On Sunday, February 22nd, the Washington Post ran
a cover story entitled “Defined By 38 Seconds”, detailing the complicated rise,
fall, and demise of a former Marine sniper, Rob Richards. Richards was one of four Marines who were
videotaped urinating on the corpses of fallen foes in a rightfully controversial
file that surfaced in 2012.
The article, which reads as a memorial to the deceased
Richards, is perhaps the single most disgusting piece of journalistic work I
have ever come across in my life.
The piece seems intent on, while maintaining the semblance
of objectivity, offering an excuse or explanation for the conduct of those four
men, and seems to try to say that the “good” of Roberts’ life – his tours and
his “service” to his country, outway the “38 seconds” which came to define his
life. This is categorically shameful and
frankly reflects poorly on the editors of the Washington Post.
As the child of a soldier, as a friend to many soldiers, and
as a person who grew up in and continues to reside and move in and through the
Military community, but more importantly as a citizen of these United States, I
am justified in saying that the actions of these four men were nothing other
than despicable, horrifying, and accomplished little more than the complete
debasement of the four marines in question.
They say it is wrong to speak ill of the dead, but I feel no
shame in speaking ill of Rob Richards.
This man, trained and compensated to carry out a specific
combat mission as a professional, gave in to the most shameful and base
instincts of the human spirit and participated in the completely voluntary
degradation of a human corpse. Whatever
else Rob Richards may have done in his entire life, while being paid to wear a
uniform meant to represent the best impulses of the American spirit, for “38
seconds” Rob Richards urinated on the corpse of a human being in a combat
environment.
Let’s not mince words here, Richards and his compatriots
committed a war crime.
If the box office numbers for “American Sniper” evince
anything, it is that this country is desperately seeking some moral certitude
about our now decade-and-a-half long struggle in the Middle East. We want heroes, and we want to believe that
the women and men who don our military uniforms in our service can be called
heroes for that service, and some of them most certainly can. There are outstanding individuals who have
won medals of a great many varieties in deeds of what can be called nothing but
heroism, and as an “army brat” I have had the personal pleasure to meet a
number of them.
But do we need heroes so badly, are we so desperate that we
have lost our capacity to call that which is despicable, despicable?
There is no salvage to be made in the case of Rob
Richards. There is no, “Okay, they did
it, but…” These men desecrated a corpse,
they committed a war crime. Personally,
I find it absolutely abhorrent not only that Richards was NOT dishonorably
discharged, but that after the incident in question he was even offered a
position teaching other marines.
We want heroes in this conflict, and we have them, but our
guilt and uncertainty about our involvement in the Middle East need not impair
our judgment of real wrongdoing when it stands in video evidence right before
our eyes!
Someone who commits a murder is punished for that act and
defined by it. The same is true for a
rapist. The same is true for a
thief. My god, in this country the same
is true for anyone who happens to possess the wrong amount of marijuana at the
wrong time. Yet when a murderer, or a
rapist, or a drug dealer stands before a judge, no lawyer can argue that they
shouldn’t be defined by the brief or momentary lapse in their judgment – a murderer
is still a murderer, no matter how long the act took.
Richards was still a war criminal. He participated in the voluntary defiling of
a corpse, and he got off. He should not
be buried next to honorable men and women in Arlington. He should not be remembered as anything other
than exactly what he was.
