol but suddenly she decides that she made a mistake and makes a rape charge. Who wins? The military is presupposed to support the woman's claims. If it is consensual how do you defend the sex unless you have video, witnesses, or a notorized statement.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'm not excusing forcible rape but there has to be a determination if it was forcible rape or if the woman was a willing participant up to a certain point. I try to imagine a good guy with stripes on his shoulder seduces a young woman into a sex act. No force, no lying, no over use of alcohol but suddenly she decides that she made a mistake and makes a rape charge. Who wins? The military is presupposed to support the woman's claims. If it is consensual how do you defend the sex unless you have video, witnesses, or a notorized statement.

It is my understanding that you are not supposed to be having sex with folks under your command.

That said, I agree that there are degree's of guilt. Raping a woman is a lot different than being seduced by a woman under your command, just as what Sandusky did and what Paterno did are not comparable. Yet some think they are all the same. What planet do they live on? Plesantville!

[JD Barleycorn]

I can only talk about events prior to the repeal of don't ask, don't tell but there are local regs about service people having sex with each other in the chain of command. A commanding officer can issue an order but it is my experience that the military would rather stay out of the sexual relationships of their people. It is generally frowned upon to have a relationship with someone directly in your chain of command. I don't think a temporary training position can be called a direct chain of command situation. I can see some pretty obvious pitfalls to chasing this tail. You see what you like, you chase, she lets you catch her, she rocks your world, and then she wants a special letter to the command listing her outstanding qualifications or else.

Officers are under greater scrutiny than enlisted. I had a superior officer with a long term live in girlfriend. She would show up in his MGB to take him home and she was hot. He was informed that officers need to be married and shacking up would not improve his chances for promotion. He politely told them to fuck off.

[PhantomofTheOpera]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I can only talk about events prior to the repeal of don't ask, don't tell but there are local regs about service people having sex with each other in the chain of command. Correct on there being regulations for that but incorrect about it being local. The UCMJ is clear about officers in Article 134 while the enlisted are covered under Art. 92 and Art. 125.

A commanding officer can issue an order but it is my experience that the military would rather stay out of the sexual relationships of their people. - This is patently false. Refer to Art. 120, 125, 133 and 134.

It is generally frowned upon to have a relationship with someone directly in your chain of command. - It is not generally frowned upon but will subject one engaging in such activity to prosecution under Art. 92,133,134 and others.

I don't think a temporary training position can be called a direct chain of command situation.- Wrong. It is, and has always been, a direct chain of command. A TI or DI has direct authority over those he trains and they are his responsibiilty.

I can see some pretty obvious pitfalls to chasing this tail. You see what you like, you chase, she lets you catch her, she rocks your world, and then she wants a special letter to the command listing her outstanding qualifications or else. - I always advised USAF male members to stay away from the "good" looking girls in particular, or for that matter any female, in the USAF when on JAG and StanEval teams. No good can become of being involved with them. A corollary to that is giving chicks you don't know rides onto base/fort/post in your POV because that can open a service member to false claims that can be nearly impossible to prove in the service members favor.

Officers are under greater scrutiny than enlisted. I had a superior officer with a long term live in girlfriend. She would show up in his MGB to take him home and she was hot. He was informed that officers need to be married and shacking up would not improve his chances for promotion. He politely told them to fuck off. - Which ended his career path to line officer, i.e. Major\Cmdr (O3) since he was guilty of violations of Art. 92, 133, 134 and others.

In general, I have found most of what is posted in this thread laughable and I am no misogynist. I respect women but most women today do not know their place just like the guys don't know their place in a lot of instances. Women have never belonged in combat as they have inherent physical disadvantages despite what the feminists think. In general, women lack the physical strength a man has as they are generally 30% weaker in the upper body. You get in a fire fight and the adrenaline starts running, a man will absolutely trash any woman, on average, no matter what she thinks she can do. That is just basic biology folks.

Now to those griping the military in this thread, let's remember what the military is for -- to break things and kill people, period. Use of the military as a police force is stupid and always will be since that use trashes the primary mission of the military. It is not a place for sensitivities or those who want a hug, Its use should always be the option of last resort such as when the diplomats have failed in their tasks of resolution. HOWEVER, when it is used, it should be used as it was intended to be used which is to break things and kill people in order to achieve an end goal of victory since anything worth doing is worth doing right the first time.

I was in SA long before some of you were born, I was an NCO, actually I was a Mustang and if you don’t know that term, look it up. I come from a long line of military and I am far from a below-average person in the IQ area or abilities. I take exception to the generalization of all NCO's, especially the males, as being stupid or unable to command "cute" girls since the ones making that statement are, in fact, very ignorant themselves and show their own bias.

Since most here have never been subjected to the UCMJ, I suggest a little study and education on the subject being discussed before some of you show just how little you really know. This link will get you started:
http://www.sldn.org/content/pages/the-uniform-code-of-military-justice-ucmj

Also, to the one that wrote about suing the Pentagon... that is a laugh and the case will be thrown out with prejudice due to the Feres Doctrine.
http://www.jdsupra.com/post/documentViewer.aspx?fid=5f3797 98-58a0-4c6e-bc2c-c51382559c43

http://www.stripes.com/news/the-argument-for-keeping-the-feres-doctrine-1.173370

Next, it is airman as there is no such thing as airwomen in the USAF. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airman

Lastly, in regards to the original post, I think it is reprehensible that the TI's have been doing that and if I had been on watch not only would they have gotten their asses beaten by me but I would have made sure that their time at Leavenworth was pure hell. I would have pursued maximum penalties allowed under the UCMJ along with a DD, forfeiture of all pay/benefits, reduced in rank to airman basic (E1) and that is just a start. I would have also pursued their commanding officers and made sure they were forced out of the service with special notations on their service records for why they had conduct unbecoming an officer. Moreover, I would have pursued any of the females in a similar fashion if they had made any false accusations, so don’t think I am giving them a free ride in what I think of this. I am disgusted with the whole situation and some asses need to be kicked for allowing this crap to happen.

[JD Barleycorn]

I am wondering if you are a JAG. As I stated "in my experience" the military does not like to get into people's sex lives. A young enlisted woman was found nude in a young enlisted man's room on the same day that all personnel were warned about such infractions. Despite the warning all that either person recieved was extra duty given by the company commander.

Officers do play by a different set of rules than the enlisted. Actions by enlisted will be tolerated or not pursued while an officer will face an investigation. For anyone who has not had experience in the military the UCMJ is designed to convict an offender from three or four different directions. If they can't charge you with a specific crime (such as disobeying orders (92)) then there is always the general article (134) or conduct unbecoming for officers (133). To make this shorter, though some things are against the UCMJ or local regs not all offenses are prosecuted.

I do agree that social issues like this do cast doubts on the idea of women in combat or assigned to combat commands.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I am wondering if you are a JAG. .

After reading both you and PhantomofTheOpera comments, I have no doubt that one is versed in military rules and the other is not as well versed.

I wonder if I B Hankering could guess just which one that is.

[theaustinescorts]

Women do not belong in combat not because they are physically weaker but because their psychologies are not adaptable to the aggression of war.

Women are criers, screamers, and otherwise are not able to cope with shock and trauma. They feignt and otherwise break down rather than fight. Women are not psychologically able to fight through these situations.

Since time immemorial people have always known this about women because it's freaking obvious but in our insane age we have to abandon all of our personal experiences and knowledge in favor of political doctine about gender and race and everything else.

In my opinion combat is a totally degrading and stupid situation which does not enoble anyone and women should be respected and admired for the fact that they aren't about it.

I like women for what they are.

[theaustinescorts]

The Israelis and others have no problem with women in the ranks, but those are unified societies where people behave in a civilized way.

America is a polyglot of different peoples and is ridden with crime and violence and malice.

America is not capable of fielding a military that can have respect for women.

Putting women into a military like the US has is like throwing them to the wolves.

Sorry to have to say this, but having lived in so many different countries I have to say America is not the best one. American society is really sick compared to others I've lived in. America is not a great country anymore, if it ever was.

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by theaustinescorts

Women do not belong in combat not because they are physically weaker but because their psychologies are not adaptable to the aggression of war.

Women are criers, screamers, and otherwise are not able to cope with shock and trauma. They feignt and otherwise break down rather than fight. Women are not psychologically able to fight through these situations.

Since time immemorial people have always known this about women because it's freaking obvious but in our insane age we have to abandon all of our personal experiences and knowledge in favor of political doctine about gender and race and everything else.

In my opinion combat is a totally degrading and stupid situation which does not enoble anyone and women should be respected and admired for the fact that they aren't about it.

I like women for what they are.

Like I said in another thread, women don't belong in the combat because they are physically weaker. The secondary reason doesn't have to do with our psychology as much as the sexuality of men and women. It causes problems to try to abandon hundreds of thousands of cultural socialization in just a decade because it is the PC thing to do. It's nonsense.

I also don't agree with different physical requirements for women in the police and fire departments. Either you are strong enough to fight in the streets or haul me out of a burning building or you are not.

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by WTF

After reading both you and PhantomofTheOpera comments, I have no doubt that one is versed in military rules and the other is not as well versed.

I wonder if I B Hankering could guess just which one that is.

ya think?

IB is looking for the failing grade post ...shhhhhhhhhh