Thanks for your reply Jason, it is much appreciated.

Thanks Jason, I look forward to going to this, if not Sunday then over the summer.

Oops, sorry about the comment multi-post. :-\

Oops, sorry about the comment multi-post. :-\

John Del Signore, don't sweat anything you wrote. You weren't trying to denigrate or disparage, only making light of fucked up shit, something we all do when there is nothing left for us to do:

In response to boho15's "They are trained KILLERS" comment, I've been trying to reconcile for my own sake how one can be both a good person and a good "killer":

The final SURRENDER workshop this Sunday (like the last two) is essentially me trying to find the most efficient way to train a group of civilians in two hours or less in the basic principles of close quarters battles (CQB). This training will be one small piece of the full SURRENDER production. Even in a controlled theatrical setting, when you or your buddy does something significant (i.e. kills an enemy, kills a civilian, kills a fellow soldier), you will feel much differently about it than if you watched an actor do is on a stage.

Anyone with questions or comments, email me at jason(at)justanothersoldier.com.

John Del Signore, don't sweat anything you wrote. You weren't trying to denigrate or disparage, only making light of fucked up shit, something we all do when there is nothing left for us to do:

blog.justanothersoldier.com/?p...

In response to boho15's "They are trained KILLERS" comment, I've been trying to reconcile for my own sake how one can be both a good person and a good "killer":

jasonchartley.com/?p=31

The final SURRENDER workshop this Sunday (like the last two) is essentially me trying to find the most efficient way to train a group of civilians in two hours or less in the basic principles of close quarters battles (CQB). This training will be one small piece of the full SURRENDER production. Even in a controlled theatrical setting, when you or your buddy does something significant (i.e. kills an enemy, kills a civilian, kills a fellow soldier), you will feel much differently about it than if you watched an actor do is on a stage.

Anyone with questions or comments, email me at jason(at)justanothersoldier.com.

John Del Signore, don't sweat anything you wrote. You weren't trying to denigrate or disparage, only making light of fucked up shit, something we all do when there is nothing left for us to do:

http://blog.justanothersoldier.com/?p=30

In response to boho15's "They are trained KILLERS" comment, I've been trying to reconcile for my own sake how one can be both a good person and a good "killer":

http://jasonchartley.com/?p=31

The final SURRENDER workshop this Sunday (like the last two) is essentially me trying to find the most efficient way to train a group of civilians in two hours or less in the basic principles of close quarters battles (CQB). This training will be one small piece of the full SURRENDER production. Even in a controlled theatrical setting, when you or your buddy does something significant (i.e. kills an enemy, kills a civilian, kills a fellow soldier), you will feel much differently about it than if you watched an actor do is on a stage.

Anyone with questions or comments, email me at jason(at)justanothersoldier.com.

John Del Signore, don't sweat anything you wrote. You weren't trying to denigrate or disparage, only making light of fucked up shit, something we all do when there is nothing left for us to do:

http://blog.justanothersoldier.com/?p=30

In response to boho15's "They are trained KILLERS" comment, I've been trying to reconcile for my own sake how one can be both a good person and a good "killer":

http://jasonchartley.com/?p=31

The final SURRENDER workshop this Sunday (like the last two) is essentially me trying to find the most efficient way to train a group of civilians in two hours or less in the basic principles of close quarters battles (CQB). This training will be one small piece of the full SURRENDER production. Even in a controlled theatrical setting, when you or your buddy does something significant (i.e. kills an enemy, kills a civilian, kills a fellow soldier), you will feel much differently about it than if you watched an actor do is on a stage.

Anyone with questions or comments, email me at jason(at)justanothersoldier.com.

John Del Signore, don't sweat anything you wrote. You weren't trying to denigrate or disparage, only making light of fucked up shit, something we all do when there is nothing left for us to do:

http://blog.justanothersoldier.com/?p=30

In response to boho15's "They are trained KILLERS" comment, I've been trying to reconcile for my own sake how one can be both a good person and a good "killer":

http://jasonchartley.com/?p=31

The final SURRENDER workshop this Sunday (like the last two) is essentially me trying to find the most efficient way to train a group of civilians in two hours or less in the basic principles of close quarters battles (CQB). This training will be one small piece of the full SURRENDER production. Even in a controlled theatrical setting, when you or your buddy does something significant (i.e. kills an enemy, kills a civilian, kills a fellow soldier), you will feel much differently about it than if you watched an actor do is on a stage.

Anyone with questions or comments, email me at jason(at)justanothersoldier.com.

i thought the REAL issue was that jason christopher hartley is like sooo cute, OMG.

For anyone to think that barbarous acts are not committed by the people in the armed forces is very naive. Look at the marine who just raped, killed, burned, and buried that poor girl recently.And she was a "friendly" meaning one of ours so just think what they would do to the "enemy." They are trained KILLERS! That is what they do and that is what they are there for. Its War and in war people kill and kill again.I think the author is coming from the "if i don't laugh ill cry" perspective. Cut him some slack people. And as for Hartley's show...im vomiting in my mouth right now.l

IvyLeagueGrunt: I think many elites gain from a destabilized Iraq by keeping defense spending at stratospheric levels; instability and war means profits for the military-industrial complex and their politically-connected consultants and lobbyists.

Iraq has also benefited the administration in that as long as we're throwing so much money and energy and attention into the Iraq catastrophe, there's that much less space in the media for a debate about their regressive domestic agenda. It's also the fruit of Cheney's Hobbesian worldview and thuggish vision of having a major U.S. presence up in Iran's face.

I'm no Friend of Bill, but he did leave office with a surplus; now we face massive debt and ruin thanks to this Iraq misadventure. Not that any of this will effect the plutocracy much; they're diversified enough to weather such storms.

It's so weird when people go all stepford wives about war. There are little kids getting their families sawed in half by mg fire in front of them (actual incident from JCH blog)-And mention that kind of by-all-accounts not rare incident, and these long-winded types start in with the "tsk tsk talking about THAT just isn't the done thing. It' really not very SUPPORTIVE, don't you know"

Well fuck that I say.

Hartley talks about it.

1) If we must resort to labels, I'd prefer to be characterized as the "Proud Army Veteran" Hybrid-electric magnet type.

2) I do agree that the exchange here is a healthy one (minus some of the more vitriolic comments). Glad you agree.

3) I doubt that what they are doing in Iraq benefits the ruling class. If anything it has contributed to destabilizing the region and placed a great deal of strain on the region's industries (and thereby caused a great deal of consternation for those of us who have invested in them). One more reason so many of them shouldn't have voted for GWB in '04.

4) Perhaps inappropriate was the wrong choice of words. Misplaced might be a better fit. Your words themselves were not inappropriate, merely they did not appear to belong in this particular article (particularly since it sounds as though the implication of what you say - that raping teenage girls, waterboarding or building naked prisoner pyramids is a common occurrence for Soldiers in Iraq and/or perhaps encouraged by the institutional Army - is not what you intended)

I see I'm really starting to draw out the "Support Our Troops" SUV-magnet crowd. I have a feeling I'm just one or two comments away from "America: Love it or leave it."

@Eyekantspel: "it is absolutely 100% wrong to disparage ALL of our soldiers because of the actions of some of them." Never wrote that or implied it. In fact, I linked to very specific incidents of rape and prisoner abuse.

@FranMartin: "Have the balls to stick by what you insinuate." See comment #2. The only thing I'll add is that the real injustice is that the ones most responsible for these war crimes - Rumsfeld, Cheney, Bush, etc. - will never be brought to trial.

Also, your apologetics for Westmoreland's racist rationalizations are tortured and disturbing. Because Mao caused mass suffering, that somehow justifies Westmoreland's sickening world view, one that tries to explain away atrocities like My Lai? The soldiers take their cue from the top. Again, "Stuff happens."

@Rocknrope: "I'd like to hear how Mr. Hartley feels about your colorful writeup." Me too. Maybe check out SURRENDER Sunday? And anyone who reads my post objectively will note nothing disrespectful toward the man, who I don't know but seems like a perceptive guy from what I've read on his blog. He's participating in this crazy theater project and that's enough for me. Also, I go out of my way to note that not only did he serve in NYC post 9/11 but that he's also grew up an SLC punk - no faint praise from my p.o.v.

@IvyLeagueGrunt:"...remove the inappropriate sentences from this article..." I said nothing inappropriate and will obviously not be removing anything. (See comment #6.) In fact, the exchange we're having here is exactly the point of SURRENDER, which concludes with a discussion. And after all, isn't our freedom to have this debate exactly what the troops are fighting for over there? Oh right, they're fighting to benefit ruling class.

The comments were obviously meant to be shock-value funny. It's pathetic to try to spin that as trying to remind us of things that happen during prolonged occupation. Coward.

No one is arguing in favor of the soldiers who committed the crimes that you speak of, but it is absolutely 100% wrong to disparage ALL of our soldiers because of the actions of some of them. It would be like saying all blogger suck just because you do.

To be clear I'm not implying that the criminal incidents you mention should not be discussed. They should be, openly and loudly. We should ask "what went wrong? was the commander held to task for his/her soldiers crimes? did the punishments fit the crime?" But an article about Mr Hartley's interactive theatrical experience seems an entirely inappropriate spot for it.

My advice: remove the inappropriate sentences from this article and make them the central theme of an article paralleling violent crimes committed by soldiers in Iraq and those committed here in the United States. You may well find statistical evidence that incidents of crime elevate significantly downrange (there are numerous journal articles that suggest this). You might even tie it in to NYC in particular by discussing measures taken to curb violent crimes in the city and how they might be applied by FOB commanders (de-facto mayors) in Iraq.

Just a thought.

We can banter about what you "meant to say" til' the cock crows. I'd like to hear how Mr. Hartley feels about your colorful writeup.

My point is that those crimes, and yes they were indeed crimes - horrific ones requiring prosecution under law, have nothing to do with this particular theatrical experience. The only common thread is the soldier, hence the apparent insinuation.

It is akin to discussing an incident of student rape on campus in a story about Columbia students' annual Varsity Show. Unless the show somehow mentioned, invoked, or provided commentary on the event, bringing it up would simply not make sense. And some might conclude it represents an ulterior motive.

I'm not claiming to know your motive or the thoughts behind your words.

I'm only stating that, from where I stand, this is insulting to soldiers and to Jason Christopher Hartley in particular, who as far as I know did not rape or torture anyone.