Thursday, November 03, 2005
Internal Military Murder - Is It 'Fragging' Or Not
It happened several months ago. A soldier deployed in Iraq apparently killed some of his superior officers. At the time, I argued heavily against using the term "fragging" when related to the incident -- "fragging" is a term dating back to the Vietnam war.
The technical definition of "fragging" is as follows:
First of all, this has all come up in the context of a Section 32 hearing (the military justice equivalent of an arraignment) that occurred concerning the incident and the defendant was formally charged and made eligible for the death penalty.
Now, back to fragging. The term arose in Vietnam essentially as a form of revolt. Drafted soldiers, fighting in a war they did not want a part of, being asked to conform to standards they did not think they should were known to kill officers over it. In many circles it was a symbol for the corrupt military and the injustice of the action in Vietnam. Regardless of how one feels about Vietnam, because of the terms origin, it carries with it a contextual implication of illegitimate military action. Thus I have argued against its use in this case from the beginning.
That said, I was not the least bit surprised to see the NYTimes use it in the headline to their story on the hearing, but pleased they at least put it in "scare quotes." I was however, somewhat surprised to see it in the headline of the Stars & Stripes coverage.
To date the only person connected with the case that I have see use the term is the defendant.
The technical definition of "fragging" is as follows:
Fragging is military slang for a soldier killing a colleague or a superior officer.Now hold that thought and link for a minute.
First of all, this has all come up in the context of a Section 32 hearing (the military justice equivalent of an arraignment) that occurred concerning the incident and the defendant was formally charged and made eligible for the death penalty.
Now, back to fragging. The term arose in Vietnam essentially as a form of revolt. Drafted soldiers, fighting in a war they did not want a part of, being asked to conform to standards they did not think they should were known to kill officers over it. In many circles it was a symbol for the corrupt military and the injustice of the action in Vietnam. Regardless of how one feels about Vietnam, because of the terms origin, it carries with it a contextual implication of illegitimate military action. Thus I have argued against its use in this case from the beginning.
That said, I was not the least bit surprised to see the NYTimes use it in the headline to their story on the hearing, but pleased they at least put it in "scare quotes." I was however, somewhat surprised to see it in the headline of the Stars & Stripes coverage.
To date the only person connected with the case that I have see use the term is the defendant.
A month before Capt. Phillip Esposito of Suffern was killed in Iraq, the man charged with murdering him told a fellow soldier that he wanted to kill the officer.Now why would such a man use such a term under such circumstances. Isn't it possible that he knew the implications of the term and wanted to make the murder he was proposing look like the military's fault? (but then don't most killers think they "had" to do it for some reason.) Anyway:
"He said, 'I hate that (expletive). I want to frag that (expletive),' " Capt. Carl Prober of the 42nd Infantry Division told a military court yesterday in Kuwait. The court is investigating the June 7 deaths of Esposito, 30, and Lt. Louis Allen, 34, of Milford, Pa., in Tikrit, Iraq. [emphasis added]
The alleged outburst occurred about the time that Esposito reprimanded Staff Sgt. Alberto Martinez, 37, a supply specialist in his unit. Esposito was company commander of the 42nd Infantry Division headquarters unit, and Allen was its operations officer.So, Espisito suspected our defendant (Martinez) of stealing, and he apparently got killed for it. Nothing so grandiose as "fragging" -- this was plain old murder-for-profit. There is no implication about the military or the legitimacy our military actions in Iraq in this story at all.
Staff Sgt. Ashvin Thimmaiah told the court that three weeks before Esposito was killed, he prohibited Martinez from entering the supply room without an escort and that Esposito later began looking for a replacement for him. Arms and ammunition are stored in the supply room in addition to other necessities.
