Rape as a weapon of war is a totally understandable concept just as
carpet bombing of German cities was reprehensible in the Second World War
but was one means to attempt to batter the enemy's morale into submission.
To talk about rape however in the same context as eg bombing the enemy,
appears totally different.
Rape and pillage have been the outcomes of conflict from the days of
primitive man and were more about the heightened excitement of the victors
which had sexual arousal as a dominant drive.There was no need to use it
as a weapon of war as it was almost an inevitable outcome. To stamp it out
in more recent war situations has been extremely difficult.
For the authors then to talk of this subject as if it was in the same
vein as Bomber Harris making a decision to obliterate Hamburg seems
disingenuous.
As a weapon of war it is true the authorities could either turn a blind
eye to the atrocity of rape or doubtless as the authors indicate encourage
it in some conflicts, but it probably required little ordering to the rank
and file fighter.
To fail to balance their article by at least acknowledging the
spontaneity of post conflict rape and its importance to the whole problem
gives this significant editorial a very blinkered perspective.
Rapid Response:
Rape as a Weapon of War
Rape as a weapon of war is a totally understandable concept just as
carpet bombing of German cities was reprehensible in the Second World War
but was one means to attempt to batter the enemy's morale into submission.
To talk about rape however in the same context as eg bombing the enemy,
appears totally different.
Rape and pillage have been the outcomes of conflict from the days of
primitive man and were more about the heightened excitement of the victors
which had sexual arousal as a dominant drive.There was no need to use it
as a weapon of war as it was almost an inevitable outcome. To stamp it out
in more recent war situations has been extremely difficult.
For the authors then to talk of this subject as if it was in the same
vein as Bomber Harris making a decision to obliterate Hamburg seems
disingenuous.
As a weapon of war it is true the authorities could either turn a blind
eye to the atrocity of rape or doubtless as the authors indicate encourage
it in some conflicts, but it probably required little ordering to the rank
and file fighter.
To fail to balance their article by at least acknowledging the
spontaneity of post conflict rape and its importance to the whole problem
gives this significant editorial a very blinkered perspective.
fouin_4@hotmail.com
Competing interests: No competing interests