Sexual Crimes in the Armed Forces (Canada)


Just reading an article in l’Actualité “Crimes Sexuels dans l’Armée Canadienne”,
published May  2014. Serious problem in the Army among the enlisted – not only in Canada – but this article provides detail statistics on the large number of cases of sexual harassment and even more serious criminal behaviour among the Forces, from low to high ranks, especially against female soldiers who suffer from those attacks more than men. It is stated that in the Canadian Forces every day five persons are sexually harassed to the point of {in certain circumstances} can be described as rape. This investigation results in a very detailed description of how the Military operates, the various echelons responsible and keeping tight-lipped, and how Superiors, the Military Police, Judge Advocate General and other legal entities respond to any reported incidences.
Basic training for the Canadian Armed Forces: [ ] and women in the Forces: [ ] does not really disclose WHAT TYPES OF WEAPONS ARE ISSUED TO WOMEN SOLDIERS. Another site lists weapons used by Canadian Armed Forces: [ ]. I assume that women in the Forces are also issued weapons, although it is not specifically stated anywhere.

(Coming back to sexual assault within the Forces): Besides the very obvious fact of how human society acts where men and women are closely collaborating and living together – any more tightly than the Armed Forces is barely imaginable (testosterone and lack of outside contact comes to mind) – there is one notion I simply cannot understand:  A woman soldier who is sexually harassed, subdued, even raped against her will, does not fight back. Instead – she whines, suffers silently, eventually reports it to a superior officer, eventually it gets to the Military Police, eventually it gets to a Military Court.

This cannot be true ! A woman soldier who at the minimum has a dangerous army knife with serrated edge, cannot fight back. [After all, she is trained for fighting in a war.]  It only takes a quick strong stab in the hand that touches her. Nothing bad will happen to her: she will not loose her position, be kicked out, this will not be reported to anyone, and she will not suffer the same from the same person again. In fact, the perpetrator will bandage up and keep his mouth shut. Should he have gone any further, such as beating her into submission, then she would have an even better case to report it, being bruised up.



Morality of War

This is about the reasons for citations and hero-worshipping of those who safely return from a war in a distant country, enjoying life-long benefits and honours bestowed upon themselves and their families. Of course, only they know what transpired in a battle. Once they have returned to their respective home countries, nobody else knows what they did “over there”. Soldiers among themselves keep tight-lipped about what they did, when and where and how. Only eye witnesses and surviving victims of war know.  And who are the ‘surviving victims of war ? Young children mostly, subjected to heavy bombings for years. Their home countries obliterated, nowhere to go. Refugees ? not necessarily.
For all intents and purposes, a war strategy which included/includes the extermination of a civilian population – often referred to as ‘by-product of the destruction of industrial sites or collateral damage’ – must be considered immoral. Who cares about the Geneva Convention and their additional Protocols [ ] – when in the heat of battle unarmed civilians and children are killed.
They only came at night (WWII). Bombers who fly at night do not see where their bombs land. Nor do they care. Vietnam Wars = worse bombings than ever onto the civilian peasant population. Iraq: How many civilian deaths and cultural artifacts destroyed.
When talking about morality, there is one thing I strongly question:”Why is it, that today and who knows for the next 500 or more years to come, those who flew those bombers over the unarmed civilians are still being honoured in their own home lands and in those allied to their home lands; while the enemy nation whose home land was destroyed is still being subjected to the most evil mass media propaganda ? War Hero, or War Criminal ? Where to draw the line ? Every time I see someone drive by in a car with a special license plate WAR VETERAN, I ask myself : “where have you been and what did you do in that war ?”
[from the mouth of a victim of war, and an eye-witness]