What is Reddit's opinion of Black Hearts: One Platoon's Descent into Madness in Iraq's Triangle of Death?

From 3.5 billion Reddit comments

First, can we stop posting screenshots? It's the lowest level of shitposting, at least include a link in the comments.

​

Second, but related to first, it's not a simple issue. I read the book about this: Black Hearts, this guy should not have been in the military in the first place, then you have multiple failures of leadership on all levels, and once you ready the book - you will think that one dead Iraqi family is getting off easy for the situation US military was in.

Oh lord no, I’m out. Did my four years and bounced. I was regular army, nothing special. I was an FO attached to an infantry platoon, but I didn’t get to be a terribly dangerous person until after that deployment when I got more strenuous training, by which time it was time to go back and pull tower guard for a bunch of MARSOC. At the time I was describing I was a spare rifleman and a radio bitch in the Headquarters. Actually, being a radio bitch was pretty cool- I got the scoop on every firefight, convoy, and blasted Afghan trucker in a fifty click radius.

If you really want to black pill yourself, check out Black Hearts about a couple of infantry guys in Iraq who went off the deep end and committed war crimes for fun.

My feelings on the matter of the Forever War are somewhat conflicted, but I consider it unarguable that our stated goal of establishing a stable democracy in Afghanistan is inherently unobtainable, and that it is a grave sin to wage war in pursuit of an objective that cannot possibly happen. A war without a win condition is simply well-organized mass murder, regardless of how honorably or dishonorably the guys fighting it behave. So even if I still had the crusader spirit and wanted to wipe the earth clean of all the bigots and sectarian butchers and reactionary terrorists in Afghanistan, I’d still want out because we can’t pull it off and so oughtta stop trying.

It's kinda disingenuous to use that study that way.

It was a study conducted by the Army on troops deployed in Iraq in the ~~first half of 2007. That was the~~ ~~deadliest time period in the war~~ ~~for American troops.~~ second half of 2006, also a very active time in the war. After years of war propaganda and that kind of stress, what do you expect? Also, this is them answering a hypothetical and not making a real world ethical decision.

Here's the full rundown from the article:

>Sixty-two percent of soldiers and 66 percent of Marines said that they knew someone seriously injured or killed, or that a member of their team had become a casualty.
>
>Only 47 percent of the soldiers and 38 percent of Marines said noncombatants should be treated with dignity and respect.
>
>About a third of troops said they had insulted or cursed at civilians in their presence.
>
>About 10 percent of soldiers and Marines reported mistreating civilians or damaging property when it was not necessary. Mistreatment includes hitting or kicking a civilian.
>
>Forty-four percent of Marines and 41 percent of soldiers said torture should be allowed to save the life of a soldier or Marine.
>
>Thirty-nine percent of Marines and 36 percent of soldiers said torture should be allowed to gather important information from insurgents.

There were a lot of different issues at work that caused the kind of horror like Abu Ghraib, I wouldn't put all the troops on blast for it. I think Black Hearts is a really good read if you're interested in what happens when the mentality you wrote about above starts to infest a unit, and how it even comes about in the first place. The military has just as much to gain by quashing that kind of thought and behavior, which is exactly why they did the study you linked. I think you'd find different numbers today, I'd be curious if you've found any follow up