Compare and contrast with recent events.
“A civilian jet airliner shot down by US Navy surface to air missiles on 3 July 1988 as it flew over the Strait of Hormuz at the end of the Iran–Iraq War. The aircraft, an Airbus A300B2-203 operated by Iran Air, was flying from Bandar Abbas, Iran, to Dubai, United Arab Emirates. While flying in Iranian airspace over Iran’s territorial waters in the Persian Gulf on its usual flight path, it was destroyed by the guided missile cruiser USS Vincennes. All 290 on board, including 66 children and 16 crew, perished.”
The captain of the ship that killed 290 innocent people was given a high military decoration by the United States of America “for exceptionally meritorious conduct in the performance of outstanding service” during his period in command.
[Source:Counterpunch]
That is all.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
16 comments
August 2, 2014 at 6:41 am
john zande
But, but, but… America’s exceptional…… :(
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 7:40 am
Notes To Ponder
Could this be the definition of “bushwhacked” ?
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 8:42 am
tildeb
Hang on… the Americans took full responsibility for the action of its military personnel and justified it (and therein lies the controversy) by the very real and grave danger the plane brought to the carrier group the missile cruiser was tasked to defend. The commander of the cruiser had seconds to decide what to do and the plane was not broadcasting its assigned identity code like the hundreds of previous planes that flew the identical route. Put in the same situation with the same conditions and tasked with the same responsibilities as the cruiser commander, I wonder how the Arb would be magically endowed to react so very differently armed with such a smug moral superiority on display here.
Not likely, I’m thinking.
What you’re doing is NOT comparing and contrasting fairly or responsibly. You are trying to make a false equivalency by the results – a shot down passenger plane – rather than an honest and fair consideration of how the decision to fire was arrived at and the responsibility taken by the US but not by Russia. What you are really doing is attacking the integrity of Americans in uniform… real people in real time making very difficult – and sometimes tragic – decisions in very difficult circumstances who then have to live with the consequences of their actions… by pretending these decisions are imperially delivered by states defended by a belief in exceptionalism. And that’s just bullshit. Arb.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 8:43 am
The Arbourist
@JZ
Exceptionally good at looking after its own interests. :/
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 10:14 am
The Arbourist
@Tildeb
The US took no formal responsibility for this action. [Note, all paragraphs in italics are quotes from the Wikipedia article on this event]
“The United States government did not formally apologize to Iran.[11] In 1996, the United States and Iran reached a settlement at the International Court of Justice which included the statement “…the United States recognized the aerial incident of 3 July 1988 as a terrible human tragedy and expressed deep regret over the loss” […] “
“This version was finalized in a report by Admiral William Fogarty, entitled Formal Investigation into the Circumstances Surrounding the Downing of Iran Air Flight 655 on 3 July 1988.[26] Only parts of this report have been released (part I in 1988 and part II in 1993). The Fogarty report stated, “The data from USS Vincennes tapes, information from USS Sides and reliable intelligence information, corroborate the fact that [Iran Air Flight 655] was on a normal commercial air flight plan profile, in the assigned airway, squawking Mode III 6760, on a continuous ascent in altitude from take-off at Bandar Abbas to shoot-down”.
The US government record indicates otherwise.
Well, if given the information that was on hand at the time, I’m guessing I wouldn’t be shooting down civilian airliners in their airspace, but of course I’m not and would never a captain of a US military vessel, so I’m not sure what *I* would do is particularly relevant.
“An analysis of the events by the International Strategic Studies Association described the deployment of an Aegis cruiser in the zone as irresponsible and felt that the expense of the ship had played a major part in the setting of a low threshold for opening fire.[30] The Vincennes had been nicknamed ‘Robocruiser’ by crew members and other US Navy ships, both in reference to its Aegis system, and to the supposed aggressive tendencies of its captain.”
Did you detect moral superiority here? The tone,(and discussions of tone, however useful they may be) if anything, is one of world weariness and a repudiation of the double standards that we choose to judge the world by.
Fascinating. Murderous imperial actions by one state are deemed to be out of bounds because it happens to be our hands on the trigger?
It would seem that the results innocent life lost are not changed by the responsibility taken or not taken by those who pulled the trigger. Do the families of Iranian flight somehow get to feel better than the families grieving for those lost on MH17 since it was the US military doing the killing? Official enemies actions’ are universally reviled and agonized over while ours are glossed over and minimized – this pattern is replete throughout history.
The comparison of murderous imperial actions: one American, one Russian, stands.
“Craig, Morales & Oliver, in a slide presentation published in M.I.T.’s Spring 2004 Aeronautics & Astronautics as the “USS Vincennes Incident”, commented that Captain Rogers had “an undeniable and unequivocal tendency towards what I call ‘picking a fight.'” On his own initiative, Rogers moved the Vincennes 50 miles (80 km) northeast to join the USS Montgomery. An angry Captain Richard McKenna, Chief of Surface Warfare for the Commander of the Joint Task Force, ordered Rogers back to Abu Musa, but the Vincennes helicopter pilot, Lt. Mark Collier, followed the Iranian speedboats as they retreated north, eventually taking some fire:”
And the consequence of his actions Captain Rogers was decorated by the US military.
In 1990, Rogers was awarded the Legion of Merit for his service as the commanding officer of the Vincennes from April 1987 to May 1989. The citation made no mention of the downing of Iran Air 655.[47]
A job well done…
You are damn right I am attacking the fucking integrity of Americans in uniform, in this situation. Anyone with an intact set of morals would do the same.
Oh, so the guided missile cruiser in the Persian Gulf wasn’t there defending the national interests of a state, most certainly not there securing the strategic resources necessary for empire. I’m curious, if not defending American imperial interests in the Gulf region, what was the Vincennes doing there?
And which part of the the historical record contradicts my claim? Iran in 1953? Vietnam? Or perhaps Chile in 1973? (Or Indonesia, Nicaragua, The Philippines, Honduras, Cuba …)
It most certainly it is – the notion that there is justice in world when one nation is accountable only to itself – is bullshit.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 11:10 am
VR Kaine
I’m a little confused on the point of this post. Is it another “Look at Big, Bad, America” post, or is it an “It’s all Effed Up Because Both Sides Do It” post?
Either way, I’m with Tlideb in part – in the fog of war, errors are made by good, decent people and to that end I disagree with much of the equivalency being made here. For one, I know for a fact the Iran Air Flight 655 has been studied at length by the US to make sure it doesn’t, and can’t, happen again. Think the other side is doing such a thing, or just simply saying, “Oops” and “Oh well”? Considering the Russians’ sanctioned brutality towards women and children, I’d say “no” so I don’t think it’s really apples to apples, even if I believe the government was shitty to try and cover it up.
In fact, I’m certainly not for the goverment cover-up of it at all:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/07/24/everyone-seems-to-have-forgotten-the-time-the-u-s-shot-down-a-passenger-jet-killing-290-and-then-tried-to-cover-it-up/
… and you might as well add the Warren Commission, 9/11 Commission, Tillman Commission, Benghazi, IRS, or any other Commission to that list as well.
If this is simply a “look at Big, Bad, America” post, then to any sanctimonious assholes who think they could have chosen better, or think that perhaps they ARE better than the men and women who serve in uniform, I say go suck a box of farts. You lack the intelligence but especially the guts to occupy any of the positions they do, and therefore could never be trusted with the same life/death, time-sensitive decisions they are.
Rebels taking a pot-shot at a transport plane simply for trophy is nothing like mistaking one for an F-14 which, therefore, was an immediate and imminent threat followed by a decision to save lives. If you read any of Gary Klein’s work on time-sensitive decision-making, you’ll see that there was much more to that situation than either the counterpunch or even the National Post article I posted above care to reveal.
Government cover-ups and denials, however? So, so done with it.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 11:13 am
VR Kaine
“Exceptionally good at looking after its own interests.”
That’s what a country’s supposed to do for its people, Arb! Otherwise, why not just start singing another country’s national anthem at the podium? ;)
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 11:53 am
tildeb
Arb, I’m not defending the shooting down of a passenger plane and neither is the US government; they are explaining how it happened (as are you… as if by some imperial decree to go shoot down an Iranian passenger which is bullshit.)
What I’m saying is that two are not equivalent. Just look at the facts: the American government took responsibility (responsibility is not synonymous with ‘apology’ as you continue to assume), struck an inquiry, made recommendations (some of which we adopted), and no further passenger planes have been shot down by overzealous (and very arguably so) missile cruiser captains. In comparison, the Russian government has not responsibility, has not struck an inquiry, has not let investigators access to the site, denies involvement, destroys evidence, and points the finger everywhere but at themselves. That’s why I said you are comparing only by the final results and then drawing conclusions you wish to maintain a very strong bias against the US government rather than the individuals responsible for acting in its name. The US government is an idea that does not comport with your view of the individuals who use it maliciously and often perniciously to further their own ends.
I make this criticism because if we ever want government to succeed in best representing the people it (not ‘they’) represents, then that process starts with recognizing and respecting a governmental idea that shares these principles. And the US government is just that: an idea worth preserving. It is – for better or worse – one of the closest models we have to this principled and responsible representation. That’s why given a choice, most people – even those with opinions very hostile to the US government – would still side with the US form over the other more dictatorial and totalitarian forms of government it tends (but not always in the world of realpolitiks) to be hostile towards.
You can be very critical of policies and people in the US government and have legitimate reasons why. That’s fine. That’s responsible citizenry. But to constantly confuse the worst elements of some if its citizenry with the worst acts done in the name of government itself and the offices it holds (like the military) is to do a gross disservice to all the rest who struggle and strive to keep those principles alive in government (like many in the US military).
All of us owe a debt of gratitude to the US people for its attempt and determination to bring forth a government of the people by the people for the people. But what we too often forget is that this is an ongoing experiment marked most easily by its failures. Pointing them out is easy: finding better ways is much harder and that’s why I appreciate your efforts on behalf of working Americans on how to make these kinds of necessary changes. We shouldn’t let this appearance of failure fool us from doing our part to make it a success (like demanding a public inquiry into, and political pressure on, the military for changes to better avoid another Vincennes incident from happening). And balanced criticism is a good place to start.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 11:54 am
The Arbourist
@Vern
Hiya Vern.
Yep. I’m good with that Vern.
When China (whomever) supplants the US as the next superpower the reasons will be the same, and then we’ll just have to deal with it, just that we won’t be holding the stick.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 2:17 pm
The Arbourist
I’m not arguing that shooting down civilian airliners this was on the top of the ‘to do’ list for the Navy on that particular day. The US navy was there representing the (imperial or otherwise)interests of the US. The message being that our interests in the region take precedence over the countries there and the people that inhabit them. Our machinations in the Middle East are(were) not mistakes, not misguided policy, or naive misinterpretations; but rather they are the realpolitik that places our energy security above the well-being of people who have the misfortune of living on top of “our” energy reserves.
So, in defending its strategic interests half the world away the US is justified in what does.
Russia, involved in a border dispute involving their national interest, should not be entitled to a certain amount of latitude, that same latitude that we expect in dealing with our own realpolitik?
Granted, the Russians are not handling the situation well, their obfuscations and bellicose responses are certainly not deescalating the situation. Should we not give the Russians at least a year for their inquiry (if there is to be one) as it took a year for the first half of the US report to be released?
Ah. So the US Government means well. And because it means well, we should discount the actions taken on its behalf by a few bad apples, because the *idea* of the US government is intrinsically good.
Thus the destruction of Iraq was excusable – because the ideals we hold are laudable – and thus the responsibility for destroying a sovereign nation is mitigated because our intent was noble and just – we are the bleeding edge of free human society; mistakes, sadly, will be made.
It seems awfully convenient that these tragic “mistakes” always seem to align with furthering the interests/geo-political goals of the US.
And apparently carte blanche for doing whatever the heck we want the world over. The Japanese fascists, according to their own documents, were creating an earthly paradise in China during WWII rooting out the “bandits” who trying to undermine their loving beneficent works. Britain was bringing civilization to the savages of the world. Bending the world to your whims in the name of ‘Democracy’ is just another flavour of self-serving ideology, a feature every empire shares – and in light of that historical fact – not a reasonable justification for violence perpetrated by the state.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 3:19 pm
Alan Scott
Arbourist,
That you do not acknowledge the differences between the two incidences is expected. Your moral equivalence is not valid.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 4:44 pm
VR Kaine
@Arb,
Hiya back! :) A curious comment:
“When China (whomever) supplants the US as the next superpower the reasons will be the same, and then we’ll just have to deal with it, just that we won’t be holding the stick.”
“we’ll just have to deal with it”? What does that mean, exactly? Does it mean you prefer to wait until China supplants us (lest we step foot in another person’s country) and then start trying to shore up our energy and political positions, like China’s already doing now in other countries (ex: Sudan, Libya)? Personally, I’d rather not wait until that happens and unfortunately, power is a dirty business.
It’s dirty in that only the strongest survive, and “strong” means money and military strength not hugs, hope, and touchy-feelies which is why China is beefing up on the former not the latter.
Furthermore, the only reason the US will get (completely) supplanted is because of yoga-fliers thinking kum bi yah” and some daisies in rifles will be enough to make the Russias, Chinas, and Hamas of the world back down. Although it feels great to wish for a world like that, it’s foolish to. Not only will it not work on countries and organizations like China and Hamas, they’ll actually prey and count on it to further weaken the west’s stance in the world. Them winning is something I’d rather not see in my lifetime.
You may not like any of the ways America wins its freedom, and I might not like some of the ways in which it does, but regardless it’s the kind of freedom you and I and everyone else seems to enjoy and take advantage of 100% once we have it. Example? Paying $3.30/g for gasoline vs. Norway’s $9.00/g, for instance. If that involves us having to go into Africa or Iraq before China or Russia does, or being the world bully once in a while, so be it. That’s the price we pay for our nice homes, TV’s, and ipads.
LikeLike
August 2, 2014 at 7:18 pm
jasonjshaw
VR Kaine – isn’t Norway considered one of the happiest countries on earth? Apparently there’s more to life than cheap gas!
Besides, with the ever-increasing income inequality, the USA seems to be allowing freedom to dry up without the need for outside help!
LikeLike
August 3, 2014 at 7:56 am
The Arbourist
@Vern
It means that once our happy window is over, we should expect the same treatment we dish out to others, and probably in spades.
Yep, it worked exceptionally well for every empire that came before us – yet our cities are built upon the wrecks of these great powers. Following the same paradigm will definitely yield different results.
No question about that there. We just shouldn’t complain when others wrest the stick from our grasp and give us the same consideration we gave to them.
I would gladly pay 9 dollars a gallon to live in the sort of society Norway provides. Is cheap gas worth rampant inequality and class strife? Not in my calculus.
Let us hope it is such an easy argument to make when it is applied to us.
LikeLike
August 3, 2014 at 7:57 am
The Arbourist
@Alan Scott
Hiya Mr.Scott. I’m surprised you came back considering your level of disagreement with well….just about everything said on this blog.
Thanks for stopping by and leaving your insightful comment.
LikeLike
August 4, 2014 at 12:05 pm
VR Kaine
@ JasonJShaw: “Besides, with the ever-increasing income inequality, the USA seems to be allowing freedom to dry up without the need for outside help!”
Agreed. The America I lived in 10 years ago hardly resembles the one I live in now where (ahem) “freedom” is concerned, and that’s to do with everything, not just economic freedom.
@Arb & Jason re: Norway:
I don’t disagree, however look at how badly Canadian and US citizens freak out over gas when it nears $4/g. Being in both Canada and the US, and on top of that being in one of the highest unemployed states in the US (NV), I see the correlation between low income and crime, for instance.
Further to the other points I was making, however, is that as far as superpowers go while the US can certainly improve in a lot of ways, between any of the warring factions right now they are the only ones I’d be getting behind, and it’s easy (and also cheap, I think) to take pot-shots at them while they’re in the middle of fighting while the rest of us get to mostly sit in our safe harbors.
LikeLike